Saudi Arabian executioners are having an unusually prolific year - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;49202252]I bet like 90% of the people saying shit like this don't even actually know any Muslims.[/QUOTE] "I know black people, so I can't be racist" I really hate this kind of thing, because it goes both ways, and you just can't deny it.

[QUOTE=Govna;49202520] Much as I dislike religion as an Atheist (that is open to spiritualistic self-improvement concepts), Christianity was not nearly as bad as Islam was in th 12th century. Or really any century for that matter. .[/QUOTE] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age[/url] Yup. Only wars happened in the 12th century and before. Totally. During these centuries, despite some conflicts, Muslims schooled Christians in philosophy, science, tolerance, progress and were pretty much fucking liberal compared to the shithole that was Christianity at that time. The dark ages weren't dark, in the Muslim world and China great progress was being made.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49204151]The dark ages weren't dark, in the Muslim world and China great progress was being made.[/QUOTE] The "dark ages" weren't dark anywhere. It's a total misnomer.

[QUOTE=sgman91;49204185]The "dark ages" weren't dark anywhere. It's a total misnomer.[/QUOTE] I know, but its laughably wrong when compared to the eastern world at the time when they were arguably at their height in history.

[QUOTE=BananaFoam;49201976]It has nothing to do with the religion and everything to do with the assholes running it. Muslims could've easily said the same exact thing about Christians in the 12th century.[/QUOTE] You're right, back then Christians and Muslims were both as violent.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;49202150]But we're not in the 12th century[/QUOTE] But we [I]are[/I] talking about 3rd world countries. People are shitty when they have a shitty quality of life.

Islam doesn't perform these executions -- people do. Islam is defined by text written on pages. It's up to people to interpret the text. I myself do not agree with Islam's texts nor do I agree with the notion of organized religion in the first place, but the blame is sorely misdirected. Sarcastically spouting "religion of peace" does literally nothing but prove you lack critical thinking skills. Placing blame on just the religion for the state of Saudi Arabia and being done with it disregards the actual politics of the country. It's just like every other country that existed/still exists that had/has a government that harshly punishes dissidents. All countries under difference religions, some of which had none at all. What matters is that religion is a tool used to round the supporters and make it simpler to deal with political enemies. You guys pride yourselves in being rational and logical, but you're doing a piss-poor job in supporting it.

So, How about those human rights. eh? Still i can't understand why a country would be elected to that position if they ignore the fundamentals of the UN.

[QUOTE=Rufia;49204352]But we [I]are[/I] talking about 3rd world countries. People are shitty when they have a shitty quality of life.[/QUOTE]Except "3rd World" is a term invented to describe the non-aligned part of the world that wasn't involved in the East vs West shit during the Cold War. Now that it's a term used to describe desolation and poverty, that no longer applies to Saudi Arabia at all; the people actually doing this live at least reasonably well-off. Plus that doesn't answer the question of why Muslims who grew up in Western countries hold the same views and, on occasion, do the same barbaric shit. [QUOTE=Boaraes;49204354]Islam doesn't perform these executions -- people do. Islam is defined by text written on pages. It's up to people to interpret the text. I myself do not agree with Islam's texts nor do I agree with the notion of organized religion in the first place, but the blame is sorely misdirected. Sarcastically spouting "religion of peace" does literally nothing but prove you lack critical thinking skills. Placing blame on just the religion for the state of Saudi Arabia and being done with it disregards the actual politics of the country. It's just like every other country that existed/still exists that has a government that harshly punishes dissidents. All countries under difference religions, some of which had none at all. What matters is that religion is a tool used to round the supporters and make it simpler to deal with political enemies. You guys pride yourselves in being rational and logical, but you're doing a piss-poor job in supporting it.[/QUOTE]While this is all true you're ignoring the fact that there are people who are devout, zealous believers and, as such, act out on the actually terrible shit found in the religion itself. These people do exist and they are not a small number which makes the religion itself an additional factor in the violence, it isn't merely a tool used to justify terrible shit because quite a few people actually believe that shit isn't terrible without question.

[QUOTE=Govna;49202520]Muslims were fighting and conquering tons of people in the 12th century and fighting hard as ever against each other; the Ghurids vs. the Ghaznavids, Saladin against the Fatimids, the Seljuks against the Abbasids... ad-Din Zangi started the fucking Second Crusade with Europe by besieging and capturing Edessa (formerly allied with Byzantium) from the Christians. Etc. Islam has a different history from Christianity in most every conceivable way. [B]Most importantly, it was not founded by a conquering holy warrior[/B]-- which is exactly what the Prophet Muhammad was in his day and is exactly how he established his rule over the Arabian Peninsula in the first place, starting with Mecca and Medina and ending with fights against the most significant tribes in the region (including the forced expulsion of local Jewish tribes). For the next 100 years after his death, it violently expanded into the Byzantine Empire, North Africa, Spain/Portugal (the Iberian Peninsula basically and later on attempted to expand into France actually), Persia, India, and the Caucasus under the Rashiduns and Umayyads. .[/QUOTE] As much as you would like to think this, the very reason Christianity was so popular was because of emperor Constantine's victory in a civil war and his eventual successor Theodosius who made Christianity mandatory in the Roman empire. It's rather interesting how many parallels there are between christian and islamic history. Christians and Muslim both lionize figures who were once heathens but converted and became great religious figures (christians have Constantine, Clovis, Cenwalh, Rollo, Leif Ericsson, and Muslims have Khalid ibn al-Walid, Aghsartan I, and Seljuk.) and Christians still remember Charlemagne as a great and noble king who defeated the evil heathen Saxons. And as someone already pointed out, Islam in the 12th century was way ahead of Christianity in culture, science, and philosophy.

[QUOTE=BananaFoam;49201976]Didn't even get past the OP before someone started this shit again. It has nothing to do with the religion and everything to do with the assholes running it. Muslims could've easily said the same exact thing about Christians in the 12th century.[/QUOTE] its all to do with the degree of secularism in their society, european states never were completely run by the church, they may have been in the top circles but the christian church really only kept the kingdoms from constantly annihilating themselves

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49204442]Except "3rd World" is a term invented to describe the non-aligned part of the world that wasn't involved in the East vs West shit during the Cold War. Now that it's a term used to describe desolation and poverty, that no longer applies to Saudi Arabia at all; the people actually doing this live at least reasonably well-off. Plus that doesn't answer the question of why Muslims who grew up in Western countries hold the same views and, on occasion, do the same barbaric shit. While this is all true you're ignoring the fact that there are people who are devout, zealous believers and, as such, act out on the actually terrible shit found in the religion itself. These people do exist and they are not a small number which makes the religion itself an additional factor in the violence, it isn't merely a tool used to justify terrible shit because quite a few people actually believe that shit isn't terrible without question.[/QUOTE] No, I'm not ignoring that at all. I never said there wasn't terrible stuff in the texts, nor did I ever say those people don't exist. You're missing the point entirely.

[QUOTE=Broguts;49204449]As much as you would like to think this, the very reason Christianity was so popular was because of emperor Constantine's victory in a civil war and his eventual successor Theodosius who made Christianity mandatory in the Roman empire. It's rather interesting how many parallels there are between christian and islamic history. Christians and Muslim both lionize figures who were once heathens but converted and became great religious figures (christians have Constantine, Clovis, Cenwalh, Rollo, Leif Ericsson, and Muslims have Khalid ibn al-Walid, Aghsartan I, and Seljuk.) and Christians still remember Charlemagne as a great and noble king who defeated the evil heathen Saxons. And as someone already pointed out, Islam in the 12th century was way ahead of Christianity in culture, science, and philosophy.[/QUOTE] Constantine didn't come around until over 200 years after the birth of Christianity. It had already spread around the empire, and that played no small role in Constantine's original acceptance of it. As a side point: No Roman emperor is seen as a great "holy warrior" by modern day Christians. In fact, there's quite a few Christian scholars who even doubt his Christianity. I'm currently reading "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Edward Gibbons and even he doubts Constantine's Christianity.

It should also be pointed out that outside of the Western World, Christians aren't exactly tolerant people either. Russia, the biggest Christian country on the planet with the 2nd biggest Christian population which commands massive respect from the entire world and has immense wealth, has only 16% of the population supporting tolerance of gays, not gay marriage, just fucking accepting them. That's waaaaaaaaaaaay below every Western mulism community, which widely accept homosexuality. Again, this has everything to do with the quality of life of the general population, education systems and the government in power which are notably all bad in most Muslim/non western christian countries.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49204151]During these centuries, despite some conflicts, Muslims schooled Christians in philosophy, science, tolerance, progress and were pretty much fucking liberal compared to the shithole that was Christianity at that time. The dark ages weren't dark, in the Muslim world and China great progress was being made.[/QUOTE] One thing that has always irked me about people praising Islam for it's "golden age" is most of their accomplishments were just cargo cultish imitations of Romans,Persians, Indians, and other relics of a dying classical civilization. The Middle East had been a cultural and economic center for millennia at the time of the Islamic conquests, producing many of Christendom's best theologians, and it's a little disingenuous to give Muslims credit for the region's accomplishments when they're the ones who took thousands of years of success and slowly drove it into the ground; turning the richest, oldest, and most strategically valuable region in the world into a worthless backwater. By this time the Ottoman Empire was being propped up for political reasons and half of the Muslim countries had been reduced to piracy as the primary form of economic activity. There's little of value produced by Muslims in these countries that was not already produced, or could not have been produced in the future, by a Christian or Zoroastrian population of the middle east and north Africa. It's interesting that despite all the existing initial social and economic skills and resources, all of these nations more or less fell into decline and became the pawns of their neighbours after the middle ages ended. Today the only thing going for half of the Arab states is the fact they have oil that they can use to import skilled foreigners to build places like Dubai, a city as superflous as the "Islamic Golden Age".

[QUOTE=Boaraes;49204464]No, I'm not ignoring that at all. I never said there wasn't terrible stuff in the texts, nor did I ever say those people don't exist. You're missing the point entirely.[/QUOTE]No, I get your point and I don't disagree with it. Let me rephrase, you're not [I]ignoring[/I] those people but you didn't include them in your statement.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49204151][url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age[/url] Yup. Only wars happened in the 12th century and before. Totally. During these centuries, despite some conflicts, Muslims schooled Christians in philosophy, science, tolerance, progress and were pretty much fucking liberal compared to the shithole that was Christianity at that time. The dark ages weren't dark, in the Muslim world and China great progress was being made.[/QUOTE] It wasn't Islam that did this. It as the relative tolerance of the rulers, the monopoly on the east-west trade routes and the ability for scholars to gather that made that area in that era a prosperous one.

[QUOTE=sgman91;49204468]Constantine didn't come around until over 200 years after the birth of Christianity. It had already spread around the empire, and that played no small role in Constantine's original acceptance of it. As a side point: No Roman emperor is seen as a great "holy warrior" by modern day Christians. In fact, there's quite a few Christian scholars who even doubt his Christianity. I'm currently reading "[B]The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire[/B]" by Edward Gibbons and even he doubts Constantine's Christianity.[/QUOTE] I should pick this up, I learned all my Roman history from Antony Kamm and Dr. Kevin McGeough

[QUOTE=Broguts;49204555]I should pick this up, I learned all my Roman history from Antony Kamm and Dr. Kevin McGeough[/QUOTE] It's pretty dense and can be tough to read in parts, but the actual content is great if you're interested in the subject matter. It's also free online if you don't mind reading it from an electronic device.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49204553]It wasn't Islam that did this. It as the relative tolerance of the rulers, the monopoly on the east-west trade routes and the ability for scholars to gather that made that area in that era a prosperous one.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but the fact remains Muslims (not Islam) during those times were much better off that Christians during that time, the guy I was quoting said Christians have always been more progressive, which simply isn't true. Christianity isn't the reason for the great renaissance or age of enlightenment either, it all comes down to the situation your country is in. Poor, third world countries with awful leaders and no realistic easy way out of said position are unlikely to produce great feats. The Arab world really needed some Ataturks post Ottoman period. [QUOTE=sgman91;49204590]It's pretty dense and can be tough to read in parts, but the actual content is great if you're interested in the subject matter. It's also free online if you don't mind reading it from an electronic device.[/QUOTE] Hahaha I have the book physically, its fucking huge and it's certainly hard to read in some parts. I need to get back into it.

Man, I just love how every thread about bad shit happening in the middle east always inevitably involves people going full "DESTROY ISLAM REMOVE KEBAB DEUS VULT". Wait, did I say "love"? I meant, "I want to snap these people's fingers in half so they'll quit typing." Yeah, that's the one.

[QUOTE=Disgruntled;49204608]Man, I just love how every thread about bad shit happening in the middle east always inevitably involves people going full "DESTROY ISLAM REMOVE KEBAB DEUS VULT". Wait, did I say "love"? I meant, "I want to snap these people's fingers in half so they'll quit typing." Yeah, that's the one.[/QUOTE] Dont cut yourself with that edge now

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49204591]Yeah, but the fact remains Muslims (not Islam) during those times were much better off that Christians during that time[/QUOTE] largely because of parasitic rent-seeking activities, slave-farming, and the sheer luck a few desert tribes had in taking over a vast economic powerhouse and then tax-farming it until the regime collapsed and a new generation came to power. as islam entrenched itself, the ostensibly tolerant and innovative culture of the early civilization steadily decayed. most of the moslem nations experienced economic and demographic stagnation (followed by decline) as the medieval period progressed. the egypt that was ruled by the ottomans had a smaller population and economy than that of the classical egypt administered by the pharaohs, persians, greeks, and romans. they spent all of their social capital that classical civilization spent centuries building up on wasteful endeavors, while in europe the successors to rome ended up rebuilding a new civilization out of virtually nothing

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;49204151][URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age[/URL] Yup. Only wars happened in the 12th century and before. Totally. During these centuries, despite some conflicts, Muslims schooled Christians in philosophy, science, tolerance, progress and were pretty much fucking liberal compared to the shithole that was Christianity at that time. The dark ages weren't dark, in the Muslim world and China great progress was being made.[/QUOTE] The Islamic Golden Age AKA - we found Roman and Greek manuscripts and translated them into Arabic.

[QUOTE=Vasili;49205067]The Islamic Golden Age AKA - we found Roman and Greek manuscripts and translated them into Arabic.[/QUOTE] Weren't Christian monks doing the same thing in the West, anyway?

The golden age of islam is more prolific than sobotonik or vasili are admitting but it isn't as prolific as was originally proposed in the thread as a rebuttal to the concept of christian nations being the only progressive ones in the world. There were a lot of smart people in the golden age, we shouldn't discount them because the bulk of their base knowledge was stolen. They came up with things in that time frame, to deny that, and just say "Nah, christians could have done that in the future" is one of the most ludicrous responses I've ever read. Anyone could have done it in the future, anyone can invent anything in the scenario of "What if" and "In the future" scenarios like that. They're as meaningless as me making a what if to show how meaningless it is. What they did come up with was good. But that period of innovation and creation was only about 100 years, and the golden age is cited to last a lot longer than that so yeah it's not fair to say it was meaningless, and it's not fair to say it's super important either.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;49205207]Weren't Christian monks doing the same thing in the West, anyway?[/QUOTE]Yes, but nobody is claiming that Christianity uplifted Europe. Actually the popular opinion is that Christianity actually held that back and got in the way of scientific advancement, so.. quite the opposite. I mean isn't that the argument used most often by atheists (and others) when they're being critical of Christianity anyway?

[QUOTE=Broguts;49204449]As much as you would like to think this, the very reason Christianity was so popular was because of emperor Constantine's victory in a civil war and his eventual successor Theodosius who made Christianity mandatory in the Roman empire. It's rather interesting how many parallels there are between christian and islamic history. Christians and Muslim both lionize figures who were once heathens but converted and became great religious figures (christians have Constantine, Clovis, Cenwalh, Rollo, Leif Ericsson, and Muslims have Khalid ibn al-Walid, Aghsartan I, and Seljuk.) and Christians still remember Charlemagne as a great and noble king who defeated the evil heathen Saxons. And as someone already pointed out, Islam in the 12th century was way ahead of Christianity in culture, science, and philosophy.[/QUOTE] I read due to the theory its culture was stolen from those conquered during that time. [QUOTE]What they did come up with was good[/QUOTE] Some of the ideas for religion I heard were quite good. Some of the more dead sects (Isma'ilism) i believe used math and science as a means to get closer to God.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49205248]What they did come up with was good. But that period of innovation and creation was only about 100 years, and the golden age is cited to last a lot longer than that so yeah it's not fair to say it was meaningless, and it's not fair to say it's super important either.[/QUOTE]All valid points, but I'm going to add something: I really don't think Europe would have progressed forward like it did without the Middle East having those hundred years or so. I mean for as long as "the West" has been a political entity we've always been married partially to the Middle East in some way or another.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49205273]I read due to the theory its culture was stolen from those conquered during that time.[/QUOTE] There's actually a lot of truth to this, considering the early Caliphate heavily borrowed from Persian and Byzantine influences for hundreds of years.