Yes, Muslim Lives Matter - and why Islam is (and has been) the biggest
threat to Muslim lives for 1400 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrSD8fwor2Q

Just like clockwork, within hours of me posting the above:

"At least 200 dead as Islamist militants attack Egyptian mosque during prayers"

The biggest threat to Muslims, is other Muslims, for 1400 years.

Islam is clear on this topic.

whoever kills a believer intentionally - his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment.
http://islamawakened.com/quran/4/93/

Have Arabs killed more Arabs than Non Arabs killing Arabs? Tough to say.

A heretic is not a believer.

Yes, you're right Islam is clear - clear that they should kill each other, which
is what they've been doing for 1400 years. You didn't even watch the video
which cites all the Qu'ran/Hadith verses that support killing other Muslims you don't agree with.

It's no coincidence that Mohammad was a terrorist, and Muslims have
been killing each other, and others for 1400 years.

Try again?

At least i don’t have to pretend some Christians actually believe in religious freedom after this last year or so. And when they bring it up i can look at them as it’s main threat. Not that they ever were not.

So Christians haven't been killing Christians over the centuries? Ever heard of any European wars or the US Civil war? Basically people of all sorts religious and non-religious backgrounds have been killing each other for centuries.

David Brown PhD the author of that despicable video was a proven psychopathic criminal, btw, and I would not trust his him.

Stop the hate-mongering.

So, are going to travel there and teach them the gospel and make peace? As per the sermon at the mount, I mean.

If you're persecuted while doing so, that just means you are blessed btw (says Jesus) - so that should be irrelevant.

I am a Christian and I believe in religious freedom.

I was mostly just messing. Of course, i know plenty of Christians who support religious freedom and include Muslims. Then we have the Roy Moore types who dont. And we have a lot of American Christians (along with others) ok with banning Muslims and there not being much outrage over it.


We also have people like the op (and i think you said they have to kill their neighbors) who dictate what True Islam is. Which is not helpful when you choose the extremists views as the Truth. The same as it would not be helpful to completely judge you, the op and Christianity by the more extremists views from the likes of the Moores of the world.

If you are going to push a version of Islam as the True version at least find one of the peacenik ones.

The Orwellian version peddled by some self-described Christians, or the actual freedom about actual religion which is already had?

His name isn't David Brown, and his videos are brilliant and very
insightful.

It's not hate-mongering in the least. Muslims are going to keep killing
each other and others for another 1400 years, unless people start having
the balls to point out that the Quran is a pile of lies, and that Mohammad
was a terrorist and a pedophile. It's hatred of the truth to not point this
out.

Calling the US Civil war a religious "Christian" war is the epitome of
stupidity and ignorance.

Here's an IQ test that David has for you regarding the recent
Massacre in Egypt by Muslims. Let's see if you pass the IQ test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnUghCujIFQ

He does not seem so smart. He says Islamic violence is excused by saying they are not real Muslims, which is true sometimes, all the while saying at the same time extremists Muslims have the True interpretations of Islams truths. Like with sharia law which varies.

Not only is it hypocritical for him to be picking Islamic Truths well saying others should not. What he picks is bad strat.


And lol at him saying he is trying to help Muslim victims. He is attacking liberal and moderate Muslims version of their own religion and forcing extremists reading of the Quran on them along with the extremists version of sharia on them. What a friend.

His correct name is David Wood . But I am correct that he has a personal history of violence , prison, and mental illness. He is an excellent speaker which makes him especially dangerous. For centuries people have made war primarily for land or power or money or vengeance whether it is Christians vs. Christians are Muslims vs. Muslims or whatever. He gives those obvious possibilities zero chance so he failed his own hate "IQ" test. He is wrong about Islam.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

He is 100% correct about Islam, and he knows more about the Qu'ran
and Muslim history than anyone I've ever met. You can't debunk anything
he says, all you can do is make stupid statements referring to the
American civil war as a Christian war - which is so amazingly stupid.

Oh, and you make ad hominem attacks against him, because again, you
having nothing of substance in response. Yeah, as a kid he spent time
in jail - how is that germane to the discussion? It's not, and you know it.

I'm not convinced. He argues that Islam is a threat to Muslims because of his claim that the Quran commands Muslims to kill apostates (understood as Muslims with different theological views) and praises those who do. Okay, that is at least a plausible interpretation as some Muslims do accept those views. I can accept that Islam, in at least some of its forms, does present a threat to other Muslims. But I don't see a justification in this video for the claim that it is the largest threat. What about other dangers, such as famine, disease, and poverty? Or other ideologies, such as nationalism, or outside invaders, or traditional moral/social practices unrelated to Islam? Saying that Islam has been/is the biggest threat to Muslim lives is a historical claim that won't be settled by exegesis of the Quran .

1. What is the "Orwellian version" of religious freedom? I've read some George Orwell, but I don't recall his thoughts on religious freedom.

2. I personally believe that anyone should be able to believe and practice whatever religion (or "non-religion", as the case may be) they choose as long as their practices to not interfere with the freedoms of other people. I also think that tax-exempt status for churches should be removed.

"Orwellian" is an informal term used to describe the language used to title a policy which is deceptive of what the policy meaning actually contains , like "double-speak".

A theocratic totalitarian policy titled "religious freedom" but which contains further meaning which actually leads to non-freedom actions, non-religious actions such as oppression and discrimination towards people is an Orwellian Policy. It's not true to it's title, and enacts the opposite.

OK, thanks.

Nah. Religious freedom means the ability to practice the religion of your choosing without government (or social) restriction. Some religious practices lead to oppression and discrimination, so restrictions on those practices are in fact restrictions on religious freedom.

And religions practice freedom from oppression and discrimination, which is an impetus for social protection, like civil rights laws, for those freedoms.

Which seems like it leaves the oppressors and discriminators as the one's oppressed and discriminated against.

However, since the supposed freedom to discriminate and oppress leads to people remembering and discovering the actual freedom from oppression and discrimination. It looks like case of one thing leads to it's progressive better.

Look how oppressors and discriminators appear to reap what they sow after people realize there is freedom from oppression and discrimination. When people value better freedom, what can oppressors and discriminators do?


Plus, it may fit their description better that the religion organizations which still practice oppression and discrimination are acknowledged as political organizations. Particularly those which stake their means to oppress and discriminate in with politics and authoritarian methods.

Really? That seems wrong to me. More typical is that people who are discriminated against or oppressed will do the same thing if they have the ability to do so.

Continue to oppress and discriminate against people.

Not all oppression is political. Lots of Democrats and liberals misunderstand fundamentalist religion because they ignore or can't see its non-political aspects. Many religions function by reinforcing social norms that are discriminatory or oppressive, or even just oppressive/discriminatory beliefs within their own religious practice.

Anyway, the main point is that religious freedom does include the right to discriminate against and oppress other people. This is one of the reasons why it, like other rights, is not absolute.

Which comes back around to Dear Orwell, since discrimination and oppression make for acts which limit people's freedom, one has to succumb to what appears to be lazy thinking to qualify discrimination and oppression with the meaning of freedom, since oppression and discriminate work to limit freedom rather than to protect it.

So a regime of oppressive discrimination operating under a banner of freedom can only pass a test of freedom's meaning while they don't actually discriminate or oppress.

Preach to 25% of the choir which doesn't care what you're saying as long as it is "muslims bad". Use exaggeration and hyperbole to portray people as protesting as belonging to a group which 25% more of the choir does not like.

Use a minimum of logic in your argument to sway 10%. Let your 60% convince the remainders with herd logic, swaying 10% more.

Pretend to moderate your argument by pointing out the good people, convince 15% more. Attack those who claim your view is extreme, by pointing out how moderate you are and that you are not making blanket statements. Convince 5% more.

Use your 90% base to overwhelm the remaining doubt, hold that that "it is at least better than the alternative".

Congratulations. A 10 second argument is now sold - hook, line and sinker. Let your base take it from here, only surfacing to re-enforce the zeal.