Two men kidnap priest, take hostages in church near the French Rouen Watch

username1866585
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#341
Report 2 years ago
#341
(Original post by BaconandSauce)
so you can't prove your claim then (an adult would have simply admitted the rhetoric they used was wrong)
i don't need to prove the claim with figures when statistics from that corrupt country don't reflect the scale of the issues.

Go ask a punjabi sikh, Bacon Boy.
0
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#342
Report 2 years ago
#342
(Original post by blah3210)
i don't need to prove the claim
Actually yes you do. You make a claim if challenged you should be able to prove it otherwise it looks like you are simply making **** up

And stop being so childish as it does complete undermine any argument you have (not that you have one mind)
0
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#343
Report 2 years ago
#343
(Original post by blah3210)
Actually no I don't. Only an ignorant moron who doesn't know anything about punjab would dispute that claim.

My argument was religious people often do things that go against their religion. It doesn't need to be "proven", Bacon Boy.
So just lies will do then if you have a point to prove.

OK got it
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#344
Report 2 years ago
#344
(Original post by blah3210)
But it is true. Go to a random village in Punjab and survey. I know it must be hard for you to acknowledge that humans other than Muslims tend to put cultural practices over religion, but it's true
Then you will have no difficulty in providing evidence that
"Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

Go to a random village in Punjab and survey. I know it must be hard for you to acknowledge that humans other than Muslims tend to put cultural practices over religion, but it's true
I am well aware that both Sikhs and Hindus commit female infanticide, but that is not what you said. You made a very specific claim. A claim that is clearly not true. Simply mathematically, if nothing else. If your claim was true, there would be few female Sikhs in India. However, the male and female populations are similar, with only a slight skew to the male (52%-48%) - what you would expect from gender-selective abortion and occasional infanticide.

The National Crime Records Bureau recorded a figure of 100 cases of infanticide in 2010. The Sikh population is 19 million. The average birth rate gives about 4 million Sikhs born every year, with the average family having 3 children. Even if only 1 in 3 children are female, if most Sikhs commit female infanticide (as you claim), there should be a skew of 30% and over 1 million cases.

You are simply wrong.
Again.
1
reply
Scrappy-coco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#345
Report 2 years ago
#345
France is close to boiling point i think.

Germany seems to have caught up pretty quick as well.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Dima-Blackburn
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#346
Report 2 years ago
#346
(Original post by blah3210)
i don't need to prove the claim with figures when statistics from that corrupt country don't reflect the scale of the issues.

Go ask a punjabi sikh, Bacon Boy.
(Original post by BaconandSauce)
Actually yes you do. You make a claim if challenged you should be able to prove it otherwise it looks like you are simply making **** up

And stop being so childish as it does complete undermine any argument you have (not that you have one mind)
(Original post by QE2)
Then you will have no difficulty in providing evidence that
"Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

Go to a random village in Punjab and survey. I know it must be hard for you to acknowledge that humans other than Muslims tend to put cultural practices over religion, but it's true I am well aware that both Sikhs and Hindus commit female infanticide, but that is not what you said. You made a very specific claim. A claim that is clearly not true. Simply mathematically, if nothing else. If your claim was true, there would be few female Sikhs in India. However, the male and female populations are similar, with only a slight skew to the male (52%-48%) - what you would expect from gender-selective abortion and occasional infanticide.

The National Crime Records Bureau recorded a figure of 100 cases of infanticide in 2010. The Sikh population is 19 million. The average birth rate gives about 4 million Sikhs born every year, with the average family having 3 children. Even if only 1 in 3 children are female, if most Sikhs commit female infanticide (as you claim), there should be a skew of 30% and over 1 million cases.

You are simply wrong.
Again.
I'm a Punjabi Sikh. QE2 is right; while female foeticide is one of the most widespread social evils in India, the claim that "most Sikhs in India commit female foeticide" is absolutely wrong.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#347
Report 2 years ago
#347
(Original post by blah3210)
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report...second-1323987

Most Sikhs also accept dowry from girls' parents, despite its prohibition in Sikhism.
:rofl: You knob!

That article states that there were 81 cases in Punjab in 2009. 81! From a population of nearly 20 million!
You claimed that "Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

Get back under your bridge!
0
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#348
Report 2 years ago
#348
(Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
I'm a Punjabi Sikh. QE2 is right; while female foeticide is one of the most widespread social evils in India, the claim that "most Sikhs in India commit female foeticide" is absolutely wrong.
I'm aware it is an issue but I would bulk at the claim 'Most' as I know it is simply incorrect

It's nothing more than hysterical rhetoric and and a poor attempt to divert from the evils of islam (but given the posted is a FGM supporter I think their posts can be easily dismissed)
0
reply
Dima-Blackburn
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#349
Report 2 years ago
#349
(Original post by Scrappy-coco)
France is close to boiling point i think.

Germany seems to have caught up pretty quick as well.

Posted from TSR Mobile
The attacks are becoming an almost daily occurrence now :s
0
reply
mariachi
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#350
Report 2 years ago
#350
(Original post by blah3210)
Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide.
(Original post by blah3210)
Only an ignorant moron who doesn't know anything about punjab would dispute that claim..
since when do insults qualify as proof ?

for your own good : stop digging deeper holes

best
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#351
Report 2 years ago
#351
(Original post by blah3210)
They weren't contradictory. They apply in different situations.
According to the opinion of the interpretations that you favour.

To me, they are clearly contradictory.

I've looked into their justifications and found them to contradict the teachings of Islam as its preached by the scholars and practised by Muslims historically.
Which of their objectives and justifications cannot be supported by passages from the Quran or sunnah?

He'd probably feel more at home with whichever group was giving precedence to the inner mysticism than the outer, cherry-pickers who ignore explicit commands.
"Inner mysticism of Islam" Bwahahaha! :rofl:

But they are obeying explicit commands.
5:33 is explicit that opponents of Islam can be crucified.
Several verses and hadith allow the use of female captives for sex.
"What Allah has made halal, no man can make haram".

Could you cite the verse that explicitly states that those who oppose Islam must not be harmed?
Or that female captives must not be used for sex?
Spoiler:
Show
You can't. Because they don't exist.
0
reply
Scrappy-coco
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#352
Report 2 years ago
#352
(Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
The attacks are becoming an almost daily occurrence now :s
Hey Dima you're a Sikh? Do you think they could be targeted by a islamic attack? I understand the message of attacking Christianity in the west but im also aware of the tensions between muslims with Sikhs and Hindus or am i over inflating the tension?

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
mariachi
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#353
Report 2 years ago
#353
(Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
The attacks are becoming an almost daily occurrence now :s
there is the risk of random retaliatory attacks on Muslims

which is of course what ISIS is hoping for : it would be the best possibility for them to raise stronger support within the Muslim community, posing as the only "defenders of Islam"
1
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#354
Report 2 years ago
#354
(Original post by blah3210)
In Islam, actually, the majority of the scholars are a source of guidance. Ever heard of the term Ijma?
The point is, it is still subjective interpretation by modern scholars. And this is the point... the literalist, retentionists of ISIS denounce such revisionism as bidah. They point to the Quran and sunnah and say "it is clear". The modern revisionists say "it is clear".
And we are back to where we started. You are simply claimimg that your interpretation is right, and others are wrong.

And I'm not saying Ibn Kathir contradicted himself at all!
He said a great deal. Even I haven't read it all. I would be very surprised if he hadn't.
However, on 5:33, for instance, he is unambiguous. Those who oppose Islam may be killed, and the verse is general in application so it can't be claimed to apply to only one historical event.
0
reply
Dima-Blackburn
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#355
Report 2 years ago
#355
(Original post by Scrappy-coco)
Hey Dima you're a Sikh? Do you think they could be targeted by a islamic attack? I understand the message of attacking Christianity in the west but im also aware of the tensions between muslims with Sikhs and Hindus or am i over inflating the tension?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Yes, I'm a Sikh. I think it's a possibility. We've already seen one attack in Germany, but I don't think it was related to the historical conflicts between the South Asian Mughals and the Sikhs. It seems like ISIS supporters would target just about any non-Muslim religious buildings.

Another main concern for the Sikhs is being targeted in anti-Muslim hate crimes; practising Sikhs wear turbans and have long beards.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#356
Report 2 years ago
#356
(Original post by the bear)
anyone who thinks that murdering elderly priests is pleasing to God is ****ed up to the max.
It's all relative.

Anyone who thinks that there is a sentient being who created the universe, cares about what you eat, wear and who you ****, and will eternally torture the majority of the people who will ever live for not doing what he wants, is already pretty ****ed up. Adding a few bits of tinsel to the tree is not that difficult.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#357
Report 2 years ago
#357
(Original post by blah3210)
Most incidents are not reported, Bacon Boy.
1. Evidence for all these invisible events please.

2. You do realise that you are claiming that there are around an extra 1 million unreported cases a year?

3. Where are all the bodies?

4. Why is there a gender difference of a only couple of percent, rather than about 30%?

5. Knob.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#358
Report 2 years ago
#358
(Original post by blah3210)
Actually no I don't. Only an ignorant moron who doesn't know anything about punjab would dispute that claim.
So, those Indian academics who have written papers on the problem of infanticide are "ignorant morons"? Because none of them claim that most families murder their female children.

My argument was religious people often do things that go against their religion. It doesn't need to be "proven", Bacon Boy.
Oh no it wasn't! I'll remind you of what your argument was...

"Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

They don't. You were wrong. And you seem unable to admit your error.

As to your point that people often do things that go against their religion, that goes without saying. What point are you trying to make? That Muslims who do things that are forbidden in Islam are still Muslims? I agree. Simply committing sin is not an act of kufr.
So, even if ISIS did unIslamic stuff, you still consider them Muslims. Again I would tend to agree. As the Quran says, the only unforgivable sin is shirk.
0
reply
mariachi
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#359
Report 2 years ago
#359
(Original post by QE2)
they (ISIS) are obeying explicit commands.
5:33 is explicit that opponents of Islam can be crucified
Several verses and hadith allow the use of female captives for sex.
"What Allah has made halal, no man can make haram"
The Quran has aged very badly

crucifixions, amputations, sex with slaves (or simply hitting your wife/wives) were routine fare in the 7th century : in the 21st, these practices shock us, and quite rightly so

the main problem is the often-repeated claim that the Quran is the "final revelation" which applies "for all times and all places" : when it is obvious ( even to many Muslims) that a radical overhaul is long overdue, and certain Quranic verses clearly don't apply anymore

it is this failure to reform Islam which is the most worrying element of the present situation : sticking to the "unalterable Quran" means resorting to logical and intellectual somersaults, attempting to justify the unjustifiable

and this hugely facilitates the work of people like ISIS

best
1
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#360
Report 2 years ago
#360
(Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
I'm a Punjabi Sikh. QE2 is right; while female foeticide is one of the most widespread social evils in India, the claim that "most Sikhs in India commit female foeticide" is absolutely wrong.
The other issue is that he said "infanticide", not "foeticide", which are two very different things.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you chained to your phone?

Yes (66)
19.94%
Yes, but I'm trying to cut back (134)
40.48%
Nope, not that interesting (131)
39.58%

Watched Threads

View All