TV commercials/ads and their gay innuendo nowadays

Quality, not quantity.

 

If it agrees with your point!

 

Et tu? There is nothing statistical at work here. Its a counter opinion to the one presented, hence offering some "rounded" information. Its from someone who lives the religion, not a Zionist organization designed to foster animosity in the Middle East because it's good for business (who didn't get hit up for a donation?).

Let's get back to this, shall we:
"There is NO denying that they <Muslims> have a "different" view on sex - rape of women, and children of both sexes, is looked at as pretty much acceptable." With friends like these...

 

Let’s do! Let’s talk about your bullshit statement of a few extremist clerics somehow being responsible for some 200 million women worldwide having their clitoris’s cut out so sex isn’t pleasurable for them. Let’s talk about the US service members punished for dealing with Afghan soldiers that were raping little boys. Let’s talk about the huge spike in rapes and other sexual assault that came to Europe with the flood of Muslim “refugees”. How about women being stoned to death in Saudi Arabia for being raped. How about honor killings? Hell, we can even talk about Muhammad’s marriage to a six year old girl and consummation at 9.

 

Lol. Sure, they are all "people of the book" but Jews and Christians don't go around cutting people's clits off. The proof is in the pudding. I happen to be quite fond of that piece of anatomy.

Find me a Jew with a slave and I will admit that you're right.

 

OK!
None of that supports your statement. My comment about the odd-cleric was directed at the rape assertion, not FGM, but no worries, because that is completely fucked up, and anyone supporting it reproachable. But so is allowing spousal beatings and rape, and damn near everyone society did that at one time.

There is no doubt that a viral strain of thought and behavior hangs over some muslim groups. Calling these as representative of the entire group is beyond ignorant. The arc of history, which the fight of the majority will win, will favor human rights. We have only to look in the rearview mirror. (When you have some concrete evidence that shows the majority of muslims worldwide support rape and pedophilia, maybe we can talk.)

 

Oh okay, so it's all good then.

 

Sort of like communism? They killed a lot more people than the Nazis could of ever dreamed of but it's okay, on a long enough timeline they will get it right?

 

Nah. Just a sideways way to remind you of what is frequently pointed out to me...anecdotal evidence doesn't really build a strong case for a worldwide condition for either side.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.br...on-and-rape-statistics-in-europe-opinion/amp/

 

Exactly what I’ve been saying:

Islamic doctrines and Arabic cultural mores that permit, explicitly or implicitly, the sexual assault of non-Muslim women who are not dressed properly or walk unaccompanied by a male relative, are pernicious. And Muslims rapists in Europe and Australia have cited belief and culture in their defense. But mass migration is often inherently disruptive, breaking down values and trust in stable communities.

 

Right, we limit our genital mutilation to boys.



For our women, we slut-shame them instead of killing them. I'm not sure that the effect is much different for the woman.
We sentence a woman (but not a man) and her child to a lifetime of poverty if a little natural pleasure results in an unmarried pregnancy.

But we are so much more evolved than "them"

Seems to me that its pretty much the same result via different means.

 

Whatever you're smokin', pass it this way.

 

Who hacked your account?

 

I thought circumcision was rooted in a sanitary issue. Sort of like pork (and other foods that weren't allowed), the powers that be decided that the best way to get the general public to follow along would be to make it a religious issue.

 

But we do give that woman an alternative to a life of poverty for her and the unmarried pregnancy....whether you agree with it or not. She doesn't have to condemn them both to a life of poverty.

 

You mean right now today or throughout history?

Today: https://www.timesofisrael.com/thousands-of-slaves-in-israel-global-study-finds/

Back then: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_slavery

Historically some Jewish people owned and traded slaves.[3] They were important players in the medieval slave trade in Europe up to about the 12th century.[4][obsolete source][5][6] Several scholarly works have been published to rebut the antisemitic canard of Jewish domination of the slave trade in Africa and the Americas in the later centuries,[7][8][9] and to show that Jews had no major or continuing impact on the history of New World slavery.[8][9][10][11] They possessed far fewer slaves than non-Jews in every Spanish territory in North America and the Caribbean, and in no period did they play a leading role as financiers, shipowners, or factors in the transatlantic or Caribbean slave trades.[12]

American mainland colonial Jews imported slaves from Africa at a rate proportionate to the general population. As slave sellers, their role was more marginal, although their involvement in the Brazilian and Caribbean trade is believed to be considerably more significant.[13] Jason H. Silverman, a historian of slavery, describes the part of Jews in slave trading in the southern United States as "minuscule", and writes that the historical rise and fall of slavery in the United States would not have been affected at all had there been no Jews living in the American South.[14] Jews accounted for 1.25% of all Southern slave owners, and were not significantly different from other slave owners in their treatment of slaves.