Originally posted by Cara: Isn't this circular reasoning? Not by two wrongs make right law. Tu quoque is so expedient. You atheist/nonbelievers are locked in vicious circular reasoning as well. You posit non-existence of God and then try reason to His non-existence. How risible! But your flock take the cake, you know why? You commit circular reasoning twice. First time you're theist and when you become atheist. That's circular reasoning to the power of two. One time is bad enough but you're two time in the deficit. Therefore, theist win this game by score of 2-1. Atheists lose!!! If you got the gumption lets hear your rational defense of atheism. My contention? Atheism is not rationally tenable. The floor is yours. Personalizing to that extent is distasteful, Socod_badne. I refuse to accept a good word from someone who has no morals. Cambaro, Sorry dear but I don't argue with women. You guessed it right, they got no morals. You wanna know why?

There's no such thing as Our Nation. If things pan out as planned, I will carve out my own little enclave where midget throwing will be legal as sport and trampoline our Olympic niche sport.

There are only two political currencies in Somalia: Islam and Clanism. Somalis don't know any better than these two. Support or opposition to the UIC depends which side one comes down on.

^Source please. I'm disinclined to believe it at face value. So out of character for the venerable one JT.

Africa is indeed rising. You'd need lots of rising to make lots of puns in the oven wouldn't you? Yes siree!

Originally posted by Cambarro: Quite alot of athieists and 'free thinkers' in general appear to be enamoured about their particular belief i.e the fruits of natural science based on 'facts through sound reason'. This isnt really objective. What's not objective about Gravity, Thermodynamics, Doppler Effect, Quantum mechanics, bernoulli principle etc? Some of them seem to think they do not have 'a belief' because it is a absence of belief in a God. Obviously the fact that it is a belief seems to escape them. In science, belief is equated with accepting a claim as valid without any evidence. If you know anything about science, you'll know that's akin to heresy as it completely abondons science altogether. They imagine that their views are based on 'facts' which can be established by evidence and proof, they hardly ever question their own methodologies if they do, only superficially. There's nothing rational about atheism in the sense they're beliefs can be demonstrated to be true. How do you falsify the atheist claim that there's no God? Likewise, how do you falsify theist claim that there is God? You can't based on logic and evidence. Evidence is emphasised strongly but we first have to establish that their way of finding and defining evidence (methodology), Let's not split hairs, ok? Evidence is demonstrable fact. For example, a leaf is evidence for existence of plants. is actually free from any beliefs and assumptions and is totally 'objective', however we find that their whole methodology is subjective YOu're harping on this silly canard that we can't differentiate objective and subjective methods. I say we can. Nary a soul on earth would render the mathematical notation 2+2 = 4 subjective. Because it can be demonstrated in the real world to be true, two apples plus two apples leaves you with in possession of 4 apples. The rule of thumb is demonstrability. If you can demonstrate something then that thing is TRUE and the methods used is OBJECTIVE. Science is a double edged sword it reveals just as much as it hides.. Hides? Now the wheels have completely come off! What's the matter? You sound like little petulent girl stomping her feet on the ground, pouting about Mommy not painting her room according to her favourite color. Science has a role and religion has a role, both can co-exists if they remain within their bounderies and people know the limitations. I have never seen science investigate, study or even deign attention to religion. But religionists are always on science's case. Why is that?

Originally posted by General Duke: Socod Badane, I oppose the clan courts because they represent clan agenda cloaked in islamic garb. You mean to tell me if they had the agenda of your clan you'll still oppose them?

Originally posted by Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar: Perhaps that where the confusion stems from -- their idea of the whole universe coming out of no where, out of the blank, gastic smoke in this case. And what's your problem with this? We observe particles appearing and disappearing all the time from and to nowhere in empty space.

THe UIC are posturing and blustering, nothing to fret about.

Originally posted by General Duke: ...again turned the whole thing into clan, THey may very well have done that but how are you and the other anti-UIC gang any different? Afterall, you all oppose the UIC for no reason other than the sheer fealty you feel for your respective clans. were is the Islamic struggle in all of this? Why would you expect Islamic struggle from non-Islamic people? I don't get it.

Originally posted by Didi Kong: An intellectual revolutionist/activist type so suffice it to say that he writes from that angle. He writes brain farts. What practical solutions have fiction work ever provided to humanity?

^^Oh Lord! Get a grip! If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins? He comes off a little militant which I think costs him some followers. The Ancestor's Tale and The Selfish Gene by him are masterpieces.

Originally posted by Khalaf: The person who is always against Islam and its traditions. What is that even mean? Yes women are more liberted and i repeat liberted i know that is a shock to u OMG :eek: say what.... in Muslim lands then in the west. And HOW do we determine that? How does one falsify your contention? "Liberated" is an idea, not a tangible. It's like passing aesthetic judgement on Monet's paintings over Picasso's. WHo decides? You? Some other art critic/admirer? Saying women are more liberated in muslim countries is meangingless uttering. Exercise in futility with no redeeming epistemic payoff. Show us how the west is morally superior to the Muslims. I don't think the West is morally superior for morality is not something we can weight and get decisive answer. More importantly, morality is relative. Who decides which morals are superior and which aren't? One can only pass proximate valued judgement based on many things (familiarit for example or reason or results etc). Someone else will disagree for equally good reasons. You know why? Moral superiority is an illusion, it doesn't exist in the real world. It's a question, by the way, that has been raging for more than 2000 years with no sight of denouement. So really, why bother?

Khalaf, Do us all a favour by dropping the pretense. You aint fooling nobody with this facade of objectivity. Like any evidence will really dissuade you from your absurd belief that women are treated better in muslim societies for no reason other than that that society is Islamic.

Originally posted by SeeKer: This is a debate that will forever be heated and polarized. Today I propose to add another dimension into this debate. Debate? Like argue a point? Hmm, I don't think so! Sorry walaashiis, I don't argue with women. It's because they don't got any moral sense unlike their male counterparts.

^Nothing missed, just blithely ignored. ICU this, ICU that... give it a break folks! You live in peaceful West but hanker for blood and enmity. If you guys care so much, why don't you pack up your bags and head there. Because talk is cheap. And detrimental to our people as you bunch are propagating and sowing further division by chearing one side against another.

Originally posted by Caamir: a working model to replicate. A very bad idea.

Do "Islamic militias" commit war crimes? No, they only do charitable work. Didn't you get the memo?

LayziGirl, Forget about Jaylaani. He got chip on his shoulder for understandable reasons. I called him Trabilist to which he took an exception to. Ever since, he's had an axe-to-grind. As far as I'm concerned he's wind under my wings. You should consider rendering him the same status too. For verily it is true I'm right on this one because I say so. You, on the other hand, are going on a tangent with all the pap you squiggled down. Your threats of gruesome violence, aggressive overtures are grounds for harassment charges. I have you know this too, I'm a good boy from a good family. Me want no trouble. You're backing me into a cul-de-sac and you know what happens someone is painted into a corner, don't you? Look how innocent my conduct was. You asked for someone to verify that Dude's Somaliness. Knowing him from HS, I stepped forward being the good helpful person I am. I unwarily fell for your ensnare. You used my reply as pretext to go on a smear compaign. I'm disappointed in you. Very disappointed.

Originally posted by LayZieGirl: Okay, someone is off his medicine... Okay, someone is projecting their own reality onto others... You ran out of things to say, so you started to come to this part of the forum just to answer me back... Actually, I'm regular contributor to this section. That aside, you asked if someone who knew him can confirm his somaliness. Since we went to the same HS, I thought I should disconfirm your doubts. Explain to me how I am the hater, when all I said was he didn't look somali? There's nothing to explain. I'm the arbitrary judge and I say you're guilty of playa hatin. Deal with it. Your disability is is spreading....and ""lol@I work out with him at the gym..."" I didn't actually say that but what the heck. I workout with him too. What you gonna do about it? More talking out of your hat? Didn't your doctor tell you not to make up anymore "make believe friends" in your head? In fact, no. My doctor highly advised me to have as many friends as possible. It's very therapeutic. You should give it a try, it'll wash off the constant bitter taste in your mouth.

Originally posted by SeeKer: Noticed how many horror movies people watch, what about the hunters and shooting animals for pleasure. Yeah, my favourite genre is Snuff films. All the grisly scenes give me quick blood rush.

Originally posted by Khalaf: but about the more important questions I raised mainly: who is morally superior the West or Islamic Ummah? Define morals first.

Originally posted by Femme: Tell me your problem, why your all pathetically silent, and I will try to diagnose you with the help of my ever trusty 'abnormal psychology' texbook. Oh Femme, you're a Godsend! Really showed up in the nick of time because the documentary The Bridge has been giving me few sanguinary ideas as possible remedies. Anyways, what's my problem you ask? One word. Bashfulness. Very intractable one may I add as well. So, how can you help me?

This parochial approach towards the Imam's remarks is blindsiding some of you from seeing the sagacious Imaams point. How many of you know men are statistically more likely to get raped in Scandanavian nations? Courtesy of unbridled femnisim foisted on the masses by draconian and quite frankly skewed laws. No, I'm not refering tossing salad epidemic but women gang raping men. Kidnapping helpless men to rape them. Do you know how these women lure the unwary, to-be-raped men? They strip naked or dress skimpily. In this context, the Imam is spot on. Women who bare skin do so with the intent to raping these helpless men. But because we're soooo politically correct nowadays we can't even talk about the subject of male rapes for fear of offending some group.