Exactly, so are you actually arguing a more taboo thing; that Muslims are fundamentally sexist and bigoted people, not that it's the ideology and brainwashing to blame?
I would have to disagree completely and I know you are wrong because UK itself is a good case study to see that more integrated second or third generation Muslims (well they identify as Muslim usually are further from Islam than that implies) and ex-Muslims that were raised by Muslims are much less sexist at the very least (usually less LGBT-phobic too) than ones still indocrinated by the OG Sharia Islam of their homeland(s).
I am actually interested in this topic, as in how you will defend it. If it is not Islam oppressing them, it is Muslims themselves. Will you attack that character of most Muslim men in Sharia nations then? Of course sexism is often perpetuated by the very women oppressed by it (onto other women and even by pressuring males to fulfil their 'providers' 'tough guys who don't ever cry or moan' role while not doing their 'feminine' role necessarily well).
What exactly will happen here?
I don't know where you'll take this but I am definitely curious. Patriarchy hurts both sexes/genders, it's just more subtle with how it harms men's mental wellbeing.
I know how this works, the more candid and blunt I become the more you play into the narrative of painting me as a brainwashed Islamophobe, deflection is your entire 'thing', you and all true fundamentalists do this.
You are indeed a fundamentalist, I didn't think so at first but it is clear that you think your interpretation of Islam is the only correct one and that people can't redefine it.
What is your approach to gay people and feminism btw?
No, you are correct, it is violent from the get-go which is more horrifying. It goes from blatantly aggressive and spiteful to wishy washy by the end.
It is actually the opposite of what happens in the Hadith, where Muhammad grows more and more narcissistic and sociopathic as it goes along even truly justifying grooming a 6 year old girl and raping her at 9 which was not at all normal back then whatsoever, it is even said how shocked and resistant the parents were until he basically strongarmed them with 'it is me asking, how dare you question it' which is also how he got 5 wives while limiting others to 4.
Muhammad was completely full of himself and in these days if someone set out saying they were in touch with a god they call some new fancy name and drew symbols for Allah that symbolise the pitchfork of Satan and even have the Arabic 6 6 6 in it, we'd be like um... okay buddy, let's get you on some meds.
You are now completely changing the topic to 'promotes' as opposed to supports or condones. Islam doesn't literally in the scripture directly command that you have to do acts of terror, instead both the scripture, the actions of Khalid alongside Muhammad and the Hashashin and many ancient Islamic leaders imply that the foundation of Islam is violent, brutal and barbaric to women, disbelievers and any native cultures where they 'colonised' (they didn't just colonised they completely blackmailed pure, nationwide conversion).
I gave you some, the first 5 chapters on their own already set out the foundation of Islam as spiteful and viciously aggressive to anything it sees as standing in the way of its viral spread.
Ehyeh gave you plenty in the other debate, you're not considering how to read them differently to your biased way and it is you, not us, ignoring what's written which is why we use the quotes in the debate and you avoid them when explaining them away.
I have read the Qur'an, Hadith and looked at Islamic history and present stories of child brides, acid attack victims and many other ex-muslim horror stories.
He is asking for a verse where it explicitly says you have to kill others, if we offer anything combining to amount to allowing and encouraging violence and brutality (even slaying) to achieve obedience and prove this is a theme throughout the Qur'an both domestically to one's wife and externally to non-believers and 'false Muslims' etc, he will ignore the combination and blame us for it.
Absolutely all quotes I will show you and historical evidence of the original Muslims (before anything could be twisted or changed, the original Muslims acted with unadultered Islam surely) you will keep ignoring it, saying it is 'self defense only'.
I found quite a few, so did ehyeh in the other debate.
Innocent Jews are a real thing. Innocent ex-Muslims are a real thing too.
Islam has also been known for intraviolence amongst sects, severely so, justified by scripture encouraging deepest hatred and aggression for so-called false followers.
I am indeed uneducated on Islamic fanatic propaganda, as soon as I spot most propaganda I literally look away to avoid it brainwashing me. So yes, I am relatively uneducated, I skimread such nonsense.
I know plenty of protestants who disagree with the topic, it is only certain states of America that have cut the lime such that protestants are pigeonholed into 'pure' trinitarianism as opposed to seeing Jesus as an independent son.
There are 2 opposing views that use the scripture to justify it:
1) Jesus was a chosen, special son independent from God sent to be the true prophet.
2) (Islamic and Jewish perspective) Jesus was a slightly deluded messiah of sorts who genuinely was in touch with the real God but had misunderstood his purpose, overestimating it.
If 'god' is either, she is a mother figure, a big sister figure.
God has nearly nothing other than omnipotence to render it as a he over a she. The human is female in the womb and transforms from XX to XY later on, the clitoris is what is transformed into the penis head and the original body being female is the only reason males have nipples. The raw/original being of reality is a feminine creator that birthed us akin to a mother.
I am allowed to completely lie in a debate and represent what I disagree with, as long as I play to win. I have in my own life experienced emotional anguish that became lessened when i found the real goddess, in my eyes but she is sadistic and responsible for almost all our agony.
I have subjectively experienced this resolution being true, nothing in my theological outlook or the deity I bow before has anything ruling out lying even about my belief in her (note I bow and do not kneel before, she is not actually into that at all, which is why she kept herself hidden in the subtext if religions rather than ever revealing the full truth in one).
because I am courageous in the face of fear and I feel law enforcement would understand that I am not being brainwashed into either side of this debate in particular and let me be.
I also have worries what could happen if I were to travel to an Islamic nation later on, idk what level of surveillance they have and do know I typed these things.
Bravery and courage are not about being fearless, that is stupidity or psychopathy. Bravery and courage relate to feeling fear and doing something anyway.
the personality and agenda of the original consciousness/creator is pretty unattainable in Taoism and easily the god is responsible for emotional issues... so...
that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not all emotional issues during one's human life stem from separation from god. If anything Taoism explicitly tells us to be balanced and not get too obsessed with god.
nothing in taoism at all agrees with this and I am my own thinker I accidentally realised I have a lot in common with how Taoists think, especially with regards to animals.
If you go heavy hitting in final round people see it as bad conduct and ignore any new points regardless, to me it was a very simple debate. I won't explain more as it will lead to me being labelled Islamophobic or worse... An Islamic extremist.
I have very little love for the faith and would even admit I have a fear of it. My beef isn't with any average Muslim at all, it is actually with Islam and that is maybe worse or better, I cannot tell.
I read the Qur'an and Hadith with an open mind, I used to resent people that preached against Islam and thought it was rude and disrespectful to disparage and tarnish a wonderful ideology... I didn't enjoy what I read.
I wonder if we legalised trophy hunting poachers how it would all go down for their families ethically. Speciesist prejudice is considered completely alright.
joke is meant to be joke and I intentionally didn't spell it as Joker
Please leave a vote
Please see ehyeh's vote.
My round 2 alone wins the debate if you understand what I wrote. This was me trying just not wasting effort addressing irrelevant points to the topic.
you want to play dirty games, alright.
this is objective proof that you are coming in with the intention to vote against me, trying to filler/insert whatever you can to justify it
Both if you have given terrible votes against me, so I can happily vote against both. I will be voting on this.
Oromagi is lying about my arguments in order to vote for me.
Oromagi is lying about my arguments in order to vote against me.
I said that the high rankers are con a lot more often... wtf are you talking about, I said the low rankers are pro very often.
Bump, please vote if you wish to
Please can you define male, female and woman for me to accept this debate.
To be clear I don't mean here, in the comments but in the official debate description.
Exactly, so are you actually arguing a more taboo thing; that Muslims are fundamentally sexist and bigoted people, not that it's the ideology and brainwashing to blame?
I would have to disagree completely and I know you are wrong because UK itself is a good case study to see that more integrated second or third generation Muslims (well they identify as Muslim usually are further from Islam than that implies) and ex-Muslims that were raised by Muslims are much less sexist at the very least (usually less LGBT-phobic too) than ones still indocrinated by the OG Sharia Islam of their homeland(s).
I am actually interested in this topic, as in how you will defend it. If it is not Islam oppressing them, it is Muslims themselves. Will you attack that character of most Muslim men in Sharia nations then? Of course sexism is often perpetuated by the very women oppressed by it (onto other women and even by pressuring males to fulfil their 'providers' 'tough guys who don't ever cry or moan' role while not doing their 'feminine' role necessarily well).
What exactly will happen here?
I don't know where you'll take this but I am definitely curious. Patriarchy hurts both sexes/genders, it's just more subtle with how it harms men's mental wellbeing.
That is a flawed reason for voting. Vote based on what the debaters argued, don't argue the case yourself.
Make it about pre 2017 and limit it to the upper middle class type salaries and upwards.
If you do this, I will accept.
I know how this works, the more candid and blunt I become the more you play into the narrative of painting me as a brainwashed Islamophobe, deflection is your entire 'thing', you and all true fundamentalists do this.
You are indeed a fundamentalist, I didn't think so at first but it is clear that you think your interpretation of Islam is the only correct one and that people can't redefine it.
What is your approach to gay people and feminism btw?
No, you are correct, it is violent from the get-go which is more horrifying. It goes from blatantly aggressive and spiteful to wishy washy by the end.
It is actually the opposite of what happens in the Hadith, where Muhammad grows more and more narcissistic and sociopathic as it goes along even truly justifying grooming a 6 year old girl and raping her at 9 which was not at all normal back then whatsoever, it is even said how shocked and resistant the parents were until he basically strongarmed them with 'it is me asking, how dare you question it' which is also how he got 5 wives while limiting others to 4.
Muhammad was completely full of himself and in these days if someone set out saying they were in touch with a god they call some new fancy name and drew symbols for Allah that symbolise the pitchfork of Satan and even have the Arabic 6 6 6 in it, we'd be like um... okay buddy, let's get you on some meds.
You are now completely changing the topic to 'promotes' as opposed to supports or condones. Islam doesn't literally in the scripture directly command that you have to do acts of terror, instead both the scripture, the actions of Khalid alongside Muhammad and the Hashashin and many ancient Islamic leaders imply that the foundation of Islam is violent, brutal and barbaric to women, disbelievers and any native cultures where they 'colonised' (they didn't just colonised they completely blackmailed pure, nationwide conversion).
I gave you some, the first 5 chapters on their own already set out the foundation of Islam as spiteful and viciously aggressive to anything it sees as standing in the way of its viral spread.
Ehyeh gave you plenty in the other debate, you're not considering how to read them differently to your biased way and it is you, not us, ignoring what's written which is why we use the quotes in the debate and you avoid them when explaining them away.
I have read the Qur'an, Hadith and looked at Islamic history and present stories of child brides, acid attack victims and many other ex-muslim horror stories.
Tommy Robinson has nothing to do with it.
He is asking for a verse where it explicitly says you have to kill others, if we offer anything combining to amount to allowing and encouraging violence and brutality (even slaying) to achieve obedience and prove this is a theme throughout the Qur'an both domestically to one's wife and externally to non-believers and 'false Muslims' etc, he will ignore the combination and blame us for it.
Absolutely all quotes I will show you and historical evidence of the original Muslims (before anything could be twisted or changed, the original Muslims acted with unadultered Islam surely) you will keep ignoring it, saying it is 'self defense only'.
I found quite a few, so did ehyeh in the other debate.
Innocent Jews are a real thing. Innocent ex-Muslims are a real thing too.
Islam has also been known for intraviolence amongst sects, severely so, justified by scripture encouraging deepest hatred and aggression for so-called false followers.
please read, Round 1 is posted.
The reason that Islam is the most converted to religion is primarily due to its aggressive dogmatism, which even Christianity is letting go of.
I am indeed uneducated on Islamic fanatic propaganda, as soon as I spot most propaganda I literally look away to avoid it brainwashing me. So yes, I am relatively uneducated, I skimread such nonsense.
The enemy needn't attack, they need only be deemed in the way of Islam's spread.
Self defence? I don't see any self defence outlined at all, it just says those that stand in the way of Allah, nothing about the self.
It also specifies only to stop the inflicting of fear and agony when the person 'repents' and conforms to Islam.
Christianm ignores the entirety of my constructive.
How does Novice saying that prove that it's true?
I didn't give any new arguments, if you mean sources that backed up exactly what I'd said then yeah.
I know plenty of protestants who disagree with the topic, it is only certain states of America that have cut the lime such that protestants are pigeonholed into 'pure' trinitarianism as opposed to seeing Jesus as an independent son.
That's hot
Not sure why you are mocking someone's theological beliefs but sure.
As fir the real diety in charge, she couldn't care less if you mock her or not, she is more sadistic than she is egotistical.
There are 2 opposing views that use the scripture to justify it:
1) Jesus was a chosen, special son independent from God sent to be the true prophet.
2) (Islamic and Jewish perspective) Jesus was a slightly deluded messiah of sorts who genuinely was in touch with the real God but had misunderstood his purpose, overestimating it.
please vote if you have time
If 'god' is either, she is a mother figure, a big sister figure.
God has nearly nothing other than omnipotence to render it as a he over a she. The human is female in the womb and transforms from XX to XY later on, the clitoris is what is transformed into the penis head and the original body being female is the only reason males have nipples. The raw/original being of reality is a feminine creator that birthed us akin to a mother.
I know of ex-Muslims and victims of the barbaric side of Islam. You do not know what has happened to the victims, I do, in detail.
There are three separate things here.
My views
Taoism
This debate
I am allowed to completely lie in a debate and represent what I disagree with, as long as I play to win. I have in my own life experienced emotional anguish that became lessened when i found the real goddess, in my eyes but she is sadistic and responsible for almost all our agony.
I have subjectively experienced this resolution being true, nothing in my theological outlook or the deity I bow before has anything ruling out lying even about my belief in her (note I bow and do not kneel before, she is not actually into that at all, which is why she kept herself hidden in the subtext if religions rather than ever revealing the full truth in one).
because I am courageous in the face of fear and I feel law enforcement would understand that I am not being brainwashed into either side of this debate in particular and let me be.
I also have worries what could happen if I were to travel to an Islamic nation later on, idk what level of surveillance they have and do know I typed these things.
Bravery and courage are not about being fearless, that is stupidity or psychopathy. Bravery and courage relate to feeling fear and doing something anyway.
the personality and agenda of the original consciousness/creator is pretty unattainable in Taoism and easily the god is responsible for emotional issues... so...
that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not all emotional issues during one's human life stem from separation from god. If anything Taoism explicitly tells us to be balanced and not get too obsessed with god.
nothing in taoism at all agrees with this and I am my own thinker I accidentally realised I have a lot in common with how Taoists think, especially with regards to animals.
No, it actually fills me with dread as if I got doxxed, I could get death threats and other things. It's you who seems to enjoy it.
https://www.debateart.com/participants/rayhan16/debates
If you go heavy hitting in final round people see it as bad conduct and ignore any new points regardless, to me it was a very simple debate. I won't explain more as it will lead to me being labelled Islamophobic or worse... An Islamic extremist.
I have very little love for the faith and would even admit I have a fear of it. My beef isn't with any average Muslim at all, it is actually with Islam and that is maybe worse or better, I cannot tell.
I read the Qur'an and Hadith with an open mind, I used to resent people that preached against Islam and thought it was rude and disrespectful to disparage and tarnish a wonderful ideology... I didn't enjoy what I read.
Please vote if the debate interests you, I understand how controversial it is.
I keep confusing Pro with con in this debate because the instigator is Con, sorry for this lexical error.
I wonder if we legalised trophy hunting poachers how it would all go down for their families ethically. Speciesist prejudice is considered completely alright.
it turns red when within 100 characters, it doesn't mean you are in the negative.
I used all the characters I could use minus 5.
I said 'help Pro' I meant 'help Con'. I confused our sides sorry