I give up.

Would it be more productive to offer reasons why you think my original post wrong?
Once I've established what you mean by stupid then I may comment. Whether it is right or wrong is not something I have questioned. Yet.

How much longer must the fallacy be prolonged that we must respect people's religious beliefs?
I'm not sure what this sentence means.

It is not correct English but I think the meaning is clear to most intelligent people. Your post provides no evidence to reverse that view.

I must admit some Muslims and some Muslim countries are horrendously intolerant. If someone loses their faith, they are executed. If a woman is raped, she is punished. Homosexuals are imprisoned or killed. Woman wear sacks, and are not allowed to go out without a man. When someone writes a book or draws a cartoon they do not like, they murder them.

Most Muslims in this country are honest decent people, but many of the imams are uneducated intolerant extremists from overseas. Tariq Ali wrote about an imam who taught him as a child in Pakistan, and how he had no respect for this ignorant bigoted man.
 
Sponsored Links
Did anyone else not understand the original post?
JBR does not understand the sentence either.
Don't be silly, Nosey.
Please allow me to explain.

To quote:
"They converge on Mina to throw stones at pillars representing the devil."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34346449

How much longer must the fallacy be prolonged that we must respect people's religious beliefs?

It's nonsense and they are stupid.


The concept of throwing stones at stone pillars in order to cause harm or pain to a perceived devil is a ridiculous concept. I'm sure that most people of intelligence understand that throwing a stone at another piece of stone will not hurt it, simply because stone does not contain any sensory apparatus or even consciousness.

Please let me know if you don't understand that first precept.

The OP then goes on to suggest that people who believe that throwing a stone at another piece of stone will cause it hurt are stupid, and questions why we should respect such people's religion if it is based on that belief.

Please let me know if that is too difficult for you to grasp.

(Personally, I should still offer respect to such people in the same way that I would offer respect to a mentally disturbed psychiatric patient on the grounds that their predicament is beyond their control, but I wouldn't give them any credence.)
 
Did anyone else not understand the original post?
JBR does not understand the sentence either.
Don't be silly, Nosey.
Please allow me to explain.

To quote:
"They converge on Mina to throw stones at pillars representing the devil."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34346449

How much longer must the fallacy be prolonged that we must respect people's religious beliefs?

It's nonsense and they are stupid.


The concept of throwing stones at stone pillars in order to cause harm or pain to a perceived devil is a ridiculous concept. I'm sure that most people of intelligence understand that throwing a stone at another piece of stone will not hurt it, simply because stone does not contain any sensory apparatus or even consciousness.

Please let me know if you don't understand that first precept.

The OP then goes on to suggest that people who believe that throwing a stone at another piece of stone will cause it hurt are stupid, and questions why we should respect such people's religion if it is based on that belief.

Please let me know if that is too difficult for you to grasp.

(Personally, I should still offer respect to such people in the same way that I would offer respect to a mentally disturbed psychiatric patient on the grounds that their predicament is beyond their control, but I wouldn't give them any credence.)
Well dodged. Just as I thought, you don't understand that jumble of words either i.e. How much longer must the fallacy be prolonged that we must respect people's religious beliefs?

Don't be obtuse JBR it does not suit. I understood the other bits. Can you make sense of this sentence? So far not one person has explained it. Not even the OP.

I've highlighted it in bold lettering and italics if you are struggling to pick out the piece of text.
 
Sponsored Links
The OP then........questions why we should respect such people's religion if it is based on that belief.
No, he didn't.
If he had said "why must we respect other peoples beliefs" then fair enough. However what he did write was...
How much longer must the fallacy be prolonged............
Over to you JB.
 
Last edited:
The OP then........questions why we should respect such people's religion if it is based on that belief.
No, he didn't.
If he had said "why must we respect other peoples beliefs" then fair enough. However what he did write was...
How much longer must the fallacy be prolonged............
Over to you JB.

You understood the sentence. :rolleyes:

Saudi Arabia is an archaic country led by a corrupt mafia who appoint relatives to posts such as managing large events, and big surprise, people die.
 
Last edited:
Noseall is a troll with too much time on his hands. He didn't used to be. Ever since he started employing Poles he's been a troll.
 
It seems that hundreds died because a couple of roads were closed to let some VIP cars through.
 
It seems that hundreds died because a couple of roads were closed to let some VIP cars through.
But it's alright because it's a virtue to die during the pilgrimage and they'll go straight to heaven.
Now THAT'S stupid..
 
Day off today, so off on the school run.
The playground will be heaving with the little blighters, but I'm not worried; I'll pick up some bricks and stones on the way.
;)
 
Day off today, so off on the school run.
The playground will be heaving with the little blighters, but I'm not worried; I'll pick up some bricks and stones on the way.
;)
YOU do the school run, Colonel? That's what we up north call woman's work.
 
It seems that hundreds died because a couple of roads were closed to let some VIP cars through.
And there's me thinking they were all equal.
Far from it.
Having worked in a hospital in Riyadh, and encountered a number of 'VIPs', I can confirm that there is a distinct hierarchy of VIPs. If an 'ordinary VIP' attends for examination, everyone else in the waiting room is bypassed and has to wait for the VIP. However, (and it has happened in my experience) should a 'more important VIP' turn up shortly afterwards, the 'ordinary VIP' stands back until his 'superior' has been attended to. There was even an official at our hospital whose job was to determine who was the more important if more than one VIP arrived.
 
Day off today, so off on the school run.
The playground will be heaving with the little blighters, but I'm not worried; I'll pick up some bricks and stones on the way.
;)
YOU do the school run, Colonel? That's what we up north call woman's work.

Precious moments with those precious to you: they might not think much of it now, but such things all add to a decent upbringing, in a good home, with love. In my opinion only, of course.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top