telling the cop he doesn't remember!!
telling the cop he doesn't remember!!
You know nothing about my personal life or how I spend it, so I'm just as liable to assert the same about you.*sigh* Here we go. Another thread in which Napoleon will get heated, writing in bolded cap-locks and insist that he's Black. Oh well, I have some time today before I have to leave the Coli to attend social gatherings and the like, something Napoleon doesn't seem to do since he's always on here.
Doesn't matter. Asserting belief in unsubstantiated concepts doesn't offer any valueIf I can prove on example of a religion which doesn't say kill all non-believers, your entire argument collapses. Please locate me the passage within the Baha'i faith which says kill all non-believers. Oh, you can't? Well, I guess you were just pretending to be an expert on something you know nothing about, as usual. Now, I shall ridicule you and everything you have said, thus far.
You're either stupid or a liar to believe that Mo wasn't out here killing infidels. Remember, this guy isn't your normal hippie p*ssy liberal messiah. Mo was about that life.**********
"I don't care about cultural context. Its in the book. YOU don't get to proclaim the infallibility of a book that condones such behavior." - I never claimed that they're infallible. All I had to do was refute the idea that all religious faiths want to kill non-believers. In in the Qur'an with mentions towards the House of War and the House of Peace, the Prophet Muhammad wished to unite the pagan tribes of Arabia, not kill every non-Muslim (and there were many) in 7th century Arabia. After Islamic conquests of Egypt, Palestine, Persia etc - populations slowly converted to Islam, they were not exterminated as you and other bigots would like to assert.
How is life under that rock of yours?"Except, its not. Present history in all religions around the world demonstrate this." - It doesn't. There. I just replaced your claim with another one. If you're going to argue. Back up shyt with analysis.
Evangelism isn't limited to street corners. The fact that the perpetuate the belief within their society and across generations IS evangelism. Its the perpetuating the faith over time. Under your eyes, all of these people would have died out."Hindus are known for their evangelism. Judaism as well. Inclusion and expansion are very much the goals" - No, Hindus are not. Why? Because you can't create a caste out of thin air. That's largely why Hindus don't try and spread their faith that much unlike Abrahamaic religious. Jews don't really spread their faith that much either because Judaism has been linked to an ethno-cultural identity which has existed for 3000 years.
Theres no such thing as nuance except the modern world for some reason. This "nuance" argument is an invention to reconcile faith in a modern world that doesn't need it."fukk accountability for voluntary associations, right?" - We can hold individuals responsible who claims they're representing a religious faith. Hard to do that with a religion because of a myriad of interpretation. Aka, nuance.
The civil rights movement started in academia and on campuses. Churches were brought into the fold because they were reservoirs of people, not because religion offered any solace."Joy? You mean the selective interpretation of a book that also validated the very sorrow you want acknowledged? Stop contradicting yourself. This is getting embarrassing." - Ah, that magical word nuance which you don't get. Here, i'll make what i'm saying to you easier to understand. Do you think Black people in America would have hard a harder time during segregation and eventually battling for their rights without the social utility of religious organizations and people like MLK and Malcom X?
Could you make any more intellectually dishonest comments?You're so stupid, @Napoleon. It boggles the mind. Proceed to have a temper tantrum!
part of me wants to believe that Canada is that chill BECAUSE of the USAREAL TALK BREHS
THE NATURE BOY GOT MAD LOVE FOR CANADA
THE FINEST HOES, KUSH AND NON OF THAT GOVERNMENT BULLshyt WE GET IN THE STATES
AND TO EVERYONE SAYING IT'S SO COLD...UNLESS YOU UP IN NATIVE LAND..shyt IS THE SAME TEMP AS NORTHERN US (NYC, BOSTON, ETC)
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
You know nothing about my personal life or how I spend it, so I'm just as liable to assert the same about you.
Lets move forward with this train wreck of bullshyt you're about to lay out
Doesn't matter. Asserting belief in unsubstantiated concepts doesn't offer any value
Violence isn't the only standard for making a good religion or not. (of which I posit there are none)
You're either stupid or a liar to believe that Mo wasn't out here killing infidels. Remember, this guy isn't your normal hippie p*ssy liberal messiah. Mo was about that life.
How is life under that rock of yours?
Go look at south asia and tell me buddhism is peaceful.
Evangelism isn't limited to street corners. The fact that the perpetuate the belief within their society and across generations IS evangelism. Its the perpetuating the faith over time. Under your eyes, all of these people would have died out.
And judaism clearly spread if we want to talk about the diaspora that is composed of seemingly different ethnic groups at this point.
Everywhere from the tip of spain to west china has "jews" in it.
Theres no such thing as nuance except the modern world for some reason. This "nuance" argument is an invention to reconcile faith in a modern world that doesn't need it.
The civil rights movement started in academia and on campuses. Churches were brought into the fold because they were reservoirs of people, not because religion offered any solace.
Plus, you're talking about two of the most liberally religious people possibly ever.
Could you make any more intellectually dishonest comments?

at Malcolm X being a religious liberal.He's all over the place with it. He speaks out against white supremacist propaganda towards black people but completely believes the propaganda towards Muslims.
He hates it when white public figures do something racist but caped EXTRA hard for Justin Bieber when he was caught twice for white supremacist comments or gestures (three times if you count the monkey grafitti drawing but he's still denying that one). He capes for gay rights but can't see how they're probably bigger white supremacists than straight white people.
1. Asserting beliefs in unsubstantiated concepts?! The horror, the horror! Examples of concepts that humans believe in for various social purposes which are unsubsantiated:
- Democracy
- Human rights
- liberalism
- atheism![]()
All religions condone violence. The major ones at least. Newer religions assume the benefit of history and seek to overlook such claims Bahai etc. However, they all assert infallibility and internal consistency to the point that they permit such behavior.2. "Violence isn't the only standard for making a good religion or not. (of which I posit there are none)". You're entire argument is premised that religions are violent and wish to kill people.
Killing infidels. Period.3. "You're either stupid or a liar to believe that Mo wasn't out here killing infidels. Remember, this guy isn't your normal hippie p*ssy liberal messiah. Mo was about that life." I never said that Muhammad wasn't killing infidels, I just said that he wasn't trying to kill ALL infidels and other Muslim conquerors after him didn't try to do so either. Again, nuance. Let's see what other shyt you vomited up.

I love how much you moderates love to jump through hoops to validate religious conflicts.4. "tell me Buddhism is peaceful". The Rohingya conflict is more ethnic than religious, although religious differences play a part in it. Please tell me the sutra where Buddha said kill non believers. Such an idiot @Napoleon

Thats textbook evangelism. Brainwashing your kids is no different. Don't sit up here and limit the expansion of the faith to locking people in a room and forcing conversions.5. Judaism had a wide diaspora because Jews migrated. But if you're saying that evangelism is also instructing children about their faith that their parents were also born into, then your statement is a wash. Evangelism is EVERYTHING then.
6. Plus, you're talking about two of the most liberally religious people possibly ever."at Malcolm X being a religious liberal

Being a muslim is a choice.He's all over the place with it. He speaks out against white supremacist propaganda towards black people but completely believes the propaganda towards Muslims.
FalseHe hates it when white public figures do something racist but caped EXTRA hard for Justin Bieber when he was caught twice for white supremacist
comments or gestures (three times if you count the monkey grafitti drawing but he's still denying that one). He capes for gay rights but can't see how they're probably bigger white supremacists than straight white people.
Yeah, your'e an idiot
The aforementioned are ADMITTEDLY fluid concepts that don't proclaim absolutism.
Religious ideation does.
Keep up.
Epistemology isn't your strong suit.
All religions condone violence. The major ones at least. Newer religions assume the benefit of history and seek to overlook such claims Bahai etc. However, they all assert infallibility and internal consistency to the point that they permit such behavior.
Killing infidels. Period.
Lets not pretend killing non-muslims or apostates is some fringe belief either.
I love how much you moderates love to jump through hoops to validate religious conflicts.
Even when all indicators will tell you how important religion plays in these conflicts, you all will never take them at their word.
Yet you want "nuance"
Thats textbook evangelism. Brainwashing your kids is no different. Don't sit up here and limit the expansion of the faith to locking people in a room and forcing conversions.
His return from Mecca![]()


Bodybag.*sigh* Here we go. Another thread in which Napoleon will get heated, writing in bolded cap-locks and insist that he's Black. Oh well, I have some time today before I have to leave the Coli to attend social gatherings and the like, something Napoleon doesn't seem to do since he's always on here.
If I can prove on example of a religion which doesn't say kill all non-believers, your entire argument collapses. Please locate me the passage within the Baha'i faith which says kill all non-believers. Oh, you can't? Well, I guess you were just pretending to be an expert on something you know nothing about, as usual. Now, I shall ridicule you and everything you have said, thus far.
**********
"I don't care about cultural context. Its in the book. YOU don't get to proclaim the infallibility of a book that condones such behavior." - I never claimed that they're infallible. All I had to do was refute the idea that all religious faiths want to kill non-believers. In in the Qur'an with mentions towards the House of War and the House of Peace, the Prophet Muhammad wished to unite the pagan tribes of Arabia, not kill every non-Muslim (and there were many) in 7th century Arabia. After Islamic conquests of Egypt, Palestine, Persia etc - populations slowly converted to Islam, they were not exterminated as you and other bigots would like to assert.
"Except, its not. Present history in all religions around the world demonstrate this." - It doesn't. There. I just replaced your claim with another one. If you're going to argue. Back up shyt with analysis.
"Hindus are known for their evangelism. Judaism as well. Inclusion and expansion are very much the goals" - No, Hindus are not. Why? Because you can't create a caste out of thin air. That's largely why Hindus don't try and spread their faith that much unlike Abrahamaic religious. Jews don't really spread their faith that much either because Judaism has been linked to an ethno-cultural identity which has existed for 3000 years.
"fukk accountability for voluntary associations, right?" - We can hold individuals responsible who claims they're representing a religious faith. Hard to do that with a religion because of a myriad of interpretation. Aka, nuance.
"Joy? You mean the selective interpretation of a book that also validated the very sorrow you want acknowledged? Stop contradicting yourself. This is getting embarrassing." - Ah, that magical word nuance which you don't get. Here, i'll make what i'm saying to you easier to understand. Do you think Black people in America would have hard a harder time during segregation and eventually battling for their rights without the social utility of religious organizations and people like MLK and Malcom X?
You're so stupid, @Napoleon. It boggles the mind. Proceed to have a temper tantrum!
Another thread off track due to Napoleon's obsession with religious folks

Its not bigotry if you're aligned with a religion you don't take seriously.Unfortunately, I have to leave this thread which has been sadly de-railed by Napoleon.
I have to attend an event with Canadians (some of them will even be Muslim!) a few meters away from Parliament Hill which will probably make mention of the attack and avoid the silly bigotry which was espoused by this fool who dares call himself @Napoleon.
Why ask you to continue to eat dirt? You already are choosing toAh! @Napoleon, the fraud continues! What other lies shall he weave for us?
I don't proclaim militant atheism. I hold beliefs accountable according to those who believe it.1. Funny how you claim that these concepts don't require absolutism and yet you proclaim "militant" atheism, yourself.
Being an atheist doesn't mean you're a nihilist. You fukking idiot.Also, human rights (if you believe in the concept) require it to be absolute and universal otherwise the concept means nothing. Much like certain religious ideologies you seem to dislike...
Again, the problem of induction...and you'd think you'd understand that if you weren't so fukking dense.I think I'll start believing you once you prove to me that God doesn't exist (bear in mind, i'm quite secular myself though its seems like out of the two of us - you are the one most likely to murder another human being)
Yet using this standard of evidence you claim Islam isn't violent2. "All religions condone violence." - Still hoping you'll turn up with a quote from the Buddha condoning the murder of Hindus...
Not all conflicts are religious. I'm not that stupid. However when they clear are, you don't get to tell those who are fighting what they're fighting for.3. Do you believe all conflicts between two groups which have different religions are because of those religions? Did the South fight the North because Baptists REALLY hate Methodists and Catholics? Did Ireland fight off the United Kingdom solely because the Pope told them to do it? Are Palestinians fighting Israelis because of a hadith? PERHAPS, it's a confluence of factors which sometimes includes religion as a motivational factor for violence like the American nationalism you occasionally draw upon when you post @Napoleon.
And you can install "culture" without predicating them on supernatural and superstitious "ideas" (because to call them beliefs is just disgustingly ignorant in itself).4. "Brainwashing your kids is no different." Oh, he thinks instilling cultural values in your children is brainwashing? Maybe he believes a secular-liberal state can do it better haha
This dumbass
![]()
5. Ah, when Malcolm X returned from Mecca and adopted the viewpoints of other Muslims he met on the Hajj?
Hold this L
