<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The New &#8220;Naked&#8221; Protest?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/</link>
	<description>The two-faced and famous have something new to worry about.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:34:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pastafarian</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-48801</link>
		<dc:creator>Pastafarian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 13:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-48801</guid>
		<description>Oh really Amy? Is it wrong? And it&#039;s just like asking Glenn Beck for a balanced view on Mexicans!? Is it? Why? What does Glen Beck have against Mexicans? Do YOU know Glen Beck&#039;s view on Mexicans? Or is Glen Beck a name you hear bandied about on the intertubes so you think that he&#039;s someone you should dislike.

Do you think &quot;Arrested Development&quot; should be made into a movie too? Do you think Zach Galifinakias is the funniest comedian since the invention of comedians? Do you think Comedy Central is a great place to get news? Do you laugh at bacon jokes which seem to be all the rage? 

I love how the internet was supposed to be this great market place of ideas, and ideals, and was supposed to give people the freedom to learn, and speak, and on, and blah... and instead it&#039;s given voice to joiners, and followers, and mindless nut-bags like Amy, and 15 year old know-it-alls who idea of brilliant political discourse is to call Republicans Nazis, and think a dimwit like Sean Hannity is the pinnacle of all that is evil. Idiot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh really Amy? Is it wrong? And it&#8217;s just like asking Glenn Beck for a balanced view on Mexicans!? Is it? Why? What does Glen Beck have against Mexicans? Do YOU know Glen Beck&#8217;s view on Mexicans? Or is Glen Beck a name you hear bandied about on the intertubes so you think that he&#8217;s someone you should dislike.</p>
<p>Do you think &#8220;Arrested Development&#8221; should be made into a movie too? Do you think Zach Galifinakias is the funniest comedian since the invention of comedians? Do you think Comedy Central is a great place to get news? Do you laugh at bacon jokes which seem to be all the rage? </p>
<p>I love how the internet was supposed to be this great market place of ideas, and ideals, and was supposed to give people the freedom to learn, and speak, and on, and blah&#8230; and instead it&#8217;s given voice to joiners, and followers, and mindless nut-bags like Amy, and 15 year old know-it-alls who idea of brilliant political discourse is to call Republicans Nazis, and think a dimwit like Sean Hannity is the pinnacle of all that is evil. Idiot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amy</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-48783</link>
		<dc:creator>Amy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 01:52:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-48783</guid>
		<description>@ pastafarian, you referenced dictionary.com for the meaning, seriously? thats like asking glenn beck for a balanced view on mexicans. yes there is another meaning, or to be precise the actual meaning of Jihad is struggle as in the struggle one has with themselves to make themselves a better person. unfortnalty this has been twisted by al quaeda and now the media use it and it just sounds wierd when they say it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ pastafarian, you referenced dictionary.com for the meaning, seriously? thats like asking glenn beck for a balanced view on mexicans. yes there is another meaning, or to be precise the actual meaning of Jihad is struggle as in the struggle one has with themselves to make themselves a better person. unfortnalty this has been twisted by al quaeda and now the media use it and it just sounds wierd when they say it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bad Jacket Company. No Obama Ad For You. (It&#8217;s George Lopez on Line Three&#8230;) at Deceiver.com</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-44939</link>
		<dc:creator>Bad Jacket Company. No Obama Ad For You. (It&#8217;s George Lopez on Line Three&#8230;) at Deceiver.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-44939</guid>
		<description>[...] (See here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (See here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40847</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:16:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40847</guid>
		<description>Amy,

&quot;seriusly deceiver, thank you for lumping me in with Al Qaeda, i’m a muslim so i must be a terrorist! its amazing how you expose peoples hyprocicy yet propegate some yourself. oh and “fortunate son”, maybe you should actually find out what the word “jihad” means (hint hint, it doesnt mean “holy war” like the idiots at faux news say) before using it in a sentence.&quot;

In this particular deceiver article, Al Qaeda isn&#039;t actually mentioned nor even anything about violence in the Muslim faith nor terrorism (unless it&#039;s been changed between when it was posted and what I&#039;m seeing now) so don&#039;t blame deceiver.com for whatever those who comment on it may say. Also, Fortunate_Son never said specifically that Jihad means holy war. Rather, it was merely referenced that that&#039;s how the term is often used. And indeed, it arguably could be considered to mean a holy war, albeit in oversimplified terms and only if referring to Jihad as-sayf. True, it might not be specific as it maybe should to say Jihad when referring to Jihad as-sayf, but that doesn&#039;t make it incorrect.

Nati,

&quot;And Religion of Peace TM??? Islam is a great peaceful religion, just because some people interpret it the wrong way doesn’t mean you should brand all those who practice Islam “terrorists”

Not that I speak for the author of the post, of course, but does the TM really have to mean that the religion is the complete opposite of whatever phrase comes before the TM? Couldn&#039;t it be at all conceivably possible that the TM simply means that a lot of religions consider themselves to be religions of peace despite what individuals in the past and present may preach about their religions and is just pointing out that Islam isn&#039;t the only one yet identifies itself as the Religion of Peace? That is to say, while it may not be any more violent than other religions, is it really any more peaceful so as to deserve such a title? Maybe what you suspect is indeed what was meant, but you know what they say about people who assume since, again, &#039;terrorist&#039; was not mentioned in the post at all (at least as I see it now). Remember, the term may often be used as a pejorative now, but not so long ago the term was meant specifically to differentiate between peaceful and violent followers of Islam. The TM may just be something as simple as a general mockery of the term for that post-9/11 use just as so many poke fun at &quot;Freedom fries&quot; or the older &quot;Victory cabbage.&quot; It was, after all, only a matter of a few years before the term &quot;Religion of Peace&quot; started to shift meanings and even then, only incompletely. And so perhaps we should ask, because, perhaps it&#039;s just me, but at the moment there&#039;s too many very possible and legitimate alternatives to just dive right into the idea that it was used to associate the whole of Islam with violent behavior.

The Oversneer, would you please be so kind as to clarify the purpose behind the TM after your use of the phrase, &quot;Religion of Peace&quot;?

Fortunate_Son,

&quot;There is no religion more intolerant of homosexuality than Islam, yet the same people attacking Catholics nonstop would consider similar statements about Islam some sort of “racism.”&quot;

Zoroastrianism is more intolerant. At least of homosexuality. It may not be one of the largest religions out there (though it used to be), it&#039;s arguably the oldest still practiced religion out there with some pockets even in Canada and the US. As for its views as a religion on homosexuality? One of the four groups of people one is allowed to kill immediately without consulting a high priest is homosexuals. Two of the others are those who burn corpses and those who are caught in the act of other crimes normally punishable by death, but I can&#039;t remember the fourth.

MC Mom,

&quot;Islam also gets a free pass from the scientific community, despite the fact that much of the Creationism/anti-evolution propaganda comes out of Turkey these days.&quot;

I note that Eastern religions also get a pass on their views on how old things are, albeit for the opposite reason. Hinduism, for example, has the age of the universe marked in holy texts as more than 155 trillion years. As opposed to the scientific community&#039;s model of less than 14 billion. But I don&#039;t recall hearing anybody ever mention that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amy,</p>
<p>&#8220;seriusly deceiver, thank you for lumping me in with Al Qaeda, i’m a muslim so i must be a terrorist! its amazing how you expose peoples hyprocicy yet propegate some yourself. oh and “fortunate son”, maybe you should actually find out what the word “jihad” means (hint hint, it doesnt mean “holy war” like the idiots at faux news say) before using it in a sentence.&#8221;</p>
<p>In this particular deceiver article, Al Qaeda isn&#8217;t actually mentioned nor even anything about violence in the Muslim faith nor terrorism (unless it&#8217;s been changed between when it was posted and what I&#8217;m seeing now) so don&#8217;t blame deceiver.com for whatever those who comment on it may say. Also, Fortunate_Son never said specifically that Jihad means holy war. Rather, it was merely referenced that that&#8217;s how the term is often used. And indeed, it arguably could be considered to mean a holy war, albeit in oversimplified terms and only if referring to Jihad as-sayf. True, it might not be specific as it maybe should to say Jihad when referring to Jihad as-sayf, but that doesn&#8217;t make it incorrect.</p>
<p>Nati,</p>
<p>&#8220;And Religion of Peace TM??? Islam is a great peaceful religion, just because some people interpret it the wrong way doesn’t mean you should brand all those who practice Islam “terrorists”</p>
<p>Not that I speak for the author of the post, of course, but does the TM really have to mean that the religion is the complete opposite of whatever phrase comes before the TM? Couldn&#8217;t it be at all conceivably possible that the TM simply means that a lot of religions consider themselves to be religions of peace despite what individuals in the past and present may preach about their religions and is just pointing out that Islam isn&#8217;t the only one yet identifies itself as the Religion of Peace? That is to say, while it may not be any more violent than other religions, is it really any more peaceful so as to deserve such a title? Maybe what you suspect is indeed what was meant, but you know what they say about people who assume since, again, &#8216;terrorist&#8217; was not mentioned in the post at all (at least as I see it now). Remember, the term may often be used as a pejorative now, but not so long ago the term was meant specifically to differentiate between peaceful and violent followers of Islam. The TM may just be something as simple as a general mockery of the term for that post-9/11 use just as so many poke fun at &#8220;Freedom fries&#8221; or the older &#8220;Victory cabbage.&#8221; It was, after all, only a matter of a few years before the term &#8220;Religion of Peace&#8221; started to shift meanings and even then, only incompletely. And so perhaps we should ask, because, perhaps it&#8217;s just me, but at the moment there&#8217;s too many very possible and legitimate alternatives to just dive right into the idea that it was used to associate the whole of Islam with violent behavior.</p>
<p>The Oversneer, would you please be so kind as to clarify the purpose behind the TM after your use of the phrase, &#8220;Religion of Peace&#8221;?</p>
<p>Fortunate_Son,</p>
<p>&#8220;There is no religion more intolerant of homosexuality than Islam, yet the same people attacking Catholics nonstop would consider similar statements about Islam some sort of “racism.”&#8221;</p>
<p>Zoroastrianism is more intolerant. At least of homosexuality. It may not be one of the largest religions out there (though it used to be), it&#8217;s arguably the oldest still practiced religion out there with some pockets even in Canada and the US. As for its views as a religion on homosexuality? One of the four groups of people one is allowed to kill immediately without consulting a high priest is homosexuals. Two of the others are those who burn corpses and those who are caught in the act of other crimes normally punishable by death, but I can&#8217;t remember the fourth.</p>
<p>MC Mom,</p>
<p>&#8220;Islam also gets a free pass from the scientific community, despite the fact that much of the Creationism/anti-evolution propaganda comes out of Turkey these days.&#8221;</p>
<p>I note that Eastern religions also get a pass on their views on how old things are, albeit for the opposite reason. Hinduism, for example, has the age of the universe marked in holy texts as more than 155 trillion years. As opposed to the scientific community&#8217;s model of less than 14 billion. But I don&#8217;t recall hearing anybody ever mention that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beige</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40846</link>
		<dc:creator>Beige</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:14:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40846</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t Jews (Orthodox ones, anyway) also refuse to eat pork?  I&#039;ve got a SIL who&#039;s a Seventh-Day Adventist and won&#039;t touch pork, either.  PETA is totally ignoring THOSE market segments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t Jews (Orthodox ones, anyway) also refuse to eat pork?  I&#8217;ve got a SIL who&#8217;s a Seventh-Day Adventist and won&#8217;t touch pork, either.  PETA is totally ignoring THOSE market segments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lonna Cottrell</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40838</link>
		<dc:creator>Lonna Cottrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:08:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40838</guid>
		<description>PETA is a desperate organization that thinks if they talk enough they will somehow make their lives meaningful. Just because Muslims refuse to eat pork, doesn&#039;t mean that tomorrow they&#039;ll refuse to eat other edible animals. Was this their natural reaction to Obama&#039;s fly slaughtering? To reach out to the Muslim community? Save the mosquitoes too!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PETA is a desperate organization that thinks if they talk enough they will somehow make their lives meaningful. Just because Muslims refuse to eat pork, doesn&#8217;t mean that tomorrow they&#8217;ll refuse to eat other edible animals. Was this their natural reaction to Obama&#8217;s fly slaughtering? To reach out to the Muslim community? Save the mosquitoes too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pastafarian</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40807</link>
		<dc:creator>Pastafarian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:41:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40807</guid>
		<description>From dictionary.com

Jihad - a HOLY WAR undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims.

Is there some other meaning?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From dictionary.com</p>
<p>Jihad &#8211; a HOLY WAR undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims.</p>
<p>Is there some other meaning?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beige</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40787</link>
		<dc:creator>Beige</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:16:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40787</guid>
		<description>Considering the fact that women and the infirm are forbidden to take part in &lt;i&gt;jihad&lt;/i&gt;, it would seem that it is, in fact, a form of &quot;holy war&quot;.  Also see hadith 1:35.  And as a female, Amy, maybe you should bring a friend or sister to comment with you, as your word alone has only half the weight of a man&#039;s.  &lt;i&gt;Viz. hadith 3.826.&lt;/i&gt;  

I mean, yay for you if you&#039;re peaceful in your faith; I know plenty of Muslims are.  But try and discount the thousands or more who aren&#039;t?  Good luck with all that.  I haven&#039;t noticed the peaceful Muslims doing anything to be of much help against the ones who aren&#039;t peaceful.  It&#039;s one thing to say &quot;Hey, I&#039;m not with them&quot; and quite another to do what you can to stop the violent practitioners from besmirching your religion.  I&#039;m a pro-life Christian, an &lt;b&gt;utterly &lt;/b&gt; flawed one, but if I found out one of my friends had bombed an abortion clinic or was planning to do so, dude is going to jail if I can help it, because while we might share a loathing for abortion, murder is murder.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Considering the fact that women and the infirm are forbidden to take part in <i>jihad</i>, it would seem that it is, in fact, a form of &#8220;holy war&#8221;.  Also see hadith 1:35.  And as a female, Amy, maybe you should bring a friend or sister to comment with you, as your word alone has only half the weight of a man&#8217;s.  <i>Viz. hadith 3.826.</i>  </p>
<p>I mean, yay for you if you&#8217;re peaceful in your faith; I know plenty of Muslims are.  But try and discount the thousands or more who aren&#8217;t?  Good luck with all that.  I haven&#8217;t noticed the peaceful Muslims doing anything to be of much help against the ones who aren&#8217;t peaceful.  It&#8217;s one thing to say &#8220;Hey, I&#8217;m not with them&#8221; and quite another to do what you can to stop the violent practitioners from besmirching your religion.  I&#8217;m a pro-life Christian, an <b>utterly </b> flawed one, but if I found out one of my friends had bombed an abortion clinic or was planning to do so, dude is going to jail if I can help it, because while we might share a loathing for abortion, murder is murder.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nati</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40777</link>
		<dc:creator>Nati</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 07:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40777</guid>
		<description>&quot;Does that mean that the next round of “naked chick” protesters will have to be covered up from head to toe?&quot;

Not all Muslim women or women living in Muslim countries are &quot;covered up from head to toe&quot;. Quran doesn&#039;t require anyone to wear hijabs/chadras/abayas. Headscarves and/or dresses are required to be worn only in certain (very few) Muslim countires. For Muslim women living elsewhere wearing a headscarf or a full dress is a choice - they are not required to wear that by country&#039;s law nor does Quran require that they dress that way, some choose to wear them, but in most Muslim countries (Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Dubai, etc.) you can wear pretty much whatever you want. And Religion of Peace TM??? Islam is a great peaceful religion, just because some people interpret it the wrong way doesn&#039;t mean you should brand all those who practice Islam &quot;terrorists&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Does that mean that the next round of “naked chick” protesters will have to be covered up from head to toe?&#8221;</p>
<p>Not all Muslim women or women living in Muslim countries are &#8220;covered up from head to toe&#8221;. Quran doesn&#8217;t require anyone to wear hijabs/chadras/abayas. Headscarves and/or dresses are required to be worn only in certain (very few) Muslim countires. For Muslim women living elsewhere wearing a headscarf or a full dress is a choice &#8211; they are not required to wear that by country&#8217;s law nor does Quran require that they dress that way, some choose to wear them, but in most Muslim countries (Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Dubai, etc.) you can wear pretty much whatever you want. And Religion of Peace TM??? Islam is a great peaceful religion, just because some people interpret it the wrong way doesn&#8217;t mean you should brand all those who practice Islam &#8220;terrorists&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christopher</title>
		<link>http://deceiver.com/2009/10/21/peta_muslims/comment-page-1/#comment-40773</link>
		<dc:creator>Christopher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 04:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deceiver.com/?p=10874#comment-40773</guid>
		<description>I love the &quot;TM&quot; after &quot;Religion of Peace.&quot; Very clever.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love the &#8220;TM&#8221; after &#8220;Religion of Peace.&#8221; Very clever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
