Thanks again for the good read, TKTPLZ!

I saw this and laughed. You are right on with this one Lashawn…

Kanye West is ridiculous and so lost. Especially how he talks about Jesus and how he wants to meet him. And then to dress up and pretend to be Christ?

But in his videos, he has all kinds of women, mostly black women, gyrating and grinding half naked……Which is pretty much all that rap, hip hop and suprisingly country is these days.

How does Kanye think he will meet Christ while promoting that kind of garbarge?

So messed up..

Remember how he said “George Bush doesnt care about black people!”

Well, “Kanye West doesnt care about black women!”

Without the fake/ super-offensive 3 (pedophile, pig, dog rape) that the Danish Imam added to increase the outrage.

Second, the double standard of the MSM is horrible. Rule of Law means all religions are treated the same. I didn’t like piss Christ or Virgin Mary in dung, nor Last Temptation of Christ. MSM has no problem supporting these offensive acts. Now they are “sensitive” to avoid offense.

Please consider leading a boycott of NBC and the upcoming Grace and Will pro-gay “Cruci-fixin’s”. Such a boycott should give the anti-Christians a space to call “censorship” and Christians time reply “hypocrite — you failed to print the 12 cartoons.”

Free speech means freedom to object, peacefully. Christians can, perhaps, show Muslims how to do that. If a Modern, tolerant Muslim movement can evolve, ending the terrorist violence — the Modern, tolerant Christians will be allies against the Secular Fundamentalists. Like many Muslims at UN meetings, who are pro-life.

(Why doesn’t Tom Grey in Slovakia do this, with his 4 kids and home-consulting job? It’s not in the cards. Plus, YOU are a better face! Pretty smile, a woman, black; and leading a boycott can get you interviews to laugh at the NBC / NYT hypocrisy! I will also suggest this to Michelle Malkin — did you see her fantastic video, And then they came for the Embassies ? )

Well, now that’s a real cutting-edge (heh – pun intended) image idea! There’s no risk in defaming Christ or Christians. If Kanye wants to show how “bad” he is, he should pose as mohammed.
Remember a couple of weeks ago, when I…

I am sympathetic towards Muslims who feel that any visual representation of Mohammad is considered an abomination. I also understand how offensive it can be when mainstream media marginalizes or even mocks the significance of a religious figure – …

Of course. I am not letting Islam off the hook here at all. Far from it. I think this kind of violence being perpetrated by some Muslims over these stupid cartoons published months ago is both appalling and ridiculous. And obviously, many Muslims are being manipulated for political gain by religious extremists. No matter how offensive some Muslims may have found the cratoons, we in the West cannot give in to such violence. We need to stand firm on the principles of free expression in a democratic society. If some Islamists are offended, well too bad.

And it goes without saying that the terrorist attacks you mention were reprehensible.

All I am saying is that Islam does not have a monopoly on violent extremism. Christians should not see themselves as being without blemish when it comes to violent and reprehensible acts, as their history well shows.

It is easy to condemn a particular race or religion as being “inherently” violent. But truth be told, this potential for violence is within all of us, and can be expressed in all religions or political philosophies under the proper conditions. I believe it is dangerous to see ourselves as being innately above such “uncivilized” acts. The German people in 1933 probably viewed themselves in this same virtuous light, only to find themselves shaking their heads in horror a little over a decade later, wondering how they could have let this happen (and quite a few Christian Germans were sure that God was on their side in WWII).

This is not to say that we cannot discern between right and wrong, or good and evil. We should not shy away from condemning evil acts whenever and whereever they occur. But if in so doing we confer upon ourselves an innate moral superiority, then we are headed down a dangerous path.

Please don’t forget the 3000 US civilians killed by the Islamists on 9/11. And the 220 killed in the 1998 Kenyan embassy bombing (and the 4000 wounded). Also the 241 US servicemen killed in Beirute in 1983. And the list goes on. I’m pretty sure you can find more than 4000 in a far shorter span of time than 350 years.

However, I don’t believe that the inquisition or the witch hunt is really comparable to the Islamist terrorists of today. Just because these were essentially within what was considered the Christian community. These were not instances of Christians going to Muslim countries to try to kill as many civilians as possible. If you really want to do comparisons perhaps you should look at the frictions between the Sunnis and Shia, perhaps including the incident where imam Ali got killed. Or perhaps all those Kurds who got gassed, or the Shias who filled Saddam’s graves.

At any rate I don’t really see this point in saying that Christians have done horrible stuffs in the past. While Islam is younger than Christianity the history of Arabs are just as long as any other peoples and they should be judged as anyone else is — according to the standards of this age.

And in doing so, they show why nobody should have to recognize them as legitimate. Michelle Malkin’s got a video recording of the massacre in Syria against the Danish and Norwegian embassies.

Absolutely. Humanity, not any of the major religions, is the main problem. Unfortunately, some religions are more prone to violence, just as some people are.

Well, that’s what I’m trying get clarification on in Price’s statement “More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined” – what exactly does “killed by Islamists” include? I assume that it must refer to people killed by Islamic terrorists. If it is to include criminals who also happen to be Muslim who commit murder in the course of robbing someone (ie, homicide crime stats) , well, then those stats would not really be instructive. In the US, for example, 25,000 people are killed each year due to homicide – are we then supposed to make the statement “25,000 people are killed by Christians each year” because the US is a predominantly Christian country? I am just trying to get at what was actually being included in the stat quote he listed. Hopefully Price can shed some light on that.

You go on to say:“And where does the poster even mention the witch hunts?” The quote listed by the poster made reference to the Inquisition. The poster then linked to the website where he got the quote – the document that is listed as the source of the quote on that website talks about both the Christian led witch hunts and the Inquisition. So, it was the website he told us to read that brought up the witch-hunts, not I. In any case, since the topic is the history of violence of Christians vs Muslims, the witch hunts are relevant.

When all is said and done, I believe these stats are correct:

– Number of people killed in 2003 (an above average year) by terrorists of all kinds, including Islamic: 625

- Number of people estimated by Price’s website to have been killed by the Inquisition in its 350-year history: 4,000

- Number of people estimated to have been kiled by Christian led witch hunts during the same period: 60,000

Draw your own conclusions, but I believe these stats are accurate (unless Price wants to refute the very source he himself listed).

Either way…I recommend you read about the Crusades in these articles written by a Crusade scholar, The Real History of the Crusades:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/118/52.0.html

Onward PC Soldiers:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/madden200505270751.asp

The Real Inquisition:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/madden200406181026.asp

Price -

You write, “…he returned to Mecca and slaughtered all men, women and children who did not convert to Islam. To be fair, at first Muslims were supposed to give Christians and Jews a third choice: convert, die, or pay a small tax…”

Well, that is precisely the same thing that the Christians did when they reconquered Spain at the end of the 15th century. The Spanish Church, backed up by the monarchy, proclaimed that all Muslims, Jews, or Gypsys living in Spain must either convert to Christianity, flee, or die.

In your next post, Price, you write: “I would agree with several posters that the jury is out on whether Islam properly practiced is bad. But if you look at the fundamental tenets of Communism, Socialism, and Marxism, the same is true.” So actually Price, when you really think about it, it is not any particualr religious belief or political philosophy that is inherently violent, but rather extremismist interpretations of any kind that leads to violence. Can we agree on that?

And in regards to extremism leading to violent acts, Christianity and Islam are far from being alone. For exmaple, radical extremist Hindus in India have in recent years carried out truly barbarous, mob-led atrocities against Muslims. So it seems that in all of these cases of insane brutality, the common denominator is humanity. We as a species like to attach ourselves to certain religious and political outlooks, and then perpetrate violence on those who believe otherwise. This I think is the true enemy of humankind. We must be on guard against it at all times, no matter what religion we hold sacred.