Florida nightclub shooting: 50 killed and 53 injured in 'act of terror' (1 Viewer)

[wannaspoon]

I was not talking about religious suppression. I was talking about creating a healthy environment where faiths can be scrutinised without those who are scrutineering being no platformed or labelled as bigots...

Can't sit around a coddle a religious class purely on the basis that they might go full retard... That's a really, really big sign that something is very, very wrong with the present paradigm...

 

[Amundies]

Maybe there should be less religion overall in society? I am kind of willing to agree to limit religious practices in our country if it goes equally for all religions. Its a matter of secularism and equality.

First of all ban all scripture classes, profoundly the biggest waste of time in school and on top of that losing valuable learning time. Ban groups and organisations regardless if their charitable or not if they base themselves around a certain religion like World Vision or if not end their tax free status.

A total ban on Evangelical or Extremist groups of any religion like Hizb ut Tharir. Also ban churches like Hillsong which are more about profit and money than anything else. Ban religious parties as well.

Ban religious schools and make them irreligious whether they be Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish or whatever.

I would totally be for it. Best to make religion a private and personal matter. It should be simply limited to the Home, Temple, Church, Mosque and Synagogue. No I am not atheist or agnostic, just love the principles of secularism.

There are so many problems with this. If the point of school is to learn, and you believe in God, then scripture classes are far from "the biggest waste of time in school", as it is literally doing what a school is meant to do; educate. Groups and organisations can base themselves around whatever they want, since they're being funded by one person or a specific group of people and so they should have the authority to do as they see fit (as long as they also abide by the law). Also since you specifically stated World Vision, if you go to their website you'll see that they have an ABN. They're run like a company (just like Coles or Audi or any other company), and so should be allowed to run as the execs see fit.

What also would give you the right to ban Hillsong because they're more about profit and money than anything else? And a religious party ban? So no Christmas parties? Yeah that's pretty dumb.

Same argument for schools as for groups; they're not funded by the government (the religious ones that is, since they're private schools), so the people who fund them should be allowed to run it as they see fit.

These are just some of the general problems with your "recommendations", if you delve into the actual law then I'm sure that you'd find many more problems.

 

[durrrrr]

Maybe there should be less religion overall in society? I am kind of willing to agree to limit religious practices in our country if it goes equally for all religions. Its a matter of secularism and equality.

First of all ban all scripture classes, profoundly the biggest waste of time in school and on top of that losing valuable learning time. Ban groups and organisations regardless if their charitable or not if they base themselves around a certain religion like World Vision or if not end their tax free status.

A total ban on Evangelical or Extremist groups of any religion like Hizb ut Tharir. Also ban churches like Hillsong which are more about profit and money than anything else. Ban religious parties as well.

Ban religious schools and make them irreligious whether they be Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish or whatever.

I would totally be for it. Best to make religion a private and personal matter. It should be simply limited to the Home, Temple, Church, Mosque and Synagogue. No I am not atheist or agnostic, just love the principles of secularism.

ban all religion in christian majority countries only

hmmm gee, I wonder why a muslims would propose such a thing

also fucking retarded that you would bring up hillsong in a thread about a mass murdering muslim terrorist

 

[Kolmias]

Maybe there should be less religion overall in society? I am kind of willing to agree to limit religious practices in our country if it goes equally for all religions. Its a matter of secularism and equality.

First of all ban all scripture classes, profoundly the biggest waste of time in school and on top of that losing valuable learning time. Ban groups and organisations regardless if their charitable or not if they base themselves around a certain religion like World Vision or if not end their tax free status.

A total ban on Evangelical or Extremist groups of any religion like Hizb ut Tharir. Also ban churches like Hillsong which are more about profit and money than anything else. Ban religious parties as well.

Ban religious schools and make them irreligious whether they be Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish or whatever.

I would totally be for it. Best to make religion a private and personal matter. It should be simply limited to the Home, Temple, Church, Mosque and Synagogue. No I am not atheist or agnostic, just love the principles of secularism.

I strongly disagree. One of the hallmarks of a civilized society is the ability to let it's members practice any faith they choose.

 

[isildurrrr1]

"Since the shooting at an Orlando nightclub last week that left 49 people dead, reports have emerged that gunman Omar Mateen frequented the gay club, used gay dating apps and had gay lovers.
But the FBI has found no evidence so far to support claims by those who say Mateen had gay lovers or communicated on gay dating apps, several law enforcement officials said."

http://www.smh.com.au/world/fbi-inv...o-shooter-had-gay-lovers-20160623-gpqs57.html

So those gay theories are out the door.

 

[Baggypants]

Name at least one? Do you live under a rock mate?

The Sandy Hook Elementary Shooting? The Planned Parenthood Shooting? Roseberg Shooting? Charleston Church Shooting? Isla Vista Shooting? The Aaron Alexis Shooting in D.C? Azana Salon and Spa Shooting? Shooting by Andre Engeldinger? The Sikh temple shooting by Wade Michael Page? The shooting at the theatre premiering the Dark Knight? Oakland Shooting by L.Goh? Hair Salon shooting by Scott Dekrai? Tucson Supermarket Shooting? University of Alabam Shooting? Binghamton Shooting by Jiverly Voong? North Illinois University shooting? Omaha Shopping mall shooting? Shooting in Virginia Tech? Salt Lake City shooting? The shooting of 5 Amish girls? Goletta Mail processing shooting? Red Lake High School SHooting? Lockheed Martin Shooting? University of Arizona Shooting? Santana High School Shooting? Edgewater Tech Shooting? Byran Uyesugi Shooting? Wedgewood Baptist Church shooting? All tech Investment Shooting? Columbine High School Shooting? Arkansas Community Shooting? Long Island Rail Road Shooting? Pettit and Martin Shooting? Lindhurst High School Shooting? University of Iowa Shooting? Luby's Cafeteria Shooting? General Motors Shooting? Patrick Edward Purdy shooting? Chapel Hill Shooting?

Most of these mass shootings were done after the year 2000 and non of these were done my Muslims. In fact, the last one I listed was the killing of 3 Muslims. You ought to keep up to date with the news, and also realise that if this many shooting can happen in such a short time, then its time for America to finally accept that there is a lack of gun control. Just maybe?

 

[durrrrr]

Gun control works. Just look at France.

 

[Baggypants]

You can't really compare France with the US. In France, the more deadly shootings are being done by an actual organisation (ISIS), whereas in America they're all done by individual people who are actually a part of America. Now look at Australia, the amount of mass shootings here is almost none. I was also pointing out that Muslims aren't actually part of the majority of the shootings in America.

 

[Orwell]

ISIS isn't too fond of guns, they're a little more....explosive.


(ahahhaa)

 

[Baggypants]

Hahaha yeah I agree. But they seem to use bombs more often in the middle east. Like in the Baghdad bombing recently. In western countries guns seem to be their weapon of choice more often.
QUESTION: Why do you guys think ISIS targets France more often than any other country? Like, there have been some attempts in Australia which has a muslim population of 2.2% but Norway has a population of muslims from 2.4% to as high as 3.7% and there isn't really anything going on there.

 

[RenegadeMx]

Hahaha yeah I agree. But they seem to use bombs more often in the middle east. Like in the Baghdad bombing recently. In western countries guns seem to be their weapon of choice more often.
QUESTION: Why do you guys think ISIS targets France more often than any other country? Like, there have been some attempts in Australia which has a muslim population of 2.2% but Norway has a population of muslims from 2.4% to as high as 3.7% and there isn't really anything going on there.

The short answer is that France fights jihadists worldwide; has one of the largest Muslim populations in Europe – and arguably the most divided society. It also has a steady stream of guns pouring in from across continental Europe's porous borders. 70% of prison inmates are also Muslim and hence more likely to be radicalized.

Furthermore France is much more proactive in intervening in ex-colonies such as Mali which would build a certain level of resentment against France in Islamists groups. And it's a lot easier for these groups to target France than say America, or even the UK, as you can smuggle guns from East Europe/Balkans.

 

[durrrrr]

You can't really compare France with the US. In France, the more deadly shootings are being done by an actual organisation (ISIS), whereas in America they're all done by individual people who are actually a part of America. Now look at Australia, the amount of mass shootings here is almost none. I was also pointing out that Muslims aren't actually part of the majority of the shootings in America.

1. Mass shootings have never been common in Australia.
2. Muslims make up a tiny minority of Americans.
3. The shootings in France being done by muslims, further demonstrating the harm that muslims do to western society. If there were no muslims in France, shootings would be almost non-existent.

 

[Baggypants]

1. Precisely. That's because of Australia's gun laws.
2. Even after 9/11 most shootings aren't being done by muslims. It just so happens that every time it is a muslim, the media tends to make it big. In comparison, recently 3 white men stabbed a muslim to death and it went by unnoticed. The media is partly to blame for this bias.

3. As Renegade said previously, the attack in France seems not to be because Muslims want to destroy Western Civilisations, but because some muslims would have some resentment over Frances involvement with the bombings around Syria and such. Russia was at an 11.7% muslim population in 2010 so the number is probably greater now, and the number of terror attacks is much lower than France. Bulgaria has atleast 7.8% muslim population, some say 12%, and you don't see anything doing on there.
Hence, Pauline Hansons argument about how the number of muslims is proportional to the number of terror attacks is BS. And as I said previously, although in France the attacks are being done by Muslims mostly, it isn't becuase of religion but rather due to France's political involvement around the middle east. That explains why some of the attackers shouted "this is for Syria" before doing what they did.

 

[durrrrr]

1. Precisely. That's because of Australia's gun laws.

No. Even prior to Australia's strict gun control.

2. Even after 9/11 most shootings aren't being done by muslims. It just so happens that every time it is a muslim, the media tends to make it big. In comparison, recently 3 white men stabbed a muslim to death and it went by unnoticed. The media is partly to blame for this bias.

Again, muslims make a tiny percent of the american population and so are vastly overrepresented in terrorism.

3. As Renegade said previously, the attack in France seems not to be because Muslims want to destroy Western Civilisations, but because some muslims would have some resentment over Frances involvement with the bombings around Syria and such.

So fucking what? That makes it alright it to kill civillians? Why the fuck would french people want muslims in their country if they're full of murderous resentment.

although in France the attacks are being done by Muslims mostly, it isn't becuase of religion but rather due to France's political involvement around the middle east. That explains why some of the attackers shouted "this is for Syria" before doing what they did.

Even if this were true, SO FUCKING WHAT?

It's just proof that muslims don't belong in the west.

 

[RenegadeMx]

1. Precisely. That's because of Australia's gun laws.
2. Even after 9/11 most shootings aren't being done by muslims. It just so happens that every time it is a muslim, the media tends to make it big. In comparison, recently 3 white men stabbed a muslim to death and it went by unnoticed. The media is partly to blame for this bias.

3. As Renegade said previously, the attack in France seems not to be because Muslims want to destroy Western Civilisations, but because some muslims would have some resentment over Frances involvement with the bombings around Syria and such. Russia was at an 11.7% muslim population in 2010 so the number is probably greater now, and the number of terror attacks is much lower than France. Bulgaria has atleast 7.8% muslim population, some say 12%,and you don't see anything doing on there.
Hence, Pauline Hansons argument about how the number of muslims is proportional to the number of terror attacks is BS. And as I said previously, although in France the attacks are being done by Muslims mostly, it isn't becuase of religion but rather due to France's political involvement around the middle east. That explains why some of the attackers shouted "this is for Syria" before doing what they did.

because this is what happened when muslims started terrorists attacks in Russia, we bombed those fuckers into oblivion

you can see more with a simple google search of grozny

 

[Baggypants]

Prior to Australia's Strict gun control, Australia was fine? Lol you high?
Port Arthur? Campsie Murder by Daoud? Milperra Massacre? Hillcrest Murder? Oenpelli shooting? Surry hill shooting? Hoodle street massacre? I could go on if you desire.
Btw you dumbass I never said It was ok for the terrorists to kill all those people in France, but since it's more politically motivated than religious, it's really stupid to generalise and just say muslims don't belong in the west, since there would probably be Christian Syrians holding the same emotions. Keep in mind that over a third of the victims in Nice were muslim. And you do realise a lot of the muslims in france and russia aren't immigrants right? A lot are pure French/Russian, so what would you propose then?

 

[durrrrr]

Prior to Australia's Strict gun control, Australia was fine? Lol you high?
Port Arthur? Campsie Murder by Daoud? Milperra Massacre? Hillcrest Murder? Oenpelli shooting? Surry hill shooting? Hoodle street massacre? I could go on if you desire.

I said that even prior to gun control, mass shootings have never been common i.e. comparable to America. I am right, the examples you provided notwithstanding. The reality is that gun control did nothing to reduce gun violence in australia.

Btw you dumbass I never said It was ok for the terrorists to kill all those people in France, but since it's more politically motivated than religious, it's really stupid to generalise and just say muslims don't belong in the west

terrorism has occurred all across the west

furthermore, the fact that being politically upset leads to violence in muslims is the problem to begin with

christians face actual oppression in muslim countries and yet we don't see middle eastern christian terrorists. If we have to avoid upsetting muslims for them not to become terrorists, then that it proof they're incompatible with our society.

There are also a million other reasons why muslims don't belong aside from terrorism, such as their extremely high rate of violent crime/and sexual assault in western countries.

Or are you going to tell me that they were justified raping women because denmark did something to offend them?

since there would probably be Christian Syrians holding the same emotions.

Number of christian syrian terrorists = 0

The emotion isn't hte problem, its the part where muslims are poor at controlling their emotions.

Keep in mind that over a third of the victims in Nice were muslim.

I don't even know if this is true, but even if it is: So fucking what? What the FUCK does that have to do with anything? You think the terrorist knew that? of course not. Here's a bunch of civillians who are nearly all non-muslim and I'm going to kill them. That was his entire thought process. I'm sure if he could have avoided killing muslims he would have.

What a stupid fucking argument, holy shit.

And you do realise a lot of the muslims in france and russia aren't immigrants right? A lot are pure French/Russian, so what would you propose then?

hahaha no. The VAST majority of muslims in france are not ethnically french

And in any case, well done, another stupid fucking argument. Even if there a large number of french muslims...that says nothing about whether not islamic immigration needs to be reduced.

 

[Baggypants]

Every shooting i listed was done before the gun ban. Do you know of any mass shootings after that? No? Then in Australias case, gun control did a shit load to decrease the number of dead.
Your whole argument is based upon the idea that all muslims are the same. You seriously that narrowminded? Met any muslims?
I never said there are Christian Syrian terrorists but they've been interviewed on Al Jazeera and they are pretty damn upset with the western countries. Btw, that graph you posted, the countries are listed in particular order so as to make it seem like muslims are at fault. Otherwise India and America would have pretty high numbers aswell.