The Instigator
Solarman1969
Pro (for)
Losing
33 Points
The Contender
Muhafidh
Con (against)
Winning
100 Points

Muhammed was a totally EVIL person, abnd thats why the terrorists are so whacked

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/7/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,823 times Debate No: 1519
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (62)
Votes (40)

 

Solarman1969

Pro

I know you are a mature muslim and dont want to do harm to anyone

I know also that YOU dont worship muhammed as you savior

Nonetheless, most muslims around the world DO, and that is where they go wrong

I want to debate, in detail, Muhammeds LIFE and legacy, and how it is causing the terror that we see today

If you want to decline, I understand and will be respectful

SOLARMAN
Muhafidh

Con

Ground Rule #1. No plagiarism.
Ground Rule #2. Use the Qur'�n to prove your points.
Ground Rule #3. Use a real translation of the Qur'�n, and identify it.

PM = "The Message: A Modern Literal Translation of the Quran," by ProgressiveMuslims.org

YOUR PROPOSITIONS:

Proposition #1. Espousing Violence. You wrote: "[Y]ou [...] dont want to do harm to anyone [but] most muslims around the world DO." There are 1.84 billion Muslims in the world. How have you survived this long? Witness:

Qur'�n 17:33 [PM]. "And do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice [...]"

Proposition #2. Worshipping Muhammad. You wrote: "YOU dont worship muhammed [but] most muslims around the world DO." Muslims do not worship prophets:

Qur'�n 3:79 [PM]. "It is not for a human that God would give him the Scripture and the authority and the prophethood, then he would say to the people: Be servants to me rather than God! rather: Be devotees for what you have been taught of the Scripture, and for what you studied."

Proposition #3. Muhammad as Savior. You wrote: "YOU dont [treat] muhammed as you savior [but] most muslims around the world DO." The word "Savior," in Arabic, does not occur in the Qur'�n. Only God forgives sins:

Qur'�n 39:53 [PM]. "[...] For God forgives all sins. He is the Forgiver, the Merciful."

Proposition #4. Causes of terrorism. You wrote: "Muhammeds LIFE and legacy [are] causing the terror that we see today." Isl�mofascist terrorism only dates back a few decades and is not consistent with God's commands:

Qur'�n 2:190 [PM]. "And fight them so there is no more persecution, and so that the system is God's. If they cease, then there will be no aggression except against the wicked."

MY CHALLENGE:

1. Show that there has never been Christian terrorism.
2. Show that Isl�mofascist terrorism would have occurred even without colonialism.
3. Show that Muslim violence throughout history has killed more people than Christian violence.

Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
Solarman1969

Pro

You dont get to set the rules here

I will use any sources I want

This is how muslim terror gets to go on- you avoid the cold, hard facts about your religion and attempt to change the subject, cherry pick verses, and then try and defame me and try to discredit me rather than take on the real arguments

This debate is about Muhammed and his life- nothing else

it is not about

MY CHALLENGE:

1. Show that there has never been Christian terrorism.
2. Show that Isl�mofascist terrorism would have occurred even without colonialism.
3. Show that Muslim violence throughout history has killed more people than Christian violence.

These are separate debate topics.

Now onto my opening arguments, and I will source things , call it plagarism if you like and act like that makes it less valid, I dont care

This is from www.prophetofdoom.net

The five oldest and most trusted Islamic sources don't portray Muhammad as a great and godly man. They reveal that he was a thief, a liar, an assassin, a pedophile, a womanizer, a rapist, a mass murderer, a pirate, a warmonger, and a scheming and ruthless politician. It's hardly the character profile of a religious leader.

The Qur'an's most repetitive theme - one detailed no less than one-thousand times - is a derivative of this rejection. Allah threatens all who deny Muhammad and Islam: Qur'an 85:10 "Those who try or tempt the believers will have the penalty of Hell. They will have the doom of the burning fire. Verily, the Seizure of the Lord is severe and painful.... Allah will encompass them from behind! He will punish them. Nay! This is a Glorious Qur'an." Qur'an 13:32 "Many an Apostle have they mocked before you; but I seized them. How awful was My punishment then! ...The unbelievers plot, but for them is torment in this life and a far more severe torture in Hell." Qur'an 2:23 "If you are in doubt of what We have revealed to Our Messenger, then bring a surah like this, and call any witnesses apart from Allah. But you cannot, as indeed you cannot guard yourselves against the Hell Fire whose fuel is men and rocks, which has been prepared for the infidels."

If the endless rant and demented threats were all that there was to the Qur'an, you could safely put down this book and ignore Allah's foolishness. But I'm afraid I have some very bad news. The Qur'an's last twenty-four surahs chronologically, those revealed in Medina, are a call to arms. They are merciless. In them Allah says things like: Qur'an 9:88 "The Messenger and those who believe with him, strive hard and fight with their wealth and lives in Allah's Cause." Qur'an 9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." Qur'an 9:112 "The Believers fight in Allah's Cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed." Qur'an 9:29 "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission." As horrible as that sounds, it gets worse. Allah claims personal responsibility for terrorism, mass murder, enslaving women and children, deception, and thievery.

Islam started when Muhammad, a seventh century Arab, purported to be the Messenger of God. That much we know for sure. The Qur'an, he claimed, was a series of revelations he received directly from a nameless Lord.

The inspirational experience was described by Muhammad to be like a bell, clanging in his head, causing him to shake and sweat profusely. These rather nasty experiences continued, he said, until he was able to decipher the message. Thus the Qur'an, Muslims believe, is God's revelation to man through his final and most important prophet.

Yet only Muhammad heard these "revelations." He offered no evidence of his divine inspiration - we take the Qur'an solely on his word.

The only rational conclusion that can be drawn from the original source material. According to the Qur'an and Sunnah Muhammad founded Islam to rule over Arabs, Persians, and Byzantines, and through conquest, to steal their treasures.

Following his first Qur'anic revelation, Muhammad claimed to have been demon possessed. By his own admission, he tried to commit suicide. Those who knew him best, his family and neighbors, said that he had gone mad. "He is a demon-possessed sorcerer fabricating scripture," they said, accusing him of plagiarism and of having purely selfish motives. They mocked his prophetic claims, ridiculed his Qur'an, and said that his preposterous notion of turning many pagan idols into the one God was insane. As a result of this verbal abuse, all chronicled in the Qur'an, Muhammad pledged to slaughter his kin.

With the Quraysh Bargain, the Meccans proved that Muhammad had established Islam to garner what he craved: power, sex, and money. The Satanic Verses, which followed, demonstrated that he was inspired by Lucifer, the Biblical Satan. Muhammad's hallucinogenic Night's Journey to the nonexistent Temple in Jerusalem, confirmed that he could not be trusted. This flight of fancy was followed by the Pledge of Aqaba, where Islam turned political and declared war on all mankind.

Having destroyed the "religion" of Islam in Mecca, Muhammad created the political doctrine of "submission" in Medina. He became a pirate, dictator, and terrorist leader. He used Qur'anic scripture to justify some of the most horrific behavior imaginable: pedophilia, incest, rape, torture, assassinations, thievery, mass murder, and terror - all in an unbridled orgy of sex, power, and money. Again, this summation simply reflects the portrayal documented in the Islamic Sunnah and confirmed in the Qur'an.

When he was fifty, Muhammad married a six-year-old child. Then he stole his son's wife. After forcing young girls to watch his men execute their fathers, Muhammad raped them. He tortured his victims to make sure no booty escaped his grasp. He committed mass murder, slaughtering Jews in genocidal rage. In ten years, he ordered a score of assassinations and conducted seventy-five terrorist raids. He used the sword to force Arabs into submission and used the slave trade to finance Islam. He was more interested in collecting girls and taxes than anything else. He ruled through fear. And his god condoned it all.

Now lets look at the BEHAVIOR of modern day muslims, and the REASONS why they behave so.

You seem to blame US for their behavior- I blame Muhammed.

You say

"Isl�mofascist terrorism only dates back a few decades and is not consistent with God's commands:"

Fine, but what is their STATED REASON for the violence?

Muhammed, and Islam, as THEY INTERPRET IT.

and Islamic terror has been around from DAY ONE.

you say

" Isl�mofascist terrorism would not have occurred even without colonialism."

So how are WE (the USA) colonialists, as you say?

And why did they bomb Indonesia - are they colonialists?

And what of the violence in Pakistan ? Is that becuase of colonialism?

What did the terrorists say who hijacked the planes and killed 3000+ innocent people

"allah ahkbar ! " - God is Great!

They all had Qu'rans on the planes and were holding them when they died

What is commonly held myths taught to young men who would be suicide bombers?

- 72 Virgins to rape in "heaven"

Where did they get that idea? Muhammed and the Qu-ran

Qur'an 56:33 "Unending, and unforbidden, exalted beds, and maidens incomparable. We have formed them in a distinctive fashion and made them virgins, loving companions matched in age, for the sake of those of the right hand." [Another translation reads:] "On couches or thrones raised high. Verily, We have created them (maidens) incomparable: We have formed their maidens as a special creation, and made them to grow a new growth. We made them virgins - pure and undefiled, lovers, matched in age."

I rest my case
Muhafidh

Con

You wrote, "You dont get to set the rules here."

On the contrary, you had the opportunity to set all your desired "rules" in your initial volley, but you declined. Knowing your pathological habit of gross plagiarism, I felt compelled to enunciate a few ground rules up front to clarify to you that I know about you and will not tolerate it.

The first and most important rule of debate, in this forum and everywhere else, is:

DO NOT PLAGIARIZE!

I didn't even have to say that, but I did, knowing what you would do:

Your response is 76% plagiarized.

Since you do not know how to follow ethical debating practice, I'm going to reproduce your post, only with the plagiarized portions replaced by their sources. I will *only* respond to your original words. As for the rest, it will be as though you had never said anything, as far as the debate is concerned.

SOLARMAN'S ACTUAL CONTRIBUTION:
-------------------
You dont get to set the rules here
I will use any sources I want
This is how muslim terror gets to go on- you avoid the cold, hard facts about your religion and attempt to change the subject, cherry pick verses, and then try and defame me and try to discredit me rather than take on the real arguments
This debate is about Muhammed and his life- nothing else
it is not about

>>>SNIPPET FROM MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE (36 words)

These are separate debate topics.
Now onto my opening arguments, and I will source things , call it plagarism if you like and act like that makes it less valid, I dont care
This is from www.prophetofdoom.net
The

>>>PLAGIARISM (508 words) from <http://www.venusproject.com...;
>>>PLAGIARISM (35 words) from <http://prophetofdoom.net...;
>>>PLAGIARISM (351 words) from <http://www.venusproject.com...;

Now lets look at the BEHAVIOR of modern day muslims, and the REASONS why they behave so.
You seem to blame US for their behavior- I blame Muhammed.
You say

>>>SNIPPET FROM MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE (15 words)

Fine, but what is their STATED REASON for the violence?
Muhammed, and Islam, as THEY INTERPRET IT.
and Islamic terror has been around from DAY ONE.
you say

>>>SNIPPET FROM MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE (10 words)

So how are WE (the USA) colonialists, as you say?
And why did they bomb Indonesia - are they colonialists?
And what of the violence in Pakistan ? Is that becuase of colonialism?
What did the terrorists say who hijacked the planes and killed 3000+ innocent people
"allah ahkbar ! " - God is Great!
They all had Qu'rans on the planes and were holding them when they died
What is commonly held myths taught to young men who would be suicide bombers?
- 72 Virgins to rape in "heaven"
Where did they get that idea? Muhammed and the Qu-ran

PLAGIARISM (82 words) from <http://prophetofdoom.net...;

rest my case
-------------------
END SOLARMAN'S ACTUAL CONTRIBUTION

Is this debate forum just an opportunity for you to cut and paste giant chunks of Isl�mophobic text to try to salve your seething racist hatred of Arabs and Muslims? Or did you really want to share your own *thoughts*? Please bear in mind that your *thoughts* come out in your own words (in case you didn't know). If I felt it made sense to debate you using other people's words, I suppose I could just start launching Qur'�ns at you, now couldn't I?

NOTE: You've written only 273 words. I will only respond to those.

Since your last plagiarized post was a verse from the Qur'�n, what version was it? I'm sure you don't know. Let me start there.

If you can't tell me what version your Qur'�n quote is (and this is quite clear from the fact that you had to plagiarize it from prophetofdoom.net instead of going to a reliable translation from a reliable source), how do you know it is not really the product of an Isl�mophobe who has produced a distorted version of the Qur'�n on purpose, with just enough similarity to the actual Qur'�n to convince people to buy it?

Let's test that verse. Copy the first part and put it in Google. Here is the result: prophetofdoom.net. Surprise? If this were a legitimate translation, I would find a lot of alternative entries from legitimate Isl�mic sources.

Next, let's assess its accuracy. Here is the actual verse that your plagiarized source sought to cite:

Qur'�n 56:33 [PM]. "Neither ending; nor foridden."

Yes, that's the whole verse. Have you never noticed that prophetofdoom.net doesn't list verses correctly?

Now, here is the correct passage in full:

Qur'�n 56:33-38 [PM]. "Neither ending; nor forbidden. And raised furnishings. We have made for them those who are special. And made them never previously touched. Perfectly matched. For those on the right side."

The verse is part of a much longer passage, which is a metaphor for Heaven. Do you disagree with it somehow?

Next, in response to my CHALLENGES, you wrote: "These are separate debate topics."

Okay, I understand. You did not want to face my challenges, so you dismissed them all and tried to justify that dismissal by implying that you cannot see the connection. Let me apprise you of the connection, and hence your valid need to respond to them:

CHALLENGE 1. Show that there has never been Christian terrorism.

You are trying to argue that Muhammad's "life and legacy" are the cause of terrorism, correct? Muhammad produced the Qur'�n, and the Qur'�n guided the behavior of the early Muslim community. Therefore, Muhammad's "life and legacy" are the Qur'�n exemplified.

Thus, the cause of terrorism must lie within the message of the Qur'�n. Conversely, it could *not* be true that terrorism is occurring *despite* the message, correct? Well then, one leg of your syllogism will break if it turns out that there has also been Christian terrorism, assuming that we agree that Jesus (the New Testament) cannot actually be a cause of terrorism. Thus, you must show that there has never been Christian terrorism.

CHALLENGE 2. Show that Isl�mofascist terrorism would have occurred even without colonialism.

Again, you're trying to argue that terrorism is a product of true Isl�m, as codified in the Qur'�n and exemplified in the "life and legacy" of Muhammad. Exogenous forces in history are not the cause, correct? Okay then, you must show that the colonialization of the Isl�mic World did not itself spur the movements that are promoting today's terrorism. If it did, then the second leg of your syllogism will break.

CHALLENGE 3. Show that Muslim violence throughout history has killed more people than Christian violence.

This is a restatement of Challenge #1, but it removes from the argument the necessity to define "terrorism" per se before pursuing proofs of its ostensible connection to a great world religion. It would be too easy to say that when Christians kill people, it's not "terrorism," and thereby get away with a distortion of logic in order to win a debate. Certainly, if you hold to the view that the "life and legacy" of the founder of the religion are what cause violence, then Jesus' "life and legacy" must be the cause of any large-scale Christian violence that we may have witnessed. If so, then the third leg of your syllogism will break.

You wrote that the "STATED REASON" for Isl�mofascist violence is what definitively links it to the "life and legacy" of Muhammad. You added, "as THEY INTERPRET IT." If that is the case, then the "STATED REASON" for Christian violence throughout history, "as THEY INTERPRET IT," is what definitively links that violence to the "life and legacy" of Jesus.

WDJD? - He caused terrorism, based on Solarman's exquisite albeit heavily plagiarized logic. Hmm...

Thus, my CHALLENGES stand. Try to answer them this time, if you dare! All�hu Akbar!
Debate Round No. 2
Solarman1969

Pro

well once again you do NOT address the subject at hand , which specifically is the LIFE of Muhammed, and what his ACTIONS were, and why THAT LEGACY, expressed in the Qu-ran AND Haiths AND Surahs has created and is creating the suffering and death of millions and threatens the world with annhilation

I gather that you are a peaceful person and have found YOUR solace in what YOU feel is the TRUE ISLAM, which works for you - again more power to you!

That being said this issue of Islam and the current terrorism and Iran and Pakistan and the Palistinians and the Saudis and the rest and their attempt to impose Sharia and a Caliphate, by force and by law, is NOT going to go away and there are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of STRONG WILLED people like me who are NOT going to just sit idly by and buy this garbage that you and the "moderate muslims" put forth, i.e.

(1) Muslim violence and insanity is somehow OUR (the wests) fault

(2) Islam is REALLY a religion of peace, and the millions of insane murderous thugs and terrorists who call themselves muslims really are not Muslims

(3) Christianity is as much of a creator of violence and death and suffering as Islam

I will COMPLETELY SMASH these three FALSE NOTIONS, since you have already, by your nonresponse, and evasiveness , acceeded to the fact that

MUHAMMED WAS A TOTALLY EVIL AWFUL MAN who

- raided over 85 Jewish caravans, brutally torturing and murdering the men, and enslaving and repeatedly raping the women

- married a 6 year old, Ayisha, and was completely morally bankrupt from a sexual perspective, and encouraged the same depravity among his followers

- was most likely insane and irrational , as evidenced by his abeerant , unpedictable, and strange behavior

and this EVIL continues today with his faithful followers, like Osama Bin Laden

Now, I will address your attempts to OBFUSCATE THIS

(1) you simply try and defame me by calling me a "plagarist" , and refuse to address the points that I bring up becuase they are too hard for you to face

that is ridiculous- first of all I am a published technical author in many reputable journals, so I KNOW EXACLTY what published research standards are

this is a debate website with no relevance to anything-

futhermore, I CITE the reference , which is scholarly, for the material I am using , Prophetofdoom.net. Thus, even your definition of plagarism, on this silly website, with no relevance to anything , is WRONG

Craig Winn has done his homework- and everyone who tries to say his site is "right wing" or "not accurate" or whatever will have to PROVE IT or simply shut up and stop trying to lie to protect EVIL AND TERROR

(2) You, like the liberals and democrats, try and equate somehow ISLAM and CHRISTIANITY

this is RIDICULOUS- I have already had one and will likely have many more to point out the silliness of this argument

But since, again, you have ceded this debate on the subject (muhammed being evil) I will respond to this NON-GERMANE point

Jesus was a totally peaceful man and a model spiritual person, very similar to the Buddha, Zoroaster, and many buddhist and Hindu saints that preceded and accceded him.

Muhammed, again, was a awful, evil selfish lustful TERRORIST

While you can point to ingorant people in HISTORY trying to use Christ to empower themselves, and commit violence, it is NOT from what he taught.

your pathetic attempt to tie the KKK, a racist idiotic, now non exisitent organization to real Christians is again, beyond the pale and pathetic (in the comments section)

but just for fun, please point out to ONE PERSON who has been killed by the KKK idiots in the last 30 years __________________________________

Heres the latest from your muslim friends - wheres the equivalent crimes by ANYONE ELSE ON PLANET EARTH OF ANY OTHER RELIGION OR NON RELIGION?

Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace

1/8/2008 (Dibiyada, Somalia) - Four civilians are killed during an ambush by Islamic militants.
1/7/2008 (Hawija, Iraq) - A married couple and their young son are shot to death by Islamic terrorists.
1/7/2008 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Eighteen innocents are are killed in two separate bombings, one a Fedayeen attack
1/7/2008 (Khanaqeen, Iraq) - Radical Sunnis abduct, bind and then murder five men. A carpenter is gunned down in a separate attack.
1/7/2008 (Spin Boldak, Afghanistan) - A suicide bomber on a motorcycle kills a local border guard.
1/7/2008 (Helmand, Afghanistan) - Taliban militants kill four Afghans with a roadside bombing.

Ok now that I have totally destroyed your pathetic attempt, once again,to say in effect

"Ok so some muslims are violent- there are plenty of violent christians too!"

NEXT OFF TOPIC ARGUMENT BY YOU

CHALLENGE 2. Show that Isl�mofascist terrorism would have occurred even without colonialism.

Again, you're trying to argue that terrorism is a product of true Isl�m, as codified in the Qur'�n and exemplified in the "life and legacy" of Muhammad. Exogenous forces in history are not the cause, correct? Okay then, you must show that the colonialization of the Isl�mic World did not itself spur the movements that are promoting today's terrorism. If it did, then the second leg of your syllogism will break.

Lets take this argument 1st

terrorism is a product of true Isl�m, as codified in the Qur'�n and exemplified in the "life and legacy" of Muhammad

Yes, this is a rephrasing of my more direct way of putting it in the debate title.

ALL, 100.00% , of terrorists that are muslims (which is certainly almost all terrorists- but I diverge-)

say

that

Muhammmed and Islam

are the reason for their violence and insanity

100%

they clutch the Qu'ran as they fire their automatic submachineguns into the air.

they praise Allah in their taped messages before they blow themselves up

So there is NO DOUBT that ISLAM is the reason, as taught by Muhammed.

For that reason, in my opinion, the "reformation" of Islam simply means that Islam will return to its roots, Muhmammed, and HIS karma.

This is clearly happening (the reformation) with the wahhabist and salafist fundementalist sects , which are predominating right now, who are EXTREMELY INSANELY VIOLENT and HOSTILE to the free world and "other" in THEIR TWISTED VIEW.

They are using ISLAM as the "US" and the "them" being

# 1 Jews - the most hated of all

#2 Christians - easy prey becuase they are so passive, in the model of their savior

#3 Buddhists - ditto

#4 Hindus - they can more match the Islamists blow for blow in India

#5 any "westerner" or free person who, especially if female, can choose to dress however they want, date anyone they want, go to school, get a job, have a life and so on.

I rest my case, and can provide a multitude of references on any of these groups or any of the over 100 known internationally recognized terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, the Iranian leadership revolutionary guard, etc etc - this is so basic as really not debatable at all

SECOND PART OF YOUR LAST ARGUMENT

Exogenous forces in history are not the cause, correct?

Exogenous refers to an action or object coming from outside a system.

So here I infer that you are saying, with sarcasm, that I am ingorant in somehow thinking that outside forces are not responsible for the violence and insanity and incredible confusion and contradiction within Islam

HUH? someone makes a video with a Qu'ran, yells ALLAH AKBAR! and then blows HIMSELF up, killing as many innocents as possible, muslim or not, and ___

Okay then, you must show that the colonialization of the Isl�mic World did not itself spur the movements that are promoting today's terrorism. If it did, then the second leg of your syllogism will break.

-
Muhafidh

Con

Now that you have at least tried a little harder to post an original argument (which nevertheless included 107 directly plagiarized words), let me clarify my points:

1. You wish to show that today's terrorism is a product of Muhammad's "life and legacy." To do this, you go to anti-Muslim hate-speech sites and claim that they actually recount Muhammad's life. Thus, your very argument is based on racist distortions, instead of optimally objective facts. Your argument fails because you do not even provide an objective foundation for it.

2. In order to connect Muhammad's "life and legacy" to modern terrorism, you state that the proof lies in the culprits' claim that they are following their religion. Evidently, you believe that terrorists can blow you up, but they cannot lie, let alone deceive themselves (or be deceived by their leaders). Thus, your argument fails because it takes this absurdity as an axiom.

3. If you pursue #2 above to its logical conclusion, you will inculpate Jesus in the incomparable atrocities thus far carried out among Christian nations, very often in the name of Jesus himself, which go far beyond anything that can be found among Isl�mic nations, in both ruthlessness and sheer number of deaths (see below). Yet you discount those events as a mysterious exception to your logic.

In conclusion, your syllogism fails because it: (a) is built on a foundation of anti-Isl�mic hate speech instead of legitimate sources; and (b) uses causal logic that would equally implicate Jesus.

Now, here are a few sites with a decent overview of Muhammad's life, which are *neither* Isl�mic in origin *nor* anti-Isl�mic hate-speech sites. Note especially Encyclopaedia Britannica, whose authority is uncontestable:

http://www.pbs.org... (brief overview in the form of a timeline)
http://www.religionfacts.com... (medium-length article on the life of Muhammad)
http://www.britannica.com... (Encyclopaedia Britannica's full-length article)

AFter you read these, consider objectively the history of anti-Isl�mic propaganda throughout European history and what it has left us in modern times. Also consider the fact that biographies and supposed sayings of Muhammad written centuries after he died reflect the opinions or agendas of those people who wrote them.

And now, on to your accusations:

1. You wrote that Muhammad "raided over 85 Jewish caravans." Exaggerated, of course, but it is true that Muslims in Mad�nah (not usually Muhammad specifically) "raided caravans" at a particular point in history. Your fallacy is not knowing or caring why. The highway projecting north of Makkah ran right through Mad�nah, thence northward toward Syria, westward toward an important port of call, and eastward toward Persia. The Makkans were attacking and harassing the Muslims in Mad�nah. The Muslims fought back at first by enforcing an embargo against Makkah.

2. You wrote that Muhammad "brutally tortur[ed] and murder[ed] the men." No, he didn't. Read an objective account before you say this. Yes, executions took place during the wars. No, torture did not occur. Read the Qur'�n for a clearer understanding of what the Muslims were and were not permitted to do. I trust you at least understand the concept of treason and the danger it represents in wartime, correct? Yes, it does merit the utmost penalty.

3. You wrote that Muhammad "enslav[ed] and repeatedly rap[ed] the women." Again, read the objective accounts. He did no such thing, but yes, your anti-Isl�mic hate-speech sites will try hard to claim the ultimate depravities at all cost. In fact, European sources have a long history of doing exactly this, so distortions of the life of Muhammad in European sources actually go back several centuries, which provide a lot of today's material.

4. You wrote that Muhammad "married a 6 year old, Ayisha." Yes, he did. But again, you don't understand this, do you? In many cultures, marriages were arranged. A "betrothal," often a very young age, proceeded the marriage ceremony. Later, the official ceremony took place. Among the early Arabs, however, the betrothal in these politically motivated cases was the "marriage" contract itself, and the groom was often decades older than the bride. Historians know that it was political in nature. Review European history for many examples of far younger cases!

Of your points regarding plagiarism, this one is particularly interesting:

You wrote: "I am a published technical author in many reputable journals." Wow. I'd love to run those through the plagiarism detection software! Please send me the references, so I can do so. I look forward to it! Just give me one reference, and I can take it from there! I'm serious!

Here are a few other points:

1. You wrote: "[E]veryone who tries to say [Craig Winn's] site is 'right wing' [...]." Not right-wing. It's anti-Isl�mic hate speech. Craig Winn's resorting to a curiously twisted translation of the Qur'�n to prove his points is more than enough to show that his agenda is the same as yours, albeit with a lot more originality.

2 You wrote: "You, like the liberals and democrats, try and equate somehow ISLAM and CHRISTIANITY." I'm a conservative. Here is a synpsis of atrocities committed by Christian nations, often explicitly in the name of Christianity itself: http://www.islam101.com.... How did Jesus cause this?

3. You wrote: "While you can point to ingorant people in HISTORY trying to use Christ to empower themselves, and commit violence, it is NOT from what he taught." My point indeed. Think about it.

4. You wrote: "[T]he KKK, a racist idiotic, [is] now non exisitent." Go their website: http://www.kkk.com.... One of the first things its says is "Bringing a Message of Hope and Deliverance to White Christian America! A Message of Love NOT Hate!" Remember what you said: "IN THEIR OWN WORDS"! Here are some recent deaths committed through KKK inspiration as late as 1998: http://www.dickgregory.com....

CLOSING ARGUMENT

Isl�mofascist terrorism is terrorism in the name of Isl�m. It is no more legitimately Isl�mic in origin than the genocide by Bosnian Christian Serbs of 200,000 Bosnian Muslims from 1992 to 1995, an atrocity sparked by Orthodox Christian Serbs' racially inspired claims of mistreatment by Bosnian Muslims (http://www.unitedhumanrights.org...). Both the Bosnian Christian Serbs and al-Q�'idah are examples of how terrorists will hijack religion to justify their violence. Yet the Bosnian Christian atrocity alone puts Christianofascism far ahead of Isl�mofascism among today's headlines.

Isl�mophobic websites abound these days, which spew the same kinds of hatred as that which set off the Bosnian genocide. In this respect, they are hardly different from the Ku Klux Klan's propaganda, which likewise continues to inspire violence against African Americans in the name of Christianity (reference Dick Gregory, above). These anti-Isl�mic hate-speech sites usually start by cherry-picking a few favorite verses from the Qur'�n, which they then try to explain in the worst possible way (cf. http://www.islamicresourceonline.org...). Of course, were we to do the same with the Old Testament, it would be a far easier, but no more justifiable, task.

Devout Christians and Muslims alike must be unified in their opposition to violence committed in their name. The Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God" (Matthew 5:9). The Qur'�n tells us, "Anyone who kills a person who has not committed murder, or who has not committed corruption in the land; then it is as if he has killed all the people! And whoever spares a life, then it is as if he has given life to all the people" (5:32). Conscientious people of both faiths have a lot more in common than they have that should divide them.
Debate Round No. 3
62 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by brokenboy 6 years ago
brokenboy
did you know that the Qur'an has the most scientific proof behind it than any other religon and you guys do know that the total amount of estimated people killed by the christans is as stated

firstly the holocaust was supposedly done in god's name.

http://articles.exchristian.net...

•As soon as Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire by imperial edict (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. Pagan priests were killed.

•Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.

•Examples of destroyed Temples: the Sanctuary of Aesculap in Aegaea, the Temple of Aphrodite in Golgatha, Aphaka in Lebanon, the Heliopolis.

•Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as "temple destroyer." [DA468]

•Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]

•Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]
According to Christian chroniclers he "followed meticulously all Christian teachings..."

•In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.

•In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]

•The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.

all in all christanity has still killed more people so before criticizing other religons about being evil why dont you examine your own.
Posted by Common_Sense_Please 7 years ago
Common_Sense_Please
Mohammad was a horrible person and just because he is a religious symbol that doesn't change what he was. However, Jesus wasn't as squeaky clean as you think either, but I highly doubt he was as bad as Mohammad.
Posted by Xenokinesis 8 years ago
Xenokinesis
wow, this is the most predjucied thing i've ever seen.
Posted by anwermate 9 years ago
anwermate
solarman, you misunderstand my point. Sure, i agree a hundred percent that one of the reasons for the crusades was to capture jerusalem from the muslims, but my point was that the crusades were also done to forcibly convert people of other religions to christianity, and that they were not only directed at muslims. Also note the absence of such phrases in those two sources as "muslim agression and brutality". But sure, ill concede that there was some muslim violence and conquest, but the fact is that christians have also committed some violent acts resembling terrorism.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
let me quote your 1st ref

The Crusades were a series of military conflicts of a religious character waged by much of Christian Europe against external and internal threats. Crusades were fought against Muslims

The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were originally launched in response to a call from the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia.

let me quote your second

Cause of the Crusades
The reason and cause of the crusades was a war between Christians and Moslems which centered around the city of Jerusalem and the Holy places of Palestine

Done deal

YOUR references back me up entirely, as the fact is that
the Crusades were a RESPONSE to muslim agression and brutality

pottery manufacture, vanished almost overnight in places like Britain.

The Muslim conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries, which conquered the Persian Empire, Roman Syria, Roman Egypt, Roman North Africa, Visigothic Spain and Portugal, and other parts of the Mediterranean, including Sicily and southern Italy, increased localisation by halting much of what remained of seaborne commerce.[dubious – discuss] Thus, whereas sites like Tintagel in Cornwall had managed to obtain supplies of Mediterranean luxury goods well into the 6th century, this connection was now lost

It started earlier in about 732 A.D. with the battle of Tours , by Charles Martel

The dynasty took a new direction in 732, when Charles Martel won the Battle of Tours, halting the advance of Muslim armies across the Pyrenees.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Read up, youngster

LEARN about history

theres been ALOT of it
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
cite your historical references
Posted by anwermate 9 years ago
anwermate
um, solarman, the crusades were agaisnt slavs, russian and greek orthodox christians, mongols, cathars, hussaites, and enemies of the pope in addition to muslims. And one of there purposes (although ill grant they did want to capture israel from muslims) was to convert people of other regions to christianity through brute force. Seriously, forced conversion, if not a form of terrorism, what is it?
Posted by zarul 9 years ago
zarul
A reaction 500 years later, thus, an offensive war.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
read your history, Child

the Crusades were plain and simple a reaction to ficve hundred years of muslim conquest

nice try

and you are not as smart as you think- read some history before you try to appear so
40 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by mjalal100 6 years ago
mjalal100
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by MCJazz77 6 years ago
MCJazz77
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Xenokinesis 8 years ago
Xenokinesis
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Ineffablesquirrel 8 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mrqwerty 9 years ago
mrqwerty
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Greendonut 9 years ago
Greendonut
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by miraquesuave 9 years ago
miraquesuave
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by griffinisright 9 years ago
griffinisright
Solarman1969MuhafidhTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30