And while 'infidel' may sound Arabic and is often associated with a Middle-Eastern accented killer, the word derives from Latin and it was the Crusader policy of killing or expelling non-Christian infidels that served as the best example of any religion taking that stance.

The Islamic term kafir, which is often assumed to mean the same thing, does not. It applies to those who do not recognise one god, and so Christians and Jews (people of the book) are not kuffar (pl. of kafir). They are, of course, still regarded as being wrong...

Did Danivon make RickyP leave with his post about posting style?

I hope not. The intention was to let him know it was not just those who disagreed with him had a problem with his style of posting and argument. Was it that harsh?

Not in my opinion. I was not casting aspersions, just asking the question.

You big meanie!

danivon wrote:I hope not. The intention was to let him know it was not just those who disagreed with him had a problem with his style of posting and argument. Was it that harsh?

We may never know. It could have nothing to do with Donivon's post which I don't recall to be overly harsh. Although I'd hate for there to be hard feelings -- and I share some responsibility -- the reality is that often Ricky's postings were out of line, and not very coherent. He misquoted and pretended that I took positions that I've never taken. I think that the level of discourse has improved post Ricky. Of course, if he can engage in self reflection, he is welcome back. With some reflection I can say that I have learned from Ricky, even though there had been more frustration than learning.

Dr. Fate:

Impressive picture.

I saw 'X,' the Malcolm X biopic, years ago and was impressed by the portrayal of Mecca in it. If the entire religion was centered on this, rather than killing infidels, it would not be a geopolitical problem.

Danivon:

Ah, so you were just conflating those radical branches with 'the entire religion' in your earlier post.

It's ineresting how we can interpret the same post differently. I saw Dr. Fate's post as very positive. Often people who are religious share much commonality with other religious people of different faiths. Both he and I were appreciating that so many people would incur the expense and wear and tear of traveling on an airplane as part of a religious conviction. Most of us travel on vacation so that we can gamble, shop, sun on the beach, or visiting Micky. I read Dr. Fate's comment as very humanistic and sympathetic.

RJ, overall it was a positive post, but the bit..." If the entire religion was centered on this, rather than killing infidels" was at best ambiguous, and can easily be read to mean that the entire religion is centered on killing infidels.

Pilgrimage used to be pretty important in both Christianity and Judaism. For Catholics it still is, although not valued as highly as it was in the Middle Ages.

danivon wrote:Ah, so you were just conflating those radical branches with 'the entire religion' in your earlier post.

You must have missed the footnotes.

Oddly, some of those branches that also see jihad as important are not partcularly violent. The Ismailis and Ahmadyya both include jihad and other obligations on top of the core 5, but at the same time this mainly refers to the 'greater jihad' of internal spritual struggle rather than the 'lesser jihad' of external physical struggle (which itself is not necessarily violent or even based on imposition on others).

Nice. Great. Love them!

My only problem is with the branches that want to kill (and occasionally sodomize) their theological "enemies."

Which branch advocates sodomy? (no, that doesn't mean 'find me links to accusations of sodomy by Muslims')

danivon wrote:Which branch advocates sodomy? (no, that doesn't mean 'find me links to accusations of sodomy by Muslims')

None and . . . I wouldn't even think of it. No telling where those links might lead.

So why mention it?

danivon wrote:So why mention it?

Because it was alleged that Christopher Stevens was assaulted in that manner--an allegation that has not been denied.

Perhaps the drone video could be released by a transparent administration.

bbauska wrote:Perhaps the drone video could be released by a transparent administration.

Nov. 7th at the earliest.