Lowe's Pulls Ads From American Muslim Time Slot

[MissJames]

Wow,talk about twisting words around. That's not needed in a legit debate. I see little tolerance on this thread from those professing to be such.

There's a reason the term is terrorists.
There's a group of people who are terrorizing others .They are cowards,striking civilians,not caring who is killed.
It has happened before amongst other religions and ethnicities.It's happening now ,in other countries .
The ones we worry the most about today happen to share the Muslim faith. They have created a fear in this country and part of the fallout is suspicion of other Muslims.
It's horrible and totally unfair,but,IMO ,understandable.
It's a real human emotion .The fear wasn't created by Lowes,it was created by other Muslims ,by their radical teachings and actions.
If radical Christians(and there are plenty ,IMO) or Jews were targeting mass groups of innocent civilians in our country,hoping to kill as many as possible, then the fallout would be a fear of all Christians or Jews.
There are radical Muslims using the communities of peaceful Muslims in this country. They are hiding out ,pretending to be everyday Americans in order to commit mass murder. Other Muslims are also killed in these plots.
I strongly suspect it is other Muslims who have provided info to the proper authorities and for that I am very grateful.
But the fear of terrorists is what is driving this train.

 

[Gardenlady]

Since 9/11, Islamists have committed 18,161 terrorist acts globally. The main cause of Muslim deaths are other Muslims.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/TheList.htm

Are we to believe that all of these attacks are the result of interference in Muslim countries?

Islamic terrorism (Arabic: إرهاب إسلامي‎ ʾirhāb ʾislām&#299 refers to acts of terrorism committed by Muslims for the purpose of achieving varying political and/or religious ends. Islamic terrorism has been identified as taking place in the Middle East, Africa, Europe, Southeast Asia, and the United States since the 1970s.
Islamic terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And here's a partial map.

I never said we were the main cause of Muslim deaths. You're fighting a straw man. Have fun with that.

Meanwhile, what I do think is that beginning midway through the 20th century, our meddling in the political matters of nations around the globe, including the middle east, created a ton of ill will. It contributes to creating the perfect conditions for radical groups of any nationality or religion to arise.

Regardless, We can count t back centuries as to how long Christians have killed in the name of god as well. What good would it do though? Isn't the point that we should all of us be better than that? Let's not pretend that Christians have clean hands. If Muslims should've assumed to all be terrorists in hiding, then Christians should similarly live under the same standard.

 

[Gardenlady]

Wow,talk about twisting words around. That's not needed in a legit debate. I see little tolerance on this thread from those professing to be such.

There's a reason the term is terrorists.
There's a group of people who are terrorizing others .They are cowards,striking civilians,not caring who is killed.
It has happened before amongst other religions and ethnicities.It's happening now ,in other countries .
The ones we worry the most about today happen to share the Muslim faith. They have created a fear in this country and part of the fallout is suspicion of other Muslims.
It's horrible and totally unfair,but,IMO ,understandable.
It's a real human emotion .The fear wasn't created by Lowes,it was created by other Muslims ,by their radical teachings and actions.
If radical Christians(and there are plenty ,IMO) or Jews were targeting mass groups of innocent civilians in our country,hoping to kill as many as possible, then the fallout would be a fear of all Christians or Jews.
There are radical Muslims using the communities of peaceful Muslims in this country. They are hiding out ,pretending to be everyday Americans in order to commit mass murder. Other Muslims are also killed in these plots.
I strongly suspect it is other Muslims who have provided info to the proper authorities and for that I am very grateful.
But the fear of terrorists is what is driving this train.

You are more in danger of dying in a bathroom accident than you are of dying in a terrorist incident.

Why are people okay with living a life of fear? Why should fear be the guiding principle of how we act towards other people? How fair is that to them?

 

[Gardenlady]

Wow, we've gone from ad revenue to corporate decisions, to pit bulls, to Christianity, to Timothy McVeigh, and back again, all in one thread. That is either incredibly impressive or proof that Lowe's got what they wanted, because if everyone else is using their business move in as many different ways as the people on this thread, they've been trending worldwide for days.

We all believe what we believe. Those that have similar beliefs will always stand together, that's the way of the world, it's why we have wars, it's how we find the people we fall in love with or marry, it's how we choose career paths and religions. And I don't think that any of us would change religions because someone on a message board pointed out that they think we should. Similarly, those that do not understand or are completely hateful towards others will not change that because someone on a message board told them to.

The Qu'ran and the Bible both give wonderful suggestions for a righteous life and they give good rules to follow, interspersed with stories of war, questionable activity agaisnt people of other races and genders, and depictions of certain people as lesser beings due to gender, race, religion or lifestyle. Both of these books contradict themselves, and are inconsistent in places. As are any works, divine or not, that are edited and written by humans.

None of it matters, none of it. We are fighting about religion, something designed to bring people together. The true followers of any righteous religion follow the rules of their Lord and society: Be nice. Honor those that deserve it. Those of us that follow the positives of any religion have to fight daily against the extremist actions of a few people that also claim the same religion to justify their hatred and their own questionable actions. Followers of Islam have to fight against the stigma of a few people that decided that they hated people enough give their own lives to take them out to. And Christians have to fight against the stigma of idiots like the Westboro Baptists.

I think that if any of our Gods would speak to us today, the main message would be to just get over ourselves. We all want to fight because we think we're right, but in reality, we all sin, we all do wrong. None of us are perfect, and therefore, none of us can say that someone else is wrong.

A great post. And puts me in mind of this funny, but sad piece from the Onion, from just after 9/11:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/god-angrily-clarifies-dont-kill-rule,222/

 

[TrackerSam]

I never said we were the main cause of Muslim deaths. You're fighting a straw man. Have fun with that.

Meanwhile, what I do think is that beginning midway through the 20th century, our meddling in the political matters of nations around the globe, including the middle east, created a ton of ill will. It contributes to creating the perfect conditions for radical groups of any nationality or religion to arise.

Regardless, We can count t back centuries as to how long Christians have killed in the name of god as well. What good would it do though? Isn't the point that we should all of us be better than that? Let's not pretend that Christians have clean hands. If Muslims should've assumed to all be terrorists in hiding, then Christians should similarly live under the same standard.

I never said you said we were the main cause. Comprehend much? "Back centuries"? Try and stay in this millenium. Yes it happened centuries ago but we're talking about what's current. You seem to be under the notion that muslims come only from the middle east. Muslims have committed terrorist acts all over the world. Let's not pretend that anyone has clean hands. Let's not pretend that by singing Kumbaya and holding hands and wearing flowers in our hair, we will keep the bogieman away. Let's also not pretend that the Koran doesn't say "death to all infidels" which means anyone who isn't a Muslim.
As Ziggy said "not all pit bulls are dangerous" but I wouldn't turn my back on any of them. It's not living in fear - it's living in a state of "fool me twice shame on me". Good luck with your boycott of Lowes. :crazy:

 

[Nova]

One thing I should add to my earlier post is I can see where some,myself included are weary of seeing Christians time and time ad nauseum deliberately portrayed as bigoted ludites or clueless objects of ridicule in popular media,obviously with a clear and deliberate Anti Christian agenda.
Then to see that same media hovering over backwards to portray Muslims in a positive light.... I can see why some might find that Galling. I get it.

Oh, please. There's no "anti-Christian" agenda. There are just a lot of Christians who are "bigoted ludites" and "clueless objects of ridicule."

There are also a lot of Christians who aren't. But as with anything, the most extreme examples get the most media attention.

 

[Nova]

When did I impose my beliefs on you?
By discussing my beliefs, I am imposing them on you?


The New York times it is NOT! That's for sure.
Thank God.

I'll leave it at that.

BBM: I didn't mean to say you impose your beliefs on me personally or on anyone here at WS. I was referring to political discussions you and I have had elsewhere.

I should have been clearer or, probably better, left that topic alone.

 

[Nova]

BBM Very true, both the Bible and the Koran were being read hundreds of years before the New York Times was a twinkle in the eye of a printing press, and will undoubtably continue to be so long after the final pages of the Times have blown down the dead canyons of NYC.

No doubt. And the same may be said of the Iliad and the Odyssey, Gilgamesh and the Bhagavad Gita. Can we agree that all these works possess the same authority, or does Gilgamesh take priority because it is the oldest?

 

[Nova]

BBM :waitasec: Really?? Historical fiction it is, but great work of literature? This argument is taking a bit of a turn towards the absurd. You can't fight fantasy with logic Nova. Don't waste your energy..... Lowe's took an indefensible stance. That people are bending over backwards to attempt to defend this corporation stymies me.

Yes, I think the Bible is a great work of literature by any objective standard. I believe most literary critics would agree. (Whether the Bible is MORE than mere literature is a matter of faith. I don't have a quarrel with those who find it divinely inspired; it's insisting that it (or the Qu'ran) is a divine rule book or history book that creates the problems. IMO, obviously.)

 

[Nova]

Posts #175 and #179.

It's very offensive. It's meant to inflame. It's disgusting.

JMO

To say people are not rational for believing the Bible is just as bigoted and intolerant as anything else in this thread. To belittle someone's faith and downright call it fantasy goes to show how bigotry when pointed at Christians is accepted.

You have misquoted me long enough, Kimberly. I'm sure it's an accident, but it's time to stop.

WHAT I SAID was that faith in the Bible as divine revelation is not a rational conclusion. It is faith, or "Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof."

(Emphasis added.)

RATHER THAN PROOF. It is a non-rational belief. As I've told you many times, I have my own non-rational beliefs in things I cannot prove.

I have never said that we who hold non-rational beliefs are "irrational" or insane.

But demanding that everyone else "respect" our leaps of faith is too much to ask. For one thing, your articles of faith are offensive according to mine. Who respects whom in such a case?

 

[Nova]

Although I am quite divine, I was trying to say SO WHAT? I never questioned that was perhaps the reason they pulled the ads, but my point is so what? They might believe the show is not a real portrayal and let's face it reality shows are not usually the real deal. Not unreasonable to question if it is an accurate portrayal.

Your analogy is flawed in that Kimberly is an individual and Muslims are a group, so how they are perceived makes a much larger impact on a society, especially due to their numbers. Groups are more powerful than individuals, with group think mindsets etc.

You Have no way of knowing if these Muslim people are moderate or not. You have no way of knowing if they secretly condone, but lie to fit in. AND especially not by a reality TV show. So if you can't prove it one way and I certainly can't the other, that means it's reasonable to consider each a possibility. And given that, Lowes acted within reason.

So Yes, I stand by the fact that if moderate Muslims want to be separated from the extremists they are going to have to stand up, denounce and be heard. (or either maybe they don't really have all that different views, or they are too afraid, either of which is pretty bad)

My use of Kimberly as an example was only to illustrate the logical problem of proving a negative. That she is an individual rather than a group has no bearing on the logical problem.

Does every Jew on TV have an obligation to make a public statement condemning the illegal settlements on the West Bank? Does every Christian on every TV show have an obligation to denounce Fred Phelps?

How exactly are people supposed to respond to this special burden you are bestowing on them to "prove" they don't have private negative thoughts?

 

[Nova]

...The analogy to gay rights was that not all minority groups should be silenced because they are a minority. To dismiss a groups' opinion because they are "minority" is hypocritical. Nova called them "christian bigots" because their view is minority. He belongs to a minority with a view and probably does not approve of people calling people of his group derogatory terms. Funny how that works. It's OK for one group who claims tolerance to call others names and refuse to give it while at the same time demanding it....

My but you have twisted syllogisms into pretzels in this thread.

I referred to a small group of people as "Christian bigots" because they are (a) Christian and (b) bigots.

Sadly, some gay people are bigots as well. If you find they have formed a group, by all means refer to the group as "gay bigots".

 

[Nova]

...As Ziggy said "not all pit bulls are dangerous" but I wouldn't turn my back on any of them.....

And MY posts are offensive because I merely state the fact that faith and reason are not the same?

Wow, just wow.

 

[Fairy1]

I didn't say in the USA I said how are they behaving now regardless of what their "book" says. The Bible and Quaran are worldwide religions. The people who follow as a whole, and how they are manifesting their beliefs, are a better gauge than some passage you can quote. You are only being selectively tolerant, which isn't really tolerant.

Since the program in question focuses on American Muslims living in Michigan, I'd say that Lowe's and the small but obviously powerful conservative groups that complained are the ones exercising selective tolerance.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

You have misquoted me long enough, Kimberly. I'm sure it's an accident, but it's time to stop.

WHAT I SAID was that faith in the Bible as divine revelation is not a rational conclusion. It is faith, or "Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof."

(Emphasis added.)

RATHER THAN PROOF. It is a non-rational belief. As I've told you many times, I have my own non-rational beliefs in things I cannot prove.

I have never said that we who hold non-rational beliefs are "irrational" or insane.

But demanding that everyone else "respect" our leaps of faith is too much to ask. For one thing, your articles of faith are offensive according to mine. Who respects whom in such a case?

Now who is twisting words or misquoting?

Perhaps we should BOTH stop?
:waitasec:

What have I said that offended you? Or, are you just assuming to know what's in my mind?

 

[Kimberlyd125]

My but you have twisted syllogisms into pretzels in this thread.

I referred to a small group of people as "Christian bigots" because they are (a) Christian and (b) bigots.

Sadly, some gay people are bigots as well. If you find they have formed a group, by all means refer to the group as "gay bigots".

Why the labels?

 

[Gardenlady]

I never said you said we were the main cause. Comprehend much? "Back centuries"? Try and stay in this millenium. Yes it happened centuries ago but we're talking about what's current. You seem to be under the notion that muslims come only from the middle east. Muslims have committed terrorist acts all over the world. Let's not pretend that anyone has clean hands. Let's not pretend that by singing Kumbaya and holding hands and wearing flowers in our hair, we will keep the bogieman away. Let's also not pretend that the Koran doesn't say "death to all infidels" which means anyone who isn't a Muslim.
As Ziggy said "not all pit bulls are dangerous" but I wouldn't turn my back on any of them. It's not living in fear - it's living in a state of "fool me twice shame on me". Good luck with your boycott of Lowes. :crazy:

My point was you can find examples of Christian violence from now and going back to through the centuries. You don't need to go back a millennium, or even 50 years. Northern Ireland? Kosovo/Yugoslavia conflict? KKK activity? Abortion clinic killings? Pogroms? Any of these ringing a bell?

Do you feel you have a duty to publicly apologize for and disassociate yourself from these Christians? To assure non-Christians that, unlike these folks, you aren't harboring hate in your heart for them, and aren't secretly waiting for your opportunity to bomb or shoot them? Commit genocide against them? Wage war against them? If not, why not? And if not, why then should Muslims have to publicly prove themselves in such a way?

 

[Gardenlady]

Oh, please. There's no "anti-Christian" agenda. There are just a lot of Christians who are "bigoted ludites" and "clueless objects of ridicule."

There are also a lot of Christians who aren't. But as with anything, the most extreme examples get the most media attention.

The anti-Christian agenda! Right up there with the gay agenda, the feminist agenda, and the socialist agenda. Existential threats to our way of life here in Amurrica!

 

[Fairy1]

Why the labels?

True. It's like labeling all Muslims as terrorists.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

True. It's like labeling all Muslims as terrorists.

Or all Christians as bigots.

I've never done either.