|
Ruphus -> RE: My photo of the week 29 (Feb. 3 2012 13:03:26)
|
Arash,
I don´t have relationships with any mudshahedin or shah followers ( who don´t even realize that these "shahs" weren´t even such, but just a putsched military farmhand and his from foreign instigated son).
Instead it is about well-informed and democratic minds.
But one has to wonder about logic ability, talent of observation and pragmatism with defenders of the orient here.
One guy wants to paint me conservative, showing such strength in ignorance and dismiss, regardless of my foregone vehement advocating for freeing from exploitation, request of authentic democracy, human rights, stemmed corruption and state of the people like no other participant.
The other one claims that 50% of muslims would be reading their holy book, while it is clear from my preceding posts that what I meant by "reading" be absorbing of context, naturally; not the usual gabbling down as phonetic volume.
If people actually read it, noone would react as surprised and doubting when you mention its major share of intimating, inimical and agitating content.
Instead there usually is indignant and surprised reaction like "No, that is not true!" until you point out the corresponding passages to the unprepared. With my following question: "Now, how was that again with your claim to have read it all?" ensued by silence.
And also with you, Arash, this item of contradiction:
Extremist of extremism; how would that be looking like?
If this very dogma isn´t extremism, what is?
Isn´t it extremist from get go to request ambush and assassin of "infidels"?
Isn´t it radical to incessantly intimate followers on what atrocities should be happening to them if they won´t strictly obey? Not extremist to claim over and over again how infidels, questioners / doubters and renegates were to be done to and burn in this and that kind of infinite fire? ( Not even as casual claims in between, mind you, but as steadily repeated intimation throughout.)
Thus, how could a moderate form of following be looking like, apart of ways that are originally being considered defection in the same time? ( And how would a willing philanthrop and democrat endure the schizophrenia?)
Both, followers ( before all) and the rest of humanity need to notice the actual condition of a doctrin first before assessing.
That´s at least what appears as of sense to me.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
