The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The Bible has just as much stuff in it like this. Selling your daughters into slavery, stoning people for working on weekends, even justified rape of virgins (after you kill all the children and married women). I could go on and on with what the Bible condones and demands of people.

This shouldn't be a "Islam causes a shit ton of problems" discussion. It should be a "religion causes a shit ton of problem".

The difference is at least that Christianity has evolved beyond being savages... and only has the 10 commandments and the golden rule (none of which condone what you speak of).

If people would live by my rules on this everything would be so much better. You believe what you want, I believe what I want and I only give a damn about your beliefs if you start thinking that others need to suffer and die because they don't follow your beliefs. Once you cross that line, then we have a problem.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sorry DT, but you're talking purely out of your liberal ass on this one. Or does Mr. Webster not suit you?

Main Entry: en·e·my
Pronunciation: \ˈe-nə-mē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural en·e·mies
Etymology: Middle English enemi, from Anglo-French, from Latin inimicus, from in- 1in- + amicus friend — more at amiable
Date: 13th century

1 : one that is antagonistic to another; especially : one seeking to injure, overthrow, or confound an opponent
2 : something harmful or deadly
3 a : a military adversary b : a hostile unit or force

What element is missing? What simple word in plain black & white do you not understand?

Any American that would attempt to deny with a straight face that "enemy" is wholly applicable to Islam is either in denial, a damned fool, gullible beyond measure, or willfully acting in collusion.

What Flasch says in post 11005 (2 below).

It's a lot more complicated than "Islam bad." And this coming from someone who tends to agree with Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" hypothesis. But that still doesn't mean that all branches of Islam, or all Muslims are our enemies. To perpetrate that worldview, and act in that way, will only be detrimental to us in the end. In the end, we're going to have to work with some branches of Islam - not like we can wipe out all of the Muslims in the world.

But you know...I know that's far too "shades of gray" for your "black and white," "absolutes are the only true facts" worldview. It might force you to actually stop and think and make differentiations based upon subtle differences.

Fuck that...much easier to just say "everyone who's not a carbon copy of me as far as religion/ethnicity/political ideology/beliefs is a POS."

You're intellectually lazy.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by molson

Amazing - all that and he could legally beat his wife if he lived under an Islamic state!

I'm amazed you were able to write this sentence given your obvious ability to access porn. Pervert.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

The difference is at least that Christianity has evolved beyond being savages...

"It has been estimated that during the Bosnian War between 20,000 and 50,000 women, mainly Muslim, were raped.[20][21] A Commission of Experts appointed in October 1992 by the United Nations concluded that "Rape has been reported to have been committed by all sides to the conflict. However, the largest number of reported victims have been Bosnian Muslims, and the largest number of alleged perpetrators have been Bosnian Serbs." (from wiki "Yugoslav wars")

I guess it was after this all Christians evolved. Catholics must not count or FLDS or abortion doctor killers or...

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

The difference is at least that Christianity has evolved beyond being savages... and only has the 10 commandments and the golden rule (none of which condone what you speak of).

Depends what part of the world. The Tarok tribe in Nigeria is Christian and has committed genocide. Bush has even stated that the war in Iraq was done because God told him to. Not that it matters since the Bible advocates genocide.

The 10 commandments are in the Qu'ran as well, although slightly different (but the same principles). The religions are eerily similar. I agree that we keep our crazy religious people under wraps much more than they do. Just saying it's not an issue of Islam vs Christianity, it's an issue of religion in general.

Originally Posted by EagleFan

If people would live by my rules on this everything would be so much better. You believe what you want, I believe what I want and I only give a damn about your beliefs if you start thinking that others need to suffer and die because they don't follow your beliefs. Once you cross that line, then we have a problem.

I agree. The problem is that most major religions do not believe in that. If you are not part of their religion, you are an enemy and in many cases should be killed. It's a different story if their religions taught everyone to mind their own business, but their holy books tell a different story.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

You're intellectually lazy.

OH HE WENT THERE...


...AGAIN!

[molson]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The Bible has just as much stuff in it like this. Selling your daughters into slavery, stoning people for working on weekends, even justified rape of virgins (after you kill all the children and married women). I could go on and on with what the Bible condones and demands of people.

This shouldn't be a "Islam causes a shit ton of problems" discussion. It should be a "religion causes a shit ton of problem".

Sure, but there's actually Islamic law countries that, as a government, practice the "beating wives is cool" version of Islam. That's a little different than finding weird shit in the front of the bible.

[molson]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

"It has been estimated that during the Bosnian War between 20,000 and 50,000 women, mainly Muslim, were raped.[20][21] A Commission of Experts appointed in October 1992 by the United Nations concluded that "Rape has been reported to have been committed by all sides to the conflict. However, the largest number of reported victims have been Bosnian Muslims, and the largest number of alleged perpetrators have been Bosnian Serbs." (from wiki "Yugoslav wars")

I guess it was after this all Christians evolved. Catholics must not count or FLDS or abortion doctor killers or...

Wow, Islam MUST be the one true religion!!

(Weird to see the usual elements who are paranoid about anything Christian now waving the flag of Islam)

I mean, isn't it weird to have the president and a mayor so outspoken about how important it is to have a particular religious building in a certain place? Why is this a government issue at all? Whoever owns the land can put what the hell they want there (assuming compliance with reasonable zoning laws), and whatever private citizens don't like it can oppose it or put barriers in the way utilizing legal means (the actual land ownership/usage situation might be more complicated than that, I haven't bothered to look that up).

Personally, I'd rather not there be a mosque/prayer area there, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop it. Part of religious freedom is having religious preferences - even if you're not a practicing member of any religion. One can think that Islam is "worse" than Christianity or Judaism, either because of the philosophies, the practice, the impact in the current world, whatever (Just like one can think that they all suck).

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by molson

I mean, isn't it weird to have the president and a mayor so outspoken about how important it is to have a particular religious building in a certain place? Why is this a government issue at all?

I can understand the mayor getting involved because he is basically making your point; it's private property, do what you want. Obama on the other hand, total mistake.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

I can understand the mayor getting involved because he is basically making your point; it's private property, do what you want. Obama on the other hand, total mistake.

Yeah - the mayor and the local authorities can say what they want. I agree that it was a mistake for Obama to go and get himself involved. He doesn't really have a say in it, and because the right-wing media was up in arms about it and trying to rally support against it and essentially calling him out for allowing it, he decided that he should make it his business, when he really should have just made a statement saying "it's a local issue...i have no influence in it" and left it at that. instead, he tried to do too much (yet again), and let somebody else dictate the battlefield.

weak.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

You're intellectually lazy.

You're morally bankrupt.

I'll take my chances with my flaws, wouldn't want to live a second with yours.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

You're morally bankrupt.

I'll take my chances with my flaws, wouldn't want to live a second with yours.

See - the funny thing is that I'm only morally bankrupt in your eyes because you have an intellectually lazy uncompromising worldview.

I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of posters on this board would say that I do indeed have morals. Hell, even most of those who don't agree with my morals would agree that at least I have morals. They might disagree with what they are, but they would agree that I have them.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Yeah - the mayor and the local authorities can say what they want. I agree that it was a mistake for Obama to go and get himself involved. He doesn't really have a say in it, and because the right-wing media was up in arms about it and trying to rally support against it and essentially calling him out for allowing it, he decided that he should make it his business, when he really should have just made a statement saying "it's a local issue...i have no influence in it" and left it at that. instead, he tried to do too much (yet again), and let somebody else dictate the battlefield.

weak.

He basically said, "it's a local issue and we have freedom of religion, so get over it." Bloomberg and Obama only spoke out because it became the mainstream opinion of the GOP that the government should stop Muslims from building houses of worship. If the outrage wasn't so pronounced and high profile there wouldn't have been a response. Personally I admire both men for standing up and defending one of our core founding principles.

[JPhillips]

I love this.

Our Daughter Isn't a Selfish Brat; Your Son Just Hasn't Read
Atlas Shrugged.
BY ERIC HAGUE

- - - -

I'd like to start by saying that I don't get into belligerent shouting matches at the playground very often. The Tot Lot, by its very nature, can be an extremely volatile place—a veritable powder keg of different and sometimes contradictory parenting styles—and this fact alone is usually enough to keep everyone, parents and tots alike, acting as courteous and deferential as possible. The argument we had earlier today didn't need to happen, and I want you to know, above all else, that I'm deeply sorry that things got so wildly, publicly out of hand.

Now let me explain why your son was wrong.

When little Aiden toddled up our daughter Johanna and asked to play with her Elmo ball, he was, admittedly, very sweet and polite. I think his exact words were, "Have a ball, peas [sic]?" And I'm sure you were very proud of him for using his manners.

To be sure, I was equally proud when Johanna yelled, "No! Looter!" right in his looter face, and then only marginally less proud when she sort of shoved him.

The thing is, in this family we take the philosophies of Ayn Rand seriously. We conspicuously reward ourselves for our own hard work, we never give to charity, and we only pay our taxes very, very begrudgingly.

Since the day Johanna was born, we've worked to indoctrinate her into the truth of Objectivism. Every night we read to her from the illustrated, unabridged edition of Atlas Shrugged—glossing over all the hardcore sex parts, mind you, but dwelling pretty thoroughly on the stuff about being proud of what you've earned and not letting James Taggart-types bring you down. For a long time we were convinced that our efforts to free her mind were for naught, but recently, as we've started socializing her a little bit, we've been delighted to find that she is completely antipathetic to the concept of sharing. As parents, we couldn't have asked for a better daughter.

That's why, when Johanna then began berating your son, accusing him of trying to coerce from her a moral sanction of his theft of the fruit of her labor, in as many words, I kind of egged her on. Even when Aiden started crying.

You see, that Elmo ball was Johanna's reward for consistently using the potty this past week. She wasn't given the ball simply because she'd demonstrated an exceptional need for it—she earned it. And from the way Aiden's pants sagged as he tried in vain to run away from our daughter, it was clear that he wasn't anywhere close to deserving that kind of remuneration. By so much as allowing Johanna to share her toy with him, we'd be undermining her appreciation of one of life's most important lessons: You should never feel guilty about your abilities. Including your ability to repeatedly peg a fellow toddler with your Elmo ball as he sobs for mercy.

Look, imagine what would happen if we were to enact some sort of potty training Equalization of Opportunity Act in which we regularized the distribution all of Johanna's and Aiden's potty chart stickers. Suddenly it would seem as if Aiden had earned the right to wear big-boy underpants, and within minutes you'd have a Taggart Tunnel-esque catastrophe on your hands, if you follow me.

Johanna shouldn't be burdened with supplying playthings for every bed-wetting moocher she happens to meet. If you saw Johanna, her knees buckling, her arms trembling but still trying to hold aloft the collective weight of an entire Tot Lot's worth of Elmo balls with the last of her strength, what would you tell her to do?

To shrug. Just like we've instructed her to do if Child Protective Services or some other agent of the People's State of America ever asks her about what we're teaching her.

After all, we've managed to raise a bright, self-reliant girl who achieves her goals by means of incentive and ratiocination and never—or very rarely—through the corrupt syllogism of force. We know, despite what you and a number of other parents we've met have said—as they carried their whimpering little social parasites away—that Johanna's defiant, quasi-bellicose nature only superficially resembles that of an out-of-control toddler, and in truth posits her as more of a latter-day Dagny Taggart than any kind of enfant terrible.

Yes, she's blossomed into everything we ever hoped or post hoc rationalized she would. In our house we no longer say, "Who is John Galt?" Instead we say, "Who's our little princess?"

[EagleFan]

Mischief in Manhattan

[JPhillips]

Regardless of their knowledge of Islam, when they repeatedly talk about a mosque at ground zero they're obviously full of shit.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

They might disagree with what they are, but they would agree that I have them.

You could have a bank account too, but if there's nothing of value in it ...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Personally I admire both men for standing up and defending one of our core founding principles.

Yep, they're real statesmen.

Just following in the proud tradition of FDR & Truman when they supported German & Japanese efforts to build recruiting centers all over the country back in the 40's.

Oh wait.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Regardless of their knowledge of Islam, when they repeatedly talk about a mosque at ground zero they're obviously full of shit.

Because you say so?

Get over yourself...

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

it became the mainstream opinion of the GOP that the government should stop Muslims from building houses of worship

That is such a laughable statement. You lose ALL credibility as soon as you say that. There is no reason to even listen to you at that point.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Because you say so?

Get over yourself...

It's not a mosque and it's not at ground zero.

Saying something is what it is not is generally referred to as lying.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

That is such a laughable statement. You lose ALL credibility as soon as you say that. There is no reason to even listen to you at that point.

Look around. In TN, in CA, in NY there are largely GOP groups opposing the construction of mosques. A leading figure of the Christian right said that no new mosques should be built in the US.

I'm honestly surprised that you don't agree with what I stated. Opposing mosques isn't a fringe position within the GOP.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

There is no reason to even listen to you at that point.

You must be new to this board, people stopped listening to each other years ago.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

It's not a mosque and it's not at ground zero.

Saying something is what it is not is generally referred to as lying.

It's not a mosque???

According to wikipedia it is.

Cordoba House, renamed Park51 and sometimes referred to as the "Ground Zero mosque", is a planned $100 million, 13-story, glass and steel Islamic community center, which will include a mosque, a 500-seat auditorium, a swimming pool, a restaurant, and a bookstore.^[5] The center also aims to provide space for Friday prayers for 1,000–2,000 Muslims.

I think the coup de grace for the Islamic extremists is when they can have the call to prayer broadcast to earshot of ground zero every day. The terrorists are undoubtedly going to very much appreciate our efforts to honor their dead comrades. I doubt we can stop it, but I don't have to sit here and talk about how wonderful of an idea it is because it's not.

[molson]

After reading what Obama actually said, I don't know what else he could have said (except nothing)

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right that people have that dates back to our founding."

There ya go, I don't think you can disagree with that. What avenue to people "opposed" to the mosque think the government should take, exactly? Make Islam illegal?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by molson

What avenue to people "opposed" to the mosque think the government should take, exactly? Make Islam illegal?

I'm sure that's the position of some, for sure.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Yep, they're real statesmen.

Just following in the proud tradition of FDR & Truman when they supported German & Japanese efforts to build recruiting centers all over the country back in the 40's.

Oh wait.

Or join the United States military.


Oh wait.

[Marc Vaughan]

To those of you who appear to be equating Islam with Terrorism.

I lived in England and commuted through London when the IRA were conducting their bombing campaigns. On frequent occasions trains and busses I was travelling on were delayed because of suspect devices (including a few bomb squad detonations).

Strangely though just because a subversive Christian group were terrorising the country we didn't prevent anyone from building Christian churches .... terrorists might hide partially behind a religion but its power and influence they're interested in, don't tar all believers of whatever relgion it is just because of a few idiots.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Or join the United States military.

Oh wait.

If you have any shred of decency, you'll take that picture of the piece of shit off this board.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

To those of you who appear to be equating Islam with Terrorism.

I lived in England and commuted through London when the IRA were conducting their bombing campaigns. On frequent occasions trains and busses I was travelling on were delayed because of suspect devices (including a few bomb squad detonations).

Strangely though just because a subversive Christian group were terrorising the country we didn't prevent anyone from building Christian churches .... terrorists might hide partially behind a religion but its power and influence they're interested in, don't tar all believers of whatever relgion it is just because of a few idiots.

When they start blarring their "Call to Prayers" out across the WTC memorial everyday, they will be doing a much better job of equating Islam to 911 than folks on this message board could ever do. I would say that the damage they will do to the image of their religion is a valid argument for not building it.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Dutch

When they start blarring their "Call to Prayers" out across the WTC memorial everyday, they will be doing a much better job of equating Islam to 911 than folks on this message board could ever do. I would say that the damage they will do to the image of their religion is a valid argument for not building it.

Huh? Why would a community center with an auxiliary prayer area inside blare out a "call to prayer?"

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

He basically said, "it's a local issue and we have freedom of religion, so get over it." Bloomberg and Obama only spoke out because it became the mainstream opinion of the GOP that the government should stop Muslims from building houses of worship. If the outrage wasn't so pronounced and high profile there wouldn't have been a response. Personally I admire both men for standing up and defending one of our core founding principles.

If that's all he said then that's fine. But I still maintain that a large part of his problem is that he's been too reactive and not proactive enough with things like this - letting the GOP and the right-wing media define the battlefields.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

If that's all he said then that's fine. But I still maintain that a large part of his problem is that he's been too reactive and not proactive enough with things like this - letting the GOP and the right-wing media define the battlefields.

In general I agree, but in his instance the only reason anything had to be said was because of the right wing freak show. If Newt, Palin et al didn't try to make this an issue there would be no need for Bloomberg or Obama to defend the 1st amendment.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

Huh? Why would a community center with an auxiliary prayer area inside blare out a "call to prayer?"

Most mosques are "inside".

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Most mosques are "inside".

This isn't a mosque per se. Expecting external blaring calls to prayer from a Islamic community center of this nature is like expecting a Christian community center with a small chapel inside to ring loud bells outside as if it did large regular masses.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

This isn't a mosque per se. Expecting external blaring calls to prayer from a Islamic community center of this nature is like expecting a Christian community center with a small chapel inside to ring loud bells outside as if it did large regular masses.

From what I've read, the Islamic Center will house a mosque capable of offering prayer 5 times daily AND provide for 2,000 to have Friday sermon and teachings. It's not comparable to a small chapel. Now, whether or not they have a loudspeaker "call to prayer" is debatable, I don't know, I'm going off past visual/audible experiences of how mosques generally work.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Now, whether or not they have a loudspeaker "call to prayer" is debatable, I don't know, I'm going off past visual/audible experiences of how mosques generally work.

Ahh, so getting worked up over an assumption you don't know to be true.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Dutch

From what I've read, the Islamic Center will house a mosque capable of offering prayer 5 times daily AND provide for 2,000 to have Friday sermon and teachings. It's not comparable to a small chapel. Now, whether or not they have a loudspeaker "call to prayer" is debatable, I don't know, I'm going off past visual/audible experiences of how mosques generally work.

Never heard of a mosque in the US that broadcast loudspeaker "call to prayer." I know it's common elsewhere, but I've never even heard of it happening here in the US.

And insofar as this is a moderate sect and a moderate leader who has in the past shown an inclination to be respectful I'd presume that they wouldn't either.

Plus...there's noise ordinances to consider also. Maybe that's why you don't get that here in the US.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by lungs

Ahh, so getting worked up over an assumption you don't know to be true.

Based on traditional Islam, it's not an assumption. DT better clarifies it for me though.

[lungs]

I guess we were working from opposite assumptions. I never remembered any loud calls to prayer coming from mosques in Minneapolis.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Dutch

From what I've read, the Islamic Center will house a mosque capable of offering prayer 5 times daily AND provide for 2,000 to have Friday sermon and teachings. It's not comparable to a small chapel. Now, whether or not they have a loudspeaker "call to prayer" is debatable, I don't know, I'm going off past visual/audible experiences of how mosques generally work.

There's already 100 full-blown "mosques" in New York City - I'm not sure that they don't practice calls to prayer, but I'd be pretty surprised if they did and this wasn't a huge news story already. It's not like there's little rural areas in NYC you can tuck these places away in. I don't seem to remember the right being all up in arms over these "recruiting centers" in NYC during the Bush administration.

One of the amazing things about NYC, and "ground zero", is that it's not like going to the Vietnam Memorial in D.C or something - city life goes on, as it has for years. You'd have to pay attention to even know you were near the site of the attacks.

Sure, there's a risk that this place becomes something more than a "mosque" (really just because of the attention everyone's paying to it). I hope that we monitor the shit out of it.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by lungs

I guess we were working from opposite assumptions. I never remembered any loud calls to prayer coming from mosques in Minneapolis.

I'm basing my info on mosques in the Middle East. If Stateside mosques don't have a call to prayer 5 times daily and this mosque isn't disruptive to the 9/11 site, I'm less inclined to think it's a big deal.

[JediKooter]

There goes that damn constitution getting in the way of discrimination again...

[molson]

Originally Posted by SteveBollea

I also hope that you wished we "monitored the shit" out of largely Irish Catholic congregations in Massachusetts during The Troubles.

Absolutely. Within legal means, of course.

[molson]

Originally Posted by SteveBollea

And again, I fail to see how any sort of extremist Islamic center can have an indoor swimming pool as part of it.

Do we know if women will be allowed in there?

Islamic men are allowed to get almost naked with each other. Most of the stricter rules only apply to women, in practice.

[molson]

Originally Posted by SteveBollea

I also hope that you wished we "monitored the shit" out of largely Irish Catholic congregations in Massachusetts during The Troubles.

But yes, two blocks may seem close if you live in even a medium-sized city. But, two blocks in Manhattan is almost a different community. And again, I fail to see how any sort of extremist Islamic center can have an indoor swimming pool as part of it.

Are you a closet muslim or something? I must admit its refreshing to see you so passionately defending the practice of a religion. I guess anything the right opposes you need to become a strong supporter of.

I mean, we freak out on this board over "christian-influenced" law preventing gay marriage. Under "islamic-influenced" laws, those gays can be executed. Presumably, no gays will be executed at this particular "prayer center", but I'm sure many member/attendees make religious pilgrimages to a place where they are (in fact, they're required to, if they're good muslims)

Shouldn't Islam get at least as much venom from the far left as Christianity?

[molson]

Are there smaller sects of Islam, like Christianity, that don't oppose homosexuality, equal rights for women, etc?

Protestan christianity is a very different animal than the than the christianity that the right makes so visible. Perhaps the same is true in Islam, and I'm being unfair making the generalizations. But I grew up Lutheran, a church that has openely gay members (and now, openly gay pastors). I did the whole confirmation/sunday school thing and nobody ever taught me anything about gays or abortion being bad. It was mostly just hippie jesus, which I think is actually a great, hugely tolerant philosophy, regardless of what anyone believes about the "literal truth" of the religion (something at least the Lutherans I grew up with didn't care about in the least).

Islam IS different, as far as I know. If you're a Muslim, Mecca and Medina aren't optional. It's not like the pope RE: Christianity. If you're a Muslim, you don't get to opt out of the Middle East version, or at least, there certainly hasn't been any wide-spread attempts at a mainstream, more tolerant sect of Islam, compatable with Western laws and ideas. That does make Islam more dangerous.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

Are there smaller sects of Islam, like Christianity, that don't oppose homosexuality, equal rights for women, etc?

Protestan christianity is a very different animal than the than the christianity that the right makes so visible. Perhaps the same is true in Islam, and I'm being unfair making the generalizations. But I grew up Lutheran, a church that has openely gay members (and now, openly gay pastors). I did the whole confirmation/sunday school thing and nobody ever taught me anything about gays or abortion being bad. It was mostly just hippie jesus, which I think is actually a great, hugely tolerant philosophy, regardless of what anyone believes about the "literal truth" of the religion (something at least the Lutherans I grew up with didn't care about in the least).

Islam IS different, as far as I know. If you're a Muslim, Mecca and Medina aren't optional. It's not like the pope RE: Christianity. If you're a Muslim, you don't get to opt out of the Middle East version, or at least, there certainly hasn't been any wide-spread attempts at a mainstream, more tolerant sect of Islam, compatable with Western laws and ideas. That does make Islam more dangerous.

I'm not an Islamic expert, so I'll refrain from commenting on different strains there. However, you're not really correct on protestantism. There certainly are tolerant churches like you grew up in, but some of the more conservative forms of Christianity are in protestant churches (ie Southern Baptist, Seven Day Adventist, etc.)

I also think it's important to remember that Christianity had a six hundred year head start on Islam. It doesn't excuse a lot of the really awful laws and customs in most Islamic countries, but it looks different if you compare it to Christianity in the 1400s.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by molson

But I grew up Lutheran, a church

Completely off the subject, but the only time I've ever questioned my non-Christian, agnostic lifestyle has been in a Lutheran Church.

Wasn't enough to get me to convert, but if I ever decided one day to start going to church I'd head straight to my local Lutheran church.

[molson]

Originally Posted by lungs

Wasn't enough to get me to convert, but if I ever decided one day to start going to church I'd head straight to my local Lutheran church.

Should that day arrive, just make sure you go ELCA and not Missouri Synod. The latter is NOT what you have in mind....

(Also, Lutheran chicks are hot).