General

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Bert — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:13:53 GMT

Well, a notice would be nice instead of being surprised when I can't log into my own account (how do I suppose to find out without making another account to ask?). I'll just wait my 3 days of no posting.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Daniel James Sanchez — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:05:34 GMT

Clayton is right. Monk-Eye is gone too, permanently.

Bert, I quoted the post that I banned you for. Your ban is only for 3 days. The more you ban dodge, however, the longer it will be.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Clayton — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 23:49:40 GMT

BP: I've never met a racist and I'm not familiar with race politics so I really can't comment on it. What I do know is that there are individuals and organizations which would like to discredit the LvMI organization (in particular because of its associations with Ron Paul and other libertarians) and the fastest way to discredit any organization is to associate it with racism or sympathy for racism. LvMI is not concerned with the study of racism in itself. Instead, it is an organization devoted to the study of economics and sociology generally through the methods of the Austrian school of economics - Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Mises, Hayek, et. al. None of this has anything to do with Nazism, Zionism, social Darwinism or any of the other -isms concerned with race and race superiority. While enlightened discussion of race issues may be possible on these forums, I see no benefit to LvMI of permitting race-baiting like this thread from Monk-Eye, and this isn't the first such thread from him.

Clayton -

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Bert — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 23:42:32 GMT

Your comments constitute a terroristic threat and with more than seventeen thousand posts you should have been mature enough to understand the gravity of the comments.

I did not report your comments to the moderator whose response is greatly appreciated, however I am considering a report to the FBI since I do not know your affiliations.

Your comments constitute ignorance, the end.

You wouldn't have to report, it's obvious Daniel Sanchez took it upon himself to ban my account, but I still got no reason as to why my account was banned specifically.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Birthday Pony — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 23:39:11 GMT

The logical consistency of the moderation policy rears its head once again!

Actually, I'd say that Monk-Eye is probably legitimately a racist. Who else do you think their posting as, Clayton?

Anyway, it's funny that Bert is banned while Monk-Eye gets to continue posting nonesense. By legitimizing the position of moderator, they've taken it upon themselves to control the discussion here, and by banning Bert for a very obviously not serious comment, but letting Monk-Eye bleed their heart out about why they hate Muslims is just as good as condoning their racist position in my eyes.

To not act is to still make a choice. And when you're in control of the discussion, you're expected to do just that. No matter how principaled its supposed to be, they've enabled the crypto-fascist and blocked their critic.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Clayton — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 23:22:44 GMT

Would be nice if the mods locked these kinds of threads, obvious trolling by the same user posing as multiple users and trying to race-bait on the forums in the hopes they can turn up a racist, supremacist nutter and then paint the LvMI with this brush... I don't think the LvMI should tolerate such baiting tactics.

Clayton -

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Consumariat — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 19:42:14 GMT

I'm actually lost for words now.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Monk-Eye — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 17:12:39 GMT

"Ostracism"

Your comments constitute a terroristic threat and with more than seventeen thousand posts you should have been mature enough to understand the gravity of the comments.

I did not report your comments to the moderator whose response is greatly appreciated, however I am considering a report to the FBI since I do not know your affiliations.

One expects such anti-libertarian motivations from fictional ishmaelism which continues to lack any legitimate jurisprudence or respect for the autonomy of entities extrinsic to its myopic self endowed absolution.

Clearly, providing the mature criteria of genetic exclusion as a highly valid reason to walk away from a debase invitation to inanity may be too much for its egocentric fanatics.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Bert — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 16:30:43 GMT

I'm seriously getting banned for this shit? This isn't even a serious thread and I get permanently banned for that comment? Have you said anything to the guy who started this ridiculous thread? Did you take this upon your self without asking the other mods? This is a nice welcome back to someone who's looking to discuss things.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Daniel James Sanchez — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:00:04 GMT

Bert:

Someone send a suicide bomber to this guy's house.

Out you go.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

James — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 03:04:12 GMT

An animal hops between cliff ledges avoiding falls to its death.

Did the animal submit to "God" or overcome the laws of nature?

It's just an allusion to discipline. The purely selfish ego must subordinate itself to the all-knowing, all-powerful superego in order to get what it wants. Wild animals are pure ego.

Religion in general tends to concern itself with discipline and guilt quite a bit... It's not perculiar to Islam, and it's not a sinister conspiricy. It's just some evidence that people are self-conscious, unlike animals.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Monk-Eye — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 02:57:24 GMT

"Excentricities"

** Discredit by Association **

Martin Luther also seemed to believe that fighting a war in the name of christianity was contrary to its doctrine and that fighting the invading turks (more aggression laden humiliated psychopaths of fictional ishmaelism) should be fought for reasons of secular independence while christianity provided spiritual support for those suffering through the conflict.

** Lines of Rebuke **

A reference to antinomianism would include martin luther in its history, however the intent of my citation is to establish independence from the necessity of religious legalism.

It is ridiculous to assert that the qurayn was dictated by an angel, in fact such an assertion is analogous to children believing in santa claus.

Anxious over death, hysterical masses are coaxed into believing that a chance at eternal life means anything other than continuance of one's genetic idenity through procreation.

The abrahamic religions assert that by following certain patterns of behaviour one may improve their chances at biological survival.

And while the metaphors are consistent with reality, the promisory metaphor that any particular individual will wake up from a dirt nap is an illusion, an allusion, a delusion.

** Vague Associations **

My current inclination of reason may be consistent with spiritual naturalism although it is difficult to relate a concrete definition of it meaning.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

John Ess — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 01:17:02 GMT

Martin Luther also said that reason was Satan's whore. And he advocated beating children and anti-semitism.

“Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil’s appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom… Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism… She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets.”

—Martin Luther, Works, Erlangen Edition v. 16, pp. 142-148.

“Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but—more frequently than not—struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”

—Martin Luther, Table Talks in 1569.

“Heretics are not to be disputed with, but to be condemned unheard, and whilst they perish by fire, the faithful ought to pursue the evil to its source, and bathe their heads in the blood of the Catholic bishops, and of the Pope, who is the devil in disguise.”

—Martin Luther, Table Talks (as quoted in Religious History: An Inquiry by M. Searle Bates, p. 156).

And why does he hate the Catholics: "“Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason - I do not accept the authority of the Popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other

Go figure. Reason is the devil's whore, but he demands reason anyway. And then says THEY contradict themselves.

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

Monk-Eye — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 23:44:06 GMT

"Limiting The Authoritative Realms Of Political Vectors"

** Nauseated by Institutions Demanding Conformance with Religious Legalism **

If you don't like religion, fine, but there's no reason to single out Muslims for being any crazier or more dishonest than the rest of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinomianism

Antinomianism (a term coined by Martin Luther, from the Greek ἀντί, "against" + νόμος, "law"), is defined as holding that under the gospel dispensation of grace, moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation.^[1]

Although the concept is related to the foundational Protestant belief of Sola Fide where justification is through faith alone in Christ, it is taken to an extreme in antinomianism. It is seen by some as the opposite of the notion that obedience to a code of religious law earns salvation: legalism or works righteousness.

***

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah

According to religious Judaism, the 613 mitzvot or "commandments" given in the written Torah, as well as their reasonings in the oral Torah, were only issued to the Jews and are therefore binding only upon them, having inherited the obligation from their ancestors.

***

Ishmaelism, as israelism, maintains an orthodox emphasis on the written laws within its city state and that is acceptable within limits of a distinct bounded realm according to worthwhile mutual concessions from/with others for self governance and individual autonomy.

However, the limits of a distinct bounded realm according to worthwhile mutual concessions from/with others for self governance and individual autonomy does not exist within fictional ishmaelism by doctrine as it specificaly premises it sovereign totality over all realms outside of hejaz, as if it were ishmaelism within hejaz itself.

Thus, there is a clear provocation to reject and dismiss fictional ishmaelism.

** Submission Is Dimunitive, Derogatory, Demeaning - Orwellian Double Speak Catering to Authoritarian Despots**

Every religion demands that you submit to God/whatever it is they believe in. That's the whole point of having a religion.

An animal hops between cliff ledges avoiding falls to its death.

Did the animal submit to "God" or overcome the laws of nature?

Re: Fictional Ishmaelism - A Film For All School Children

John Ess — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 23:05:24 GMT

I think there should be legit debate about religions, but as someone who has studied Arabic the claim about Islam meaning submission is not true. It doesn't currently have any other meaning in Arabic except the religion.

Is-ta-sa-lam استسلام is the arabic word for surrender or submission to someone or some thing. And sa-la-m سلام means peace. They both have the same root, but are not really related except tangentially.

They are related by root, but that doesn't mean anything really. This tri-consonantal root existed within Hebrew and Aramaic as well. Shalom in Hebrew. And Salam in Aramaic.

Slave is usually 'abd in the religious sense or some other; which is another tri-consonantal root. عبد in Arabic and עבד in Hebrew.

One interesting hypothesis that I've seen is that the Quran is entirely written in Aramaic. This accounts for words which have no equivalent or which cannot be translated. Which I think is the case with Islam itself. In this view, the whole book is a work of Christian missionaries. And most of the meaning changes toward an actually better book. I don't know if it is any good. I don't have any but passing interest in religions, and focus only on languages. But it would be funny if it was true. And may very well be true.