International Burn a Quran Day? WTF?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterBorn
  • Start date Start date
Superfreak said:
Wow... so to you... calling a moron a moron is done out of hatred?

The quote to Socrtease was in jest... next time I will post a smile of some sort so that idiots like you can comprehend.
Click to expand...

Now that I think about it...you are right!

Obviously the only reason you called him a moron is because you LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEE him...

Jarod and SF sittin in a tree...

Watch it Jarod...SF's flirting with you again!
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... so we have yet another idiot that thinks a typed swear word or insult must be done due to hatred?

and you idiots wonder why people call you idiots.
Click to expand...


I didn't say shit about hatred. I said you likely aren't getting any ass and are taking out your frustrations on others.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Now that I think about it...you are right!

Obviously the only reason you called him a moron is because you LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEE him...

Jarod and SF sittin in a tree...

Watch it Jarod...SF's flirting with you again!
Click to expand...

Or.... It could just be that I think he is a moron. Stating that does not have to include an extreme emotion such as love and hate. But I know stating this is pointless given your inability to comprehend due to the cognitive challenges you face.
 
Superfreak said:
Wow... so to you... calling a moron a moron is done out of hatred?

The quote to Socrtease was in jest... next time I will post a smile of some sort so that idiots like you can comprehend.
Click to expand...

You call Jarod a moron because you are so ruled by your emotions that you constantly let them bubble to the surface in the form of one petty insult after another.
 
NigelTufnel said:
I didn't say shit about hatred. I said you likely aren't getting any ass and are taking out your frustrations on others.
Click to expand...

My bad... when you said 'yeah' to Zappas post referencing the hatred, it appeared you were agreeing with his assessment. how silly of me.

now I see that you were instead trying to project your own line of bullshit onto my comments. Like Zappa and Jarods failed attempts to project hatred, your attempt to project frustration fails.

I simply think Jarod is a fucking moron. That is all. No frustration/hate/love involved in that assessment. Simply an observation from his non stop idiotic comments on this board.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
You call Jarod a moron because you are so ruled by your emotions that you constantly let them bubble to the surface in the form of one petty insult after another.
Click to expand...

No, I called Jarod a moron because he is a fucking moron.

your attempts to project emotions onto me from reading words off of your computer screen are quite comical.
 
Superfreak said:
My bad... when you said 'yeah' to Zappas post referencing the hatred, it appeared you were agreeing with his assessment. how silly of me.

now I see that you were instead trying to project your own line of bullshit onto my comments. Like Zappa and Jarods failed attempts to project hatred, your attempt to project frustration fails.

I simply think Jarod is a fucking moron. That is all. No frustration/hate/love involved in that assessment. Simply an observation from his non stop idiotic comments on this board.
Click to expand...


And I simply think that your incessant and repetitive use of petty vulgarity when speaking of Jarod displays a straightforward pattern of hatred for the man.

Simply an assessment from your non stop pejorative comments aimed at him on this and many other threads.

The man with no hatred in his heart can pause long enough to come up with a reasonable alternative other than the childish namecalling...the man who holds hatred in his heart can't be bothered.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And I simply think that your incessant and repetitive use of petty vulgarity when speaking of Jarod displays a straightforward pattern of hatred for the man.

Simply an assessment from your non stop pejorative comments aimed at him on this and many other threads.

The man with no hatred in his heart can pause long enough to come up with a reasonable alternative other than the childish namecalling...the man who holds hatred in his heart can't be bothered.
Click to expand...

this really ironic coming from you

your foul words and hatred are all over this board
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And I simply think that your incessant and repetitive use of petty vulgarity when speaking of Jarod displays a straightforward pattern of hatred for the man.

Simply an assessment from your non stop pejorative comments aimed at him on this and many other threads.

The man with no hatred in his heart can pause long enough to come up with a reasonable alternative other than the childish namecalling...the man who holds hatred in his heart can't be bothered.
Click to expand...

again, you are attempting to project your beliefs and attitudes upon others. That is where your mistake lies.

It has absolutely nothing to do with hatred, regardless of how many times you try to paint it as such.

Do note... you have now called me petty and childish... does that mean your name calling is due to hatred?

Bottom line... Jarod is a fucking moron, you are as well. I know you can't help it and I know the truth may hurt you both... but that is life.
 
Superfreak said:
again, you are attempting to project your beliefs and attitudes upon others. That is where your mistake lies.

It has absolutely nothing to do with hatred, regardless of how many times you try to paint it as such.

Do note... you have now called me petty and childish... does that mean your name calling is due to hatred?

Bottom line... Jarod is a fucking moron, you are as well. I know you can't help it and I know the truth may hurt you both... but that is life.
Click to expand...

Wrong once again,oh hate-filled one!

I never called you petty or childish...I called your INSULTS petty and childish.

Do try and keep up, eh sunshine?
 
Freak makes some good points sometimes, but they are devalued by his childish insults.
 
It looks like I may have been wrong about this pastor. If he got the mosque moved like he says he did, he's a fucking genius.
 
WinterBorn said:
On the topic of Qu'ran burning: When the University of Alabama was being burned during the Civil War, Univerisity librarion André Deloffre pleaded that the library be spared. Colonal Thomas Johnston is said to have agreed to save one book and it was a English translation of the Qu'ran still a part of the Gorgas Library Collection.
Click to expand...


Man, I dig fascinating historical tidbits and factoids like this. If the pay wasn't total crap, I might have been down with doing some history degrees in college.

On a tangential note, I'll piggy back on your post to deal with Asshat's trolling about Islam.

Surprisingly, the information that Asshat-Bravo-SouthernGirl reads about islam on JihadWatch.com, and other backwaters of the bigoted wingnutosphere, is intentionally misleading and dishonest.

It really doesn't require any effort at all to find credible research, done by reputable academic. religious scholars and religious historians.


From what I've gathered, the violence in the Quran is far less than the violence in the Bible.

Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran?

Defense Vs. Total Annihilation

"Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible," Jenkins says.

Jenkins is a professor at Penn State University.

Violence in the Quran, he and others say, is largely a defense against attack.

"By the standards of the time, which is the 7th century A.D., the laws of war that are laid down by the Quran are actually reasonably humane," he says. "Then we turn to the Bible, and we actually find something that is for many people a real surprise. There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124494788
Click to expand...

Good stuff. The militant crap in the Quran is in a specific historical context, and pertains to the time in the 8th century when the pagans were trying to wipe out the monotheistic muslims on the arabian peninsula. The muslims were in a fight for their lives, and I get the impression from actual religious experts that the militant crap in the Koran is in the context of defending themselves. Sh*t man, I think the bible has some genocides in it, but all that crap has to be understood in the historical contexts.


This dude is another excellent religious scholar and expert on Islam. Good stuff, for those who, unlike Asshat, respect reason, academic research, and scholarly inquiry......

Dr. Juan Cole, University of Michigan:

Dangerous falsehoods are being promulgated to the American public. The Quran does not preach violence against Christians.

Quran 5:69 says (Arberry): “Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Christians, and those Sabeaans, whoso believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness–their wage waits them with their Lord, and no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow.”

In other words, the Quran promises Christians and Jews along with Muslims that if they have faith and works, they need have no fear in the afterlife. It is not saying that non-Muslims go to hell– quite the opposite.

When speaking of the 7th-century situation in the Muslim city-state of Medina, which was at war with pagan Mecca, the Quran notes that the polytheists and Arabian Jewish tribes were opposed to Islam, but then goes on to say:

5:82. ” . . . and you will find the nearest in love to the believers (Muslims) those who say: ‘We are Christians.’ That is because amongst them are priests and monks, and they are not proud.”

So the Quran not only does not urge Muslims to commit violence against Christians, it calls them “nearest in love” to the Muslims! The reason given is their piety, their ability to produce holy persons dedicated to God, and their lack of overweening pride.

The tendency when reading the Quran is to read a word like “kafir” (infidel) as referring to all non-Muslims. But it is clear from a close study of the way the Quran uses the word that it refers to those who actively oppose and persecute Muslims. The word literally meant “ingrate” in ancient Arabic. So the polytheists (“mushrikun”) who tried to wipe out Islam were the main referents of the word “infidel.” Christians, as we see above, were mostly in a completely different category. The Christian Ethiopian monarch gave refuge to the Muslims at one point when things got hot in Mecca. The Quran does at one point speak of the “infidels” among the Jews and Christians (2:105: “those who committed kufr/infidelity from among the people of the Book.”) But this verse only proves that it did not think they were all infidels, and it is probably referring to specific Jewish and Christian groups who joined with the Meccans in trying to wipe out the early Muslim community. (The Quran calls Jews and Christians “people of the book” because they have a monotheistic scripture).

People often also ask me about this verse:

[5:51] O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as friends; these are friends of one another. Those among you who ally themselves with these belong with them.

This is actually not a good translation of the original, which has a very specific context. In the Arabia of Muhammad’s time, it was possible for an individual to become an honorary member or “client” of a powerful tribe. But of course, if you did that you would be subordinating yourself politically to that tribe. The word used in Arabic here does not mean “friend.” It means “political patron” (wali). What the Quran is trying to do is to discourage stray Muslims from subordinating themselves to Christian or Jewish tribes that might in turn ally with pagan Mecca, or in any case might have interests at odds with those of the general Muslim community.

So the verse actually says:

[5:51] O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as tribal patrons; these are tribal patrons of one another. Those among you who become clients of these belong with them.

Since the Quran considers Christians nearest in love to Muslims, it obviously does not have an objection to friendship between the two. But apparently now it is some Christians who have that hateful attitude, of no friendship with “infidels.”

http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/bigotry-toward-muslims-and-anti-arab.html
Click to expand...



Good freaking stuff. Every time my IQ plummets from having read some rightwing crap on jpp.com, I can always rebuild some brain cells by reading lucid scholarly work from actual Religious Historians or actual Climate Scientists. Good times.
 
Cypress said:
Man, I dig fascinating historical tidbits and factoids like this. If the pay wasn't total crap, I might have been down with doing some history degrees in college.

On a tangential note, I'll piggy back on your post to deal with Asshat's trolling about Islam.

Surprisingly, the information that Asshat-Bravo-SouthernGirl reads about islam on JihadWatch.com, and other backwaters of the bigoted wingnutosphere, is intentionally misleading and dishonest.

It really doesn't require any effort at all to find credible research, done by reputable academic. religious scholars and religious historians.


From what I've gathered, the violence in the Quran is far less than the violence in the Bible.



Good stuff. The militant crap in the Quran is in a specific historical context, and pertains to the time in the 8th century when the pagans were trying to wipe out the monotheistic muslims on the arabian peninsula. The muslims were in a fight for their lives, and I get the impression from actual religious experts that the militant crap in the Koran is in the context of defending themselves. Sh*t man, I think the bible has some genocides in it, but all that crap has to be understood in the historical contexts.


This dude is another excellent religious scholar and expert on Islam. Good stuff, for those who, unlike Asshat, respect reason, academic research, and scholarly inquiry......





Good freaking stuff. Every time my IQ plummets from having read some rightwing crap on jpp.com, I can always rebuild some brain cells by reading lucid scholarly work from actual Religious Historians or actual Climate Scientists. Good times.
Click to expand...

This proves academia has been filled with traitors for a while now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top