[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great
Views expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Dear Limey Assholes ...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index -> Noteworthy Discussion Threads
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
stefania



Joined: 17 Jul 2003
Posts: 4250
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, in Iran children are being hanged and executed everyday and we waste our time by attacking the personal opinion of that or this american politician !

Who's the real enemy ? The Islamic Republic or that or this American politician ?
_________________
Referendum AFTER Regime Change

"I'm ready to die for you to be able to say your own opinions, even if i strongly disagree with you" (Voltaire)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spenta said

Quote:
Stefania you've spammed this board with so many off subject posts that you've even been warned by the Admin, so you are not in a position to lecture others. American Visitor started this, and because he can't argue the points he is now trying to end it. I came along long after you guys had started this, now in an attempt to silence me, you pretend this is off subject. If its off subject why did you start and continue it before I even joined in? Obviously only those who disagree with you are off subject!


I love this conversation, I just didn't want to distract from the main topic, but here goes. I think we need more converstaions about these things to try to gain mutual understanding. It is healthy in the long run.

Quote:
You wrote that you support a consitutional ammendment banning gay marraiage as a way of stopping judges from legislating. In other words you want judges to rule in favor of your beliefs. Once again, if you can't see your own contradictions I can't help you. You want judges to rule in favor of your beliefs, and you call that people sorting it out


Absolutely not. The constitutional amendments are voted on by the people and most are passing by 60% or greater. That is not judges deciding anything, that is the power of the people.

Quote:
I wrote that Mysogyny and bigotry are not Amercian values in response to you, in turn you demanded prove it, and I did! Now you pretend it never happened, you spin a mighty long spin of yarn, but noone is buying it, except for maybve Stefania :LOL:


I understood and I believe rightly so that you were saying anyone who disagrees with you on gay marriage and other subjects is a homophobe or a misogynist. That is what I asked you to prove.

Quote:
Once again, if all are equal under he law, how come a judge can marry a heterosexual man and woman, but not a homosexual man and woman. Is that a judge or the law treating all equally? Answer this question.


It depends entirely on how the law is written. If the law grants me a drivers licenses for a passenger car and I claim equality of the law gives me the right to drive an eighteen wheeler because other people have truckers licenses, that is a misunderstanding of the equality of the law. If a poor man and a rich man both apply for drivers licenses, they are both to be treated equally in testing and other qualifying exams. That is how I understand equality under the law means.

If you or anyone else wishes to change the law to allow gay marriage or even to do a constitutional amendment to that effect there is nothing stopping you except the certain knowledge you will lose at this point. To win your point you have to convince a mojority to support you, which is not happening at this point.

Code:
If human life is sacred, are you anti Capital punishment or just anti a woman's right to choose? And if you are anti Capital punishment, are you just as active in fighting capital punishment and war as you are fighting a woman's right to choose? And if human life is sacred, can we then read you denouncing Bush, for his support of Capital punishment and war?


So just how is your belief in sanctity of life? Do you support the destruction of innocents? If so how do you justify it? To compare the death penalty where a murder is executed to the destruction of innocent life because it is inconvenient to society is a reach.

Quote:
More lies. You either have serious trouble comprehending what you read, or resort to lies and fabrications in order to debate. You must have no confidence in the inherent truth, justice, fairness or relevance of your own beliefs for resorting to lies and fabrications. I never described the ACLU as anti Christian. This is precisely what I wrote to Reza:


Quote:
PS. American values are not homophobia and mysogyny, altho those are the values of some intolerant and bigotted Americans!! The ACLU is not waging a war against Christianity but simply fighting the abuses of religion and religious fundementalism!


You said the ACLU is fighting a war against what you termed "abuses of religion and religious fundementalism!" From the perspective of the ACLU and I suspect from your perspective if you would admit it, that seems that much of Christianity in the US today. I haven't seen the ACLU fighting radical Islam, have you? If so please share with us exactly where this is occurring.

I will be glad to continue the converstaion, but I don't want to distract from the main topic. Really, however, I think this type of conversation is useful since the Iranians will face many of these same issues some day if the Mullahs are overthrown.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Spenta



Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Posts: 1829

PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You did not answer most of my questions, and you are still misrepresenting what I wrote. I never said the ACLU was engaged in a war but rather was fighint religious fundementalism, but as usual you misqquote, misunderstand and misrepresent what I wrote. For someone who relies on so many quotes, you sure know how to skip the ones that reveal your misrepresentations.

However, for the sake of returning to the topic, I will end it here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spenta,

You have the right to interpret your posts. I responded to them the way they came across. For instance this clearly came across as very hostile to Christians or other relitious people. Perhaps that is not what you meant but you certainly used loaded language.

Quote:
Since these guys think unions are the anti-christ and equality is the same as apostacy, they hate it. But then again this how it goes with the religious zealots programmed and brainwashed by the Corporate elite, be they Islamists, Zionist or Christian fundementalist it makes no difference, its the same old same old!


If you tell me I misunderstood, I'll accept that. I suppose "fighting the abuses of religion and religious fundamentalism" could be interpreted not to mean the same thing as "waging a war against them."

Perhaps when the ACLU sues towns for celebrating Christmas with a nativity scene as they have traditionally done for over a hundred years, that is fighting religious extremism. Sometimes one man's extremist is another man's average citizen and that is the danger when a secular organization decides to attack peaceful people with whom they disagree simply because they don't like their faith.

Getting back on topic is probably a good thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eski



Joined: 20 Jun 2004
Posts: 157
Location: Washington State, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And the ammendment to the constitution to ban gay marriage is not disallowing people debate on the subject and ruling from the bench? Duh ...



Spenta,
A constitutional amendment is not ruling from the bench and is usually the end result of extensive debate on a subject like so called, Gay Marriage. A constitutional amendment is done by proposing it to the house and senate and then sending it to all 50 states to be ratified by representatives elected by the people to make these decisions. Ruling from the bench is when an activist judge, (usually a liberal) overturns the will of the people and imposes his own warped interpretation of our constitution. There is a huge difference between the two. Liberals hate Constitutional amendments because once they are law, liberal, activist judges can't tell the people that their beliefs and ideals don't matter by overturning referendums that, "We The People," voted on and approved by overwhelming majorities. (No doubt they would try though) Activist justices are usually ex-ACLU lawyers that hate everything that traditional America stands for and seek to destroy us from within. NO DUH.......
_________________
Liberalism is NOT a political philosophy.
It IS a MENTAL DISORDER! (Michael Savage)
Those who forget their history are condemned to repeat it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In my explanation of the ACLU to Reza I made a mistake I should correct. I told him it was originally formed to protect people's civil rights and that is how I used to believe. If what I read here, is correct it was actually formed from the beginning with a different purpose in mind and the name was a deception.
[url]
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41808 [/url]

Here is one passage from the article:
Quote:
"ACLU founder: 'Communism is the goal,'" by Joseph Farah, revealing the group's shocking roots. ACLU founder Roger Baldwin, who zealously sought to recreate America in the Soviet image, once said: "I have continued directing the unpopular fight for the rights of agitation, as director of the American Civil Liberties Union. I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal."


I personally believed for many years it was a legitimate civil rights organization and only recently became aware of the anti-Christian goals. When it begins to attack radical Islam in the US and to block it's agenda to take over our society, I will rethink my objections to the organization. So long as it only attacks peaceful Christians going about their peaceful ordinary lives I will object to it. If it was indeed formed to promote Communism then it was anti-Christian from its very founding.

It is similar to my feelings about the UN. I used to laugh at the conservatives who expressed fear of the UN, but with the Oil for Food scandle and the appointment of opressive totalitarian regimes to human rights commissions, I have had to rethink my support for the organization. I understand they have had an Islamophobe conference in which anyone criticizing Islam is automatically labeled a bigot and can even be jailed in some supposedly free Western countries. Whether the critics can support their allegations on facts, is unimportant. They are Islamophobes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sudi



Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Posts: 235
Location: Plano, TX

PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for this info, American Visitor. Goes to show, you learn something new everyday. I had the same impression of ACLU's origins as you did ... very deceiving name.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
irani



Joined: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 172

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

American visitor wrote:

Quote:


Although I'm sure it is unnecessary, let me just remind you that the English with their love of freedom also came from a Christian background. The only major religion practiced today which I'm convinced is completely incompatible with democracy and freedom is Islam.


Is that so? or is it the fact that the European countries are all secular?
Dont you know that Turkey is a secular muslim country???
Every religion is incompatible with democracy and freedom if it isnt separated from the State, duh.

ps.. i know its alittle late but i had to answer...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Irani said,

Quote:
Is that so? or is it the fact that the European countries are all secular?
Dont you know that Turkey is a secular muslim country???
Every religion is incompatible with democracy and freedom if it isnt separated from the State, duh.


Whether Europe with their secularism can maintain their freedoms is highly questionable. They fell under the Nazis and then were nearly taken over by the Communists. The Islamists have their sights on Europe which so far seems to have no moral or philosophical courage from which to resist the take over. Also the Europeans don't seem very anxious to force regime change in Iran and are becoming extremely antisemitic once again. Their secular philosophy doesn't seem to have a moral center.

The French had a bloody secular revolution in which they rejected all forms of religion. This is quite different from England and the United States which were very religious and based their government on Judeo-Christian principles. While England maintained a state church, the citizens in US who were overwhelmingly Christian from dissenting backgrounds, formed the constitution with the bill or rights and a provision that the government would not regulate religion. The reason we have the freedoms we do today is because the American Christians believe God wants them to keep their churches separate from the government and have fought and sacrificed to keep those freedoms.

For the churches, this has proven a very wise choice. In the US where the churches are free from government control, Christianity has flourished while in Europe which generally has state run churches it is on life support. The Christians in the US are firmly committed to our religious freedoms and will do everything necessary in order to ensure it survives. Despite the posturing by the secularists, the Christians form the moral and philosophical center of our country.

It would be unfortunate for the Iranians to look to the US for leadership in confronting the evils brought on by the Mullahs and then turn around and trash the Christians who form the overwhelming majority of our population. In a country with religious freedom, folks are free to believe or not, but the antiChristian bigotry manifested by the secularists is very unfortunate. The Europeans think the US will rescue them again if when the Islamists take over, but after all the trash talk coming from Europe, I'm not sure that will happen.

I'm not sure how Turkey ties in here. George Bush believes the Middle East is ready for democracy and he is trying to liberate people. This is certainly an improvement over the old policy of maintaining stability in the Middle East by supporting dictatorships. Personally, I'm not sure if the Islamic culture will support genuine freedom and democracy, only time will tell. Perhaps the best model will be Jordan where there is an enlightened monarch who has the power to step in when the radicals try to take over and pushes the country back towards freedom. In Turkey, I believe the military has the power to step in when the civilian population begins to move to far towards the rule of the Mullahs.

The problem which may make Islam incompatible with democracy is the combination of church and state which is built into the Koran and the hadiths. Many Muslims believe ardently that to be true to their religion they have to support Sharia law and enforce it on other people, which is incompatible with liberal democracy. I have seen statistics showing this is true even among a large percentage of Muslims in the United States where they should know better. Also many Muslims have been taught to divide the world into the "house of Islam" and the "house of war" and to regard kaffurs as inferiors and not to be too friendly with them. I believe these characteristics make Islam unique among religions. It would be just as wrong to judge all religions by the example set by Islam as it would to judge all secularists by the actions of Stalin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to further explain my understanding of how religion and government interact in the United States. Our declaration of independence contains the following statement:
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
It is clear the founders of the United States were theists and believed people had been given certain unalienable rights by God. If one deletes God from the equation, these unalienable rights become mere privileges given by the whim of the majority. The unalienable rights are gone.

A major issue between theists and atheists and agnostics is dualism and materialism. Non-theists are usually materialists who believe human nature including our consciousness can be completely explained by arrangement of the matter from which we are formed, while theists are usually dualists who believe there is a spiritual aspect to man which transcends matter. This profoundly alters your moral outlook.

Materialist believe humans are nothing but advanced animals completely explainable by the laws of evolution and natural selection. The governing principle which regulates everything including morality is the selfish gene. Every human thought and action is seen through this prism. There is no correct way to order society since all are based on the selfish gene. Cultures and societies are equal except those in which those ignorant Christians have too much influence. Those unfortunate to have to live in a Christian dominated land should do all they can to belittle and marginalize the Christians who are a menace to intellectual society.

Dualists have differing interpretations of the origin of the human species but all agree there is a spirit which transcends the material makeup of the brain. The brain influences but doesn't explain the mind. This frees people to act altruistically and frees us from the complete domination of the selfish gene. People become much more than just a complex machine, with unalienable rights as unique individuals. It is this understanding of the inherent dignity of man which forms the basis of Democracy in the United States.

Although the United States does not lift its laws from the Bible and is secular in the sense that the government does not make laws governing religion, the basic principles upon which the constitution was founded are from the Judeo-Christian tradition. These principles are enshrined in the declaration of independence with the unalienable rights given to us by God. It is this common understanding which forms the basis of discussions upon which the laws of the land are based. Because of this profound respect for the dignity of the individual, the US is a republic governed by a constitution which guarantees those rights not a true democracy in which the majority rule with no regard to the rights of the minority. The Iranians will have options and don't need to copy our constitution, but I think you should at least consider it when you are free to establish your own democratic country. It has worked very well for us and although your culture is different, you may get some good ideas for your own government.


Last edited by American Visitor on Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:27 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stefania



Joined: 17 Jul 2003
Posts: 4250
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AV, I agree with most of what you say, although I am a secularist.

I also think that there's a campaign against the Christians , but that's mainly true in Europe, where we are seeing a slow but effective Islamic invasion.
_________________
Referendum AFTER Regime Change

"I'm ready to die for you to be able to say your own opinions, even if i strongly disagree with you" (Voltaire)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
irani



Joined: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 172

PostPosted: Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know that the US is a secular country, That wasnt what i meant, many americans however are fundamentalists," In general, say 55 percent of those polled, every word of the Bible is literally accurate. Thirty-eight percent do not believe that about the Bible. " poll conducetd by neewsweek, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6650997/site/newsweek.

== 55% of americans are fundamentalists, secular? they want to prevent a womans right to choose, they want to prevent gay weddings, gay adoption and cell reaserch. They are thinking the same way as their muslim and jewish compatriot, the Islamists and the orthodox-jews.
Why does the us want to forbidd the world to do stem cell reaserch?!

Quote:
Whether Europe with their secularism can maintain their freedoms is highly questionable. They fell under the Nazis and then were nearly taken over by the Communists. The Islamists have their sights on Europe which so far seems to have no moral or philosophical courage from which to resist the take over. Also the Europeans don't seem very anxious to force regime change in Iran and are becoming extremely antisemitic once again. Their secular philosophy doesn't seem to have a moral center.



And you fell under the Bush regime, and are nearly taken over by hezballahis, The Islamist have more sights at the US. Neither would the US if it had diplomatic relations with Iran.


Quote:
The French had a bloody secular revolution in which they rejected all forms of religion.


And for that i admire them.

Quote:
This is quite different from England and the United States which were very religious and based their government on Judeo-Christian principles. While England maintained a state church, the citizens in US who were overwhelmingly Christian from dissenting backgrounds, formed the constitution with the bill or rights and a provision that the government would not regulate religion. The reason we have the freedoms we do today is because the American Christians believe God wants them to keep their churches separate from the government and have fought and sacrificed to keep those freedoms.


Perhaps those who created your constitution were educated, as they based it french theories.


Quote:
For the churches, this has proven a very wise choice. In the US where the churches are free from government control, Christianity has flourished while in Europe which generally has state run churches it is on life support. The Christians in the US are firmly committed to our religious freedoms and will do everything necessary in order to ensure it survives. Despite the posturing by the secularists, the Christians form the moral and philosophical center of our country.


Yeah, Europeans have awakend and dont care about religion, like many Iranians have today.


Quote:
It would be unfortunate for the Iranians to look to the US for leadership in confronting the evils brought on by the Mullahs and then turn around and trash the Christians who form the overwhelming majority of our population. In a country with religious freedom, folks are free to believe or not, but the antiChristian bigotry manifested by the secularists is very unfortunate. The Europeans think the US will rescue them again if when the Islamists take over, but after all the trash talk coming from Europe, I'm not sure that will happen.


The Islamist will not take over.


Quote:
I'm not sure how Turkey ties in here. George Bush believes the Middle East is ready for democracy and he is trying to liberate people. This is certainly an improvement over the old policy of maintaining stability in the Middle East by supporting dictatorships. Personally, I'm not sure if the Islamic culture will support genuine freedom and democracy, only time will tell. Perhaps the best model will be Jordan where there is an enlightened monarch who has the power to step in when the radicals try to take over and pushes the country back towards freedom. In Turkey, I believe the military has the power to step in when the civilian population begins to move to far towards the rule of the Mullahs.



JORDAN?! is that your best example? maybe you should try; Malaysia,Indonesia,Lebanon,Tajikistan?

What has the US brought to the ME? An Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and soon a Islamic Republic of Iraq. Well that we could manage to do by ourselves. The Jordanian Monarch is a tyrant that deserves to die, he is just like Mubarak,Khamenei, Assad and the others.
The Turks have been Secular fora century, the military hade nothing to do with that. Thank god the military has now been normalized and dont run around in every corner of the country.


Quote:
The problem which may make Islam incompatible with democracy is the combination of church and state which is built into the Koran and the hadiths.


Yeah, but if youre secular your secular and dont follow that.

Quote:
Many Muslims believe ardently that to be true to their religion they have to support Sharia law and enforce it on other people, which is incompatible with liberal democracy. I have seen statistics showing this is true even among a large percentage of Muslims in the United States where they should know better.


Dont forget that many European countries that are now democracies once were just like the ME states, where they ruled with no religious freedom and christian traditions, and yet now these dont exists anymore.


Quote:
It would be just as wrong to judge all religions by the example set by Islam as it would to judge all secularists by the actions of Stalin.


That should be: "as it would to judge all communists by the actions of stalin.

Stalin was in no way secular, he was an absolute atheist he was so fundamental that he didnt allow people to practice any other religion.

Quote:
Although the United States does not lift its laws from the Bible and is secular in the sense that the government does not make laws governing religion, the basic principles upon which the constitution was founded are from the Judeo-Christian tradition. These principles are enshrined in the declaration of independence with the unalienable rights given to us by God.


I thought it was your forefathers who wrote the constitution, not god. so havent those principles have been given to you by youre forefathers?


Quote:
Because of this profound respect for the dignity of the individual, the US is a republic governed by a constitution which guarantees those rights not a true democracy in which the majority rule with no regard to the rights of the minority.


If you have respect for the minority, Why dont you let the minority of Homosexualls who want to get married, get married?


Quote:
The Iranians will have options and don't need to copy our constitution, but I think you should at least consider it when you are free to establish your own democratic country. It has worked very well for us and although your culture is different, you may get some good ideas for your own government.


Youre right, we have our own traditions, the traditions of Zarahustra and the principles of Cyrus wich was created 2500 years ago and is still today used as the universal declaration of human rights. The christian principles come from the jewish and those comes from the zaraostrian.

Stefania;
Quote:
I also think that there's a campaign against the Christians , but that's mainly true in Europe, where we are seeing a slow but effective Islamic invasion.


And in the ME we have the reverse we have Christians trying to convert Muslims, who cares, really?


regards,
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Irani said
Quote:
I know that the US is a secular country, That wasnt what i meant, many americans however are fundamentalists," In general, say 55 percent of those polled, every word of the Bible is literally accurate. Thirty-eight percent do not believe that about the Bible. " poll conducetd by neewsweek, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6650997/site/newsweek.

== 55% of americans are fundamentalists, secular? they want to prevent a womans right to choose, they want to prevent gay weddings, gay adoption and cell reaserch. They are thinking the same way as their muslim and jewish compatriot, the Islamists and the orthodox-jews.
Why does the us want to forbidd the world to do stem cell reaserch?!


America is a secular country based on Judeo-Christian principles. This is exactly the way Christians want it. Fundamentalist in the Christian world is quite different than fundamentalist in the Islamic world. I have read your statistics and think they are probably quite accurate, however the results of having a Christian majority country is quite different than having a country run by Islamic fundamentalists.

Any one of the topics you brought up would make an interesting debate. I will go into them only briefly. 1.The "woman's right to choose" is a euphamism for killing an inocent human being. That is in violation of the declaration of independence stating that people have the right to life. Once human life is expendable there is no limit to the slippery slope as Europe has discovered. Many people including me are not for a total ban on abortion but think it should be limited and not used casually as a form of birth control. 2. Once one redefines marriage to include gay marriage where do you stop? I understand the English are considering giving Muslims tax breaks for their multiple wives. Can you define the limits and on what basis or is marriage just anything you wish it to be? In that case the word has no meaning. 3. Stem cell research is not banned in this country and no one plans to ban it in the future. George Bush put limits on government spending on fetal stem cell research, private money has no limits of which I'm aware. Sometimes science surges ahead of the ethicists and we have to take time to be sure we are proceeding correctly. Eventually the science will be done, of that I have no doubt.

Quote:
And you fell under the Bush regime, and are nearly taken over by hezballahis, The Islamist have more sights at the US. Neither would the US if it had diplomatic relations with Iran.


I'm not sure I understand this. The US is also in danger of falling to the Islamists and we will have to work hard to make sure that doesn't happen. Is that what you were refering to?

Quote:
Perhaps those who created your constitution were educated, as they based it french theories.


I'm sure the Americans were aware of French theories but they were Englishmen and based their laws on English common law. The Enlightenment was certainly understood here and was important in helping them decide for a republic and separation of powers. The most important guiding principles were those of the Protestant reformation with the determination to live free and worship free.

Quote:
Yeah, Europeans have awakend and dont care about religion, like many Iranians have today.


In a free country people are free to choose for themselves whether to worship or not. That is good. Whether the Europeans can maintain their freedom is another issue.

Quote:
The Islamist will not take over.


I hope you are right. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Quote:
What has the US brought to the ME? An Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and soon a Islamic Republic of Iraq. Well that we could manage to do by ourselves. The Jordanian Monarch is a tyrant that deserves to die, he is just like Mubarak,Khamenei, Assad and the others.
The Turks have been Secular fora century, the military hade nothing to do with that. Thank god the military has now been normalized and dont run around in every corner of the country.


I think your criticism is justified here. George Bush doesn't seem to worry about the composition of the government so long as it is a democracy. That is a real concern. When we went into Japan and Germany, we made sure there were true democratic institutions in place and many freedoms. Those seem to be lacking in Afghanistan and I expect also in Iraq. I hope with democracy the people will gradually come to understand freedom and slowly liberalize their societies.

I didn't know people felt that way about the ruler of Jordan. I'm interested in what he has done against his people. What we hear here is that he is bringing a democratic form of government and he is a moderate, but clearly there is more to it or you wouldn't feel that way.

Indonesia and Lebanon are not countries I consider successful. Perhaps there are things I have overlooked. Lebanon is a vassal of Syria right now. Indonesia is struggling and where they will end up is still unclear. I do know they have slaughered many of their minorities such as those in East Timor. Tajikistan and Malaysia I don't know much about so I can't comment. Turkey is wobbly although I understand the Islamic party has moderated somewhat so they can breath easier for awhile.

Quote:
Dont forget that many European countries that are now democracies once were just like the ME states, where they ruled with no religious freedom and christian traditions, and yet now these dont exists anymore.


The reason they have freedom is because of the Protestant reformation. Even the most fervent Catholics will admit the Catholic church had become very corrupt. There was no support in the Bible for what went on in the church. The reformers appealed to the teachings of Jesus and His disciples to change things and stood for their principles even when burned at the stake. There is no support in the Bible for state churches as Europe has had for centuries. Separation of church and state is firmly rooted in the Bible doctrines.

Some of the most fundamentalist Christians, the anabaptists who were the for runners of the Baptists, were leaders in demanding freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. The Christian fundamentalists count among their numbers some of the greatest freedom lovers in the world.

Quote:
thought it was your forefathers who wrote the constitution, not god. so havent those principles have been given to you by youre forefathers?


Yes.

Quote:
Youre right, we have our own traditions, the traditions of Zarahustra and the principles of Cyrus wich was created 2500 years ago and is still today used as the universal declaration of human rights. The christian principles come from the jewish and those comes from the zaraostrian.


I worked with a Zoroastrian when I was in training and he was a very good man. I'm sure there are many similarities between Judiasm, Christianity and Zoroastrianism. All three religions came from the same region and similar cultures so share many traditions. I don't think that should diminish any of the three relgions since the ability to learn and share ideas is the sign of a living tradition.

Well anyway, I'm not sure where this is going. It seems we are bogged down in details. There are some pet ideas which the secularists are riding right now which they crucialize but which many Christians don't go along with. The Christians' objections are usually not based on specific Bible commands but on common sense and ethical principles. Whether there is gay marriage is not of utmost importance for most people even for many gays. This is just brought up to stir the pot. There is nothing to stop gays from forming stable relationships right now without the state giving them a license. There are probably some issues such as visitation rights when someone is in the hospital and the right to be the decision maker when one is disabled which need to be worked out. Those things don't require a redefinition of marriage to be worked out. The bigger question is do the secularists know where they are going. They seem to ride the topic toujour witout any foresight where their societies will end up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Spenta



Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Posts: 1829

PostPosted: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I ain't no fan of Islam as everybody on these sites already knows!

However, I will give you one word of advise American visitor: Islam bashing, while promoting Christianity and Judaism as better does not work!

By promoting Christianity and Judaism as better, you are only recruiting more to Islam and especially its fundementallist brand, and pushing even moderate muslims to become more fundemenatlist. Its a question of prejudice, ethnic sensitivities and ethnic pride. You push that button, that Christians are automatically better, you will get a reaction.

This is the problem with the right wing Christian Fundemenatlists in the US, they are making Islam fashionable Rolling Eyes without even realising it! Rolling Eyes

PS. The US was not founded on Judeo Christian principals. It was founded on principals of democracy or else it would have been like Europe at the time of its founding with laws of religion, church and royalty ruling over all, instead of democracy! This country was founded on principals of democracy, going back to the Greeks, which predates Christianity. Also, the writings of Votaire and other French philopshers on democracy (definately not Christian), and the Magna Carta were earlier influences, and the magna Carta cited the example of Persian Kings i.e. Cyrus the Great. The Founding fathers were Free Masons, and even a Rosecrucian, they dabbled in ancient knowledge systesm that were kept secretive for fear of persecution by the church as heresy, they had nothing in common with right wing Christian zealots of today.

Much of what the world was dealing with after the Rennassaince had to do with the rebirth of classical Greece after the thousand year sleep of the dark ages and the oppresive rule of the church. The 'Rebirth' of the Rennaissance, was the rebirth of non-christian ideas from the classical world that had been laying dormant as a result of Christian suppression. The US was created in this atmosphere, not Judeo Christian prinispals Rolling Eyes study history, instead of right wing propoganda, and you just might learn something!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
American Visitor



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 224

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2005 5:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spenta said

Quote:
However, I will give you one word of advise American visitor: Islam bashing, while promoting Christianity and Judaism as better does not work!


That is excellent advice.

Quote:
By promoting Christianity and Judaism as better, you are only recruiting more to Islam and especially its fundementallist brand, and pushing even moderate muslims to become more fundemenatlist. Its a question of prejudice, ethnic sensitivities and ethnic pride. You push that button, that Christians are automatically better, you will get a reaction.


Actually I think of the true Iranian religion as Zoroastrian and consider the culture as Persian. I agree a cultural war is not productive. The reason I took up the defense of Christians is because they were attacked on this thread. It is statements like this which fueled the discussion:
Quote:
This is the problem with the right wing Christian Fundemenatlists in the US, they are making Islam fashionable without even realising it!


like this:
Quote:
PS. The US was not founded on Judeo Christian principals. It was founded on principals of democracy or else it would have been like Europe at the time of its founding with laws of religion, church and royalty ruling over all, instead of democracy! This country was founded on principals of democracy, going back to the Greeks, which predates Christianity. Also, the writings of Votaire and other French philopshers on democracy (definately not Christian), and the Magna Carta were earlier influences, and the magna Carta cited the example of Persian Kings i.e. Cyrus the Great. The Founding fathers were Free Masons, and even a Rosecrucian, they dabbled in ancient knowledge systesm that were kept secretive for fear of persecution by the church as heresy, they had nothing in common with right wing Christian zealots of today.


and like this:
Quote:
Much of what the world was dealing with after the Rennassaince had to do with the rebirth of classical Greece after the thousand year sleep of the dark ages and the oppresive rule of the church. The 'Rebirth' of the Rennaissance, was the rebirth of non-christian ideas from the classical world that had been laying dormant as a result of Christian suppression. The US was created in this atmosphere, not Judeo Christian prinispals study history, instead of right wing propoganda, and you just might learn something!


This thread started out quoting Americans who were angry that some of the British were trying to influence our elections since they thought we were too ignorant to know how to vote. It degenerated into Christian bashing in general since many Europeans think it is the stupid fundamentalist Christians who are ruining the US. Now I'm being told I don't know the history and culture of my own country or I'd know those fundamentalist Christians couldn't build a country like the US.

I enjoy looking at religion or political philosophy as an outside observer, take the various philosophical assumptions of the group and follow them through to see how they play out in actual practice. That's what I have tried to do here. There is no question that the Greeks made big contributions to Western culture. The American founders certainly were aware of the French and their ideas. However if these were the only factors weighing on their thinking we would be France, and we are not France. Even the French will be all too happy to acknowlege we are much different than France. I don't claim my knowlege is infallible or my analysis is perfect, but neither is it all wrong.

I do not wish to offend people including you. However on this issue we simply disagree. That is completely legitimate in a free country.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index -> Noteworthy Discussion Threads All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group