Censorship?

[sr71plt]

So the 64 year old Imam with a doctorate in Islamic studies, who taught the Islamic portion of my World religions class in college had no idea what the history of Islam was. OKAY. I guess all of you know Islam better then a man with a Doctorate in Islamic studies who is a life long Muslim and grew up under Sharia Law. Seems Legit.

As for moving a convo, I am not a mod, I can't move the thread. Conversations ebb and flow and rarely stay on one topic. Don't like that too bad. Don't like my Sig ignore me.

Maybe if there weren't so many assholes sending disgusting PMs to the woman on here, I wouldn't need the sig. Read the asshat thread to see what I mean. The sig has cut down on the number of idiotic PMs I get. Yet there are still morons who send me sex requests.

Most likely you didn't understand what he was saying. A religion doesn't exist until it is actually founded. Then of course it pulls up a history to give it background. But nowhere is it recorded that Hagar and Ishmael walked around saying, "We are Islamic--and radical Islamics at that--and we're gonna get you Christians" (Christianity not have been founded at that point either.)

Bringing in a purported statement by a claimed professor is pretty lame anyway. Cite something we can see if you think you still have a point.

You really should just give this up. It's not making you look too bright.

 

[sr71plt]

Beef? I don't have any beef with anyone. I put a general topic of "censorship" out for discussion. If people would rather talk about religeous views, fine. I'd rather talk about fucking Metal.

I think your answer is that you didn't (don't?) understand what censorship is. It's still not clear that you do. Tipper Gore was a private person (even when she was the vice president's wife). You can talk about her attempts to suppress this and that, but it wasn't censorship--she had no authority to impose anything on anybody. Several people have taken time and effort to try to help you with that here. Either try to be more clear what your question or the true topic is, or just go with the flow as it has progressed. You don't own a thread just because you initiated it.

We got off into religion because a single poster took us there. The rest of us are trying help to her out of her ignorance on the topic.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

And then there are the pot/shit stirrers that infest the internet like a plague of locust.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Most likely you didn't understand what he was saying. A religion doesn't exist until it is actually founded. Then of course it pulls up a history to give it background. But nowhere is it recorded that Hagar and Ishmael walked around saying, "We are Islamic--and radical Islamics at that--and we're gonna get you Christians" (Christianity not have been founded at that point either.)

Bringing in a purported statement by a claimed professor is pretty lame anyway. Cite something we can see if you think you still have a point.

You really should just give this up. It's not making you look too bright.

Catholics were not called Catholic until centuries after Jesus. Does that make St. Peter, the first Pope any less Catholic?

No there are no writings from that time, it's called oral history. If I still had my text book I would show you the information, but I sold it back when I was done with the class.

Interesting you are asking for sources in this thread, but when I use sources in another you ignore it and hurl insults.

Oh and yet another insult toward me, too. Wow. Are you going for a lit record?

How much history of Native Americans is written? None. Yet no one disputes their history.

You should stop insulting people. It's making you look immature.

 

[Kantarii]

I think your answer is that you didn't (don't?) understand what censorship is. It's still not clear that you do. Tipper Gore was a private person (even when she was the vice president's wife). You can talk about her attempts to suppress this and that, but it wasn't censorship--she had no authority to impose anything on anybody. Several people have taken time and effort to try to help you with that here. Either try to be more clear what your question or the true topic is, or just go with the flow as it has progressed. You don't own a thread just because you initiated it.

We got off into religion because a single poster took us there. The rest of us are trying help to her out of her ignorance on the topic.

It's a good fucking thing the site doesn't allow people to remove the thread once it has been posted. Because, then I would show ownership and trash the damn thing. I find it pretty disrespectful to stray off topic.

The post was a generalized topic of discussion - censorship. I never made a claim to know it all. I just let the know-it-alls step up and try to convince me otherwise. Honestly, I couldn't care less what people think or say because it will never influence me in any way.

 

[sr71plt]

It's a good fucking thing the site doesn't allow people to remove the thread once it has been posted. Because, then I would show ownership and trash the damn thing. I find it pretty disrespectful to stray off topic.

The post was a generalized topic of discussion - censorship. I never made a claim to know it all. I just let the know-it-alls step up and try to convince me otherwise. Honestly, I couldn't care less what people think or say because it will never influence me in any way.

Well, you introduced it with Tipper Gore, who doesn't figure in in any way with censorship (an attempt to suppress by a private citizen, yes, but that's not censorship), so the problem started there--with the title you gave the thread and invoking Tipper Gore right off the bat.

I'm not sure you have a handle on who's being a "know-it-all." If you're comfortable with what you know and that it's what is there to be known, there's not much reason for initiating a thread on the Internet at all. When you equate Tipper Gore's attempt to suppress music she doesn't like with censorship, you're showing that you don't know "it all" right there--as several tried to tell you. Censorship has to be backed up with the authority to suppress and it's not censorship unless the suppression is accomplished. Tipper Gore had no authority to censor and she wasn't successful in her efforts--and she's too dead now to get it done.

I don't think your expectations from the Internet are going all that well from your attitude position.

On the other issue--threads floating to other topics--you really are out of luck on that one and you're going to have to adjust to it anywhere you go on the Internet or stay mad about it (with not much of anyone giving you sympathy on that point). Sorry, that's reality. How old are you again? And how much experience do you have with Internet discussion boards?

Welcome to Literotica, though.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Catholics were not called Catholic until centuries after Jesus. Does that make St. Peter, the first Pope any less Catholic?

Depends who you ask. Catholics would certainly acknowledge St. Peter as Catholic, but you'd have trouble finding a Protestant theologian who agreed with that.

As far as I know, the usual Protestant position is that Roman Catholicism is a deviation from the original and correct Christianity as practised by St. Peter, with varying opinions on how serious that deviation is; by their interpretation Catholicism is descended from Peter's Christianity but not the same thing.

However, some of the more extreme Protestants view Catholicism as a non-Christian religion masquerading as Christianity, as part of a gigantic satanic conspiracy, and even believe that Islam was another hoax founded by the Catholics. (No, really. Google "Jack Chick tracts".)

(BTW, before anybody gets confused, you will sometimes find references to "the catholic church" in Protestant liturgy. This doesn't mean Roman Catholicism; the word "catholic" is also an adjective meaning "universal".)

The foundation of Islam is usually dated to Mohammed and the revelation of the Quran. The Quran mentions Jesus many times, in the past tense, so by that definition it's pretty clear that Christianity dates Islam.

Islam does teach that there were earlier prophets than Mohammed (yes, Ishmael is one of them). From a Muslim perspective I guess you could argue that Islam has been around since the creation of the world, with a series of revelations providing additional information on the divine plan, and Mohammed being the last of those prophets. Perhaps that's what the imam you listened to was saying.

But if you're going to backdate the beginning of "Islam" on that account, then you need to do the same for Christianity, because Christianity also teaches that there were earlier prophets than Jesus. It's still nonsensical to claim that Islam is older than Christianity.

(Atheist here, but I try to keep track of how the alternatives work.)

No there are no writings from that time, it's called oral history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021

How much history of Native Americans is written? None.

...yeah, no.

The Mayans were writing at least as early as the 3rd century BCE, and while the conquistadors destroyed much of that, quite a few examples of Mayan writing including historical material has survived. We know the names and dates of 5th-century Mayan rulers thanks to those records, and we also know the Mayan civilisation suffered a serious decline in the 9th century because that's when their dated monuments tapered off.

More recently, quite a few Native Americans have written down their history in English. Yes they have! Examples here.

OK, I'm gonna put this Dunning-Kruger poster child on ignore now. Bye!

 

[Ldy_Sea]

As far as I know, the usual Protestant position is that Roman Catholicism is a deviation from the original and correct Christianity as practised by St. Peter,

Even though there was only one Christian Church until 1500 and Martin Luther. But Cathocism was the deviation. Okay.

Islam does teach that there were earlier prophets than Mohammed (yes, Ishmael is one of them). From a Muslim perspective I guess you could argue that Islam has been around since the creation of the world, with a series of revelations providing additional information on the divine plan, and Mohammed being the last of those prophets. Perhaps that's what the imam you listened to was saying.

But if you're going to backdate the beginning of "Islam" on that account, then you need to do the same for Christianity, because Christianity also teaches that there were earlier prophets than Jesus. It's still nonsensical to claim that Islam is older than Christianity.

The difference being that Christianity recognizes those prophets and that they were Jewish.

Does Islam recognize Jewish prophets, with the exception of Jesus? No they don't they are all prophets of Islam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

Wikipedia, banned in colleges worldwide for it's notorious wrong information that anyone with a $50 smart phone can edit.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021

And this proves that...

Oh right it proves that the Koran was put in writing 1300 years ago. But does it prove how long it was passed down via oral tradition?

The oldest Christian bible the Codex Sinaiticus is abot 1600 years old. Does that mean Christianity satrted 1600 years ago?

The Mayans were writing at least as early as the 3rd century BCE, and while the conquistadors destroyed much of that, quite a few examples of Mayan writing including historical material has survived. We know the names and dates of 5th-century Mayan rulers thanks to those records, and we also know the Mayan civilisation suffered a serious decline in the 9th century because that's when their dated monuments tapered off.

So one society out of hundreds had a writing system. Do the Mayans wrote about the Mohawk, or the Cheerokee, or Seminole, or any of the other tribes that exsisted on this continent?

More recently, quite a few Native Americans have written down their history in English. Yes they have! Examples here.

So modern writings about Native Amerians are proving what about Islam?

I referenced them to show that there is unwritten history that is unknowable to modern scholars and you come back with 1 group that wrote, and that some people are writing history today.

Any serious historian uses accounts from contemporary sources (Someone that was alive at the time in question) and will ignore modern writings. If you want to know what life was like in the year 0, read Josephus, don't watch Ben Hur.

OK, I'm gonna put this Dunning-Kruger poster child on ignore now. Bye!

And ends with an insult. Bravo. Next time try to use an insult people don't have to look up. Too bad you don't know how to have polite discourse.

Oh well.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

It's a good fucking thing the site doesn't allow people to remove the thread once it has been posted. Because, then I would show ownership and trash the damn thing. I find it pretty disrespectful to stray off topic.

Welcome to Literotica. I can promise you that Lit in general and this forum in particular is not filled with people who are respecters of anyone's intentions, beliefs and dignity. Threads are routinely hijacked; it's not considered wrong to do so and you couldn't stop it even if it was. People are routinely insulted - it used to be worse, but we have a Mod now and a lot of the shit has finally been quelled - and you'll rapidly find that the Ignore feature is very, very important to Pax Romana as it exists at all here. A couple of the active members appear to be openly unbalanced.

Respect is not assumed here, and rarely does anyone earn any. If you think otherwise you'll be gone and forgotten in a matter of weeks.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Depends who you ask. Catholics would certainly acknowledge St. Peter as Catholic, but you'd have trouble finding a Protestant theologian who agreed with that...

...But if you're going to backdate the beginning of "Islam" on that account, then you need to do the same for Christianity, because Christianity also teaches that there were earlier prophets than Jesus. It's still nonsensical to claim that Islam is older than Christianity.

(Atheist here, but I try to keep track of how the alternatives work.)

Pretty darn good summary, especially for an atheist. I haven't seen that too often.

Agree about the Dunning-Kruger thing. Time to extend my ignore list.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Pretty darn good summary, especially for an atheist. I haven't seen that too often.

Catholic heritage, Protestant schooling, living with a lapsed Charismatic/former Sunday-school teacher, Muslim colleagues. I try to pay attention

(Plus it's really helpful for writing characters with different beliefs to mine, and more interesting than reading Dawkins.)

 

[Kantarii]

Welcome to Literotica. I can promise you that Lit in general and this forum in particular is not filled with people who are respecters of anyone's intentions, beliefs and dignity. Threads are routinely hijacked; it's not considered wrong to do so and you couldn't stop it even if it was. People are routinely insulted - it used to be worse, but we have a Mod now and a lot of the shit has finally been quelled - and you'll rapidly find that the Ignore feature is very, very important to Pax Romana as it exists at all here. A couple of the active members appear to be openly unbalanced.

Respect is not assumed here, and rarely does anyone earn any. If you think otherwise you'll be gone and forgotten in a matter of weeks.

I appreciate the heads up on how things work around here. I'm not a fan of putting people on ignore. People are entitled to their voice. But, when they cross my boundaries, yes, I will not hesitate to use it.