Mohammad gets free speech shut down

Dr. Mohammad!!

 

BTW, when he did that, he also took the woman's daughter for a wife. Poor taste.

 

1.6 BILLION people are delusional, then (they think that he's the best role model for all time)....can we agree on that?

 

He even has an answer for what to do if you fart in church.

 

So when a moderate Muslim is told that their prophet is a torturer and rapist what SHOULD their reply to that be? I know what MY reply would be (similar to when I learned that "my" former prophet - Jesus Christ - was one sick puppy.)

 

Not all of them are delusional.
Muslims in a muslim country face death, if they quit the religion.
Others lose their friends and family, so they remain quiet.

Muslims are victims also.

 

And what to say during sex....I'm not kidding you.

Religion is all about CONTROL....never about "what's best for all the people of the world."

 

I always look at someone else next to me and give that indignant "oh, how could you!?" look. Seems to work.

 

I wonder when we'll find a Muslim ethical enough to condemn Mohammad for advocating death for simply leaving the religion? It might be like trying to find Bigfoot or Yeti, but maybe we'll run across one some day.

 

Yes, the Abrahamic faiths are so perverse, so barbaric, so backwards, so disgusting, that they APPROVE of rape: http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-home-page/rape-in-the-bible/

I wouldn't have said this unless I could actually BACK IT UP with those quotes from the Bible, because no one would have believed me! They think, instead, that "god is love", and "Jesus is love", etc. Yet the book about him approves of RAPE, and God/Jesus never says a word.....

 

And their god will torture those same non-Muslim leftists forever, allegedly - just for being non-Muslim!

[Edit: to be fair, CHRISTIANS are also as uncaring as Muslims, as Christians also approve of the same torture for non-believers in their own religion.]

 

Show us all the Muslims who condemn the 100+ Jihad-enabling verses in the Qur'an.
You can't, can you?

 

I think we are having a major case of miscommunication here. I never said, or even implied that a comic is the same as child porn. I was merely questioning the obsession Aisha and Mohammed (obsessing over a grown man having sex with a 9 year old is a little creepy). As for my question about child porn itself, it was to see if you understood how freedom of speech works.

 

Obama for one. Can you think of any?

 

Where the hell did Obama condemn parts of the Qur'an!?

 

I think I'm being trolled.

 

No, I can't think of ANY Muslims who could summon the moral courage to condemn the Jihad-enabling verses in the Islamic texts.

 

WE SHOULD have a contest in the interests of liberty!

 

Paid the price but that's a price worth paying.

True heroes!

 

We can agree to disagree now the day has passed I feel no more need to post cartoons which were purely a protest.

f*ck you censorship

 

Of course. There's no such thing as hate speech. People saying things you don't like are the only things that need protected in the first place.

All of Islam is a threat to western society and culture, and that is because it is not a religion, it is a way of life.

Sharia is in direct opposition to western culture, and it is an inherent component of Islam.

 

I think we are close to the same page but not quite. Agree with the protected speech comment.

"All of Islam" is too broad a generalization and the term lacks specificity. The second point is that Christianity, and other religions are often "a way of life" This does not make them bad. The comment does not well point out what the problem is within Islam ... you get to this a bit more in the next sentence.

Sharia is the problem 100%. The thing is however that not all Muslims believe in Sharia. To separate - shoot one's arrows straight - the term "Islamist" should be used. This avoids the generalization and gets to the heart of the evil.

It is interesting that the MSM has avoided using this term - like the plague. This is disinformation central. They intentionally avoid targeting this evil and educating people on exactly and specifically what this evil and dangerous ideology is.

 

That's not a task for journalists, it's a task for pundits and activists. Journalists can only educate on events and manifestos in a factual manner. Even though I share your sentiment somewhat, journalists have to attempt not to be viewed as shilling for or against a religion.

You can see this from the opposite perspective in whiny American Christian's who claim the media attacks Christianity, when the media is not really attacking Christianity.