LogFAQs > #891917669

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Holy Cross to change 'Crusaders' school mascot due to fear of offending Muslims
Callixtus 12/09/17 10:34:56 PM #65:	TroutPaste posted... Callixtus posted... TroutPaste posted... Also I posted a wikipedia excerpt about the cause of the crusades and people were too busy arguing about other stuff I know wikipedia isn't canonical, but I'd like to see where these stupid views are coming from, other than a weird slanted interpretation of 2 half-related maps What do you think is slanted about my interpretation? The Roman Empire was the premier Christian state, and the Islamic invaders conquered the majority of it by the time of the First Crusade in wars of aggression. The lands lost included some of the heartlands of Christianity. Those are basic, easily verifiable facts. The Roman Empire is not a moral compass . They had no more right to that land than anyone else. Yeah they do, if you believe in any sort of territorial boundaries. They held the land for hundreds of years and so they had a right to it, just like any other state. The Islamic invaders did not have a single justification for invading those lands. Is your argument that it's perfectly fine to uproot people from their lands because the people currently living there apparently have no more right to it than anyone else? --- It will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. \| I did not come to bring peace to the earth, but the sword. -Jesus <cite>Callixtus posted [p:891917669] in Holy Cross... [t:76077219]...</cite> <quote><cite>TroutPaste posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Callixtus posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TroutPaste posted...</cite> <quote>Also I posted a wikipedia excerpt about the cause of the crusades and people were too busy arguing about other stuff I know wikipedia isn't canonical, but I'd like to see where these stupid views are coming from, other than a weird slanted interpretation of 2 half-related maps</quote> What do you think is slanted about my interpretation? The Roman Empire was the premier Christian state, and the Islamic invaders conquered the majority of it by the time of the First Crusade in wars of aggression. The lands lost included some of the heartlands of Christianity. Those are basic, easily verifiable facts.</quote> The Roman Empire is not a moral compass . They had no more right to that land than anyone else.</quote> Yeah they do, if you believe in any sort of territorial boundaries. They held the land for hundreds of years and so they had a right to it, just like any other state. The Islamic invaders did not have a single justification for invading those lands. Is your argument that it's perfectly fine to uproot people from their lands because the people currently living there apparently have no more right to it than anyone else? --- It will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. \| I did not come to bring peace to the earth, but the sword. -Jesus</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1