Black Transgender Not Allowed to Claim Self-Defense ...

Quote:

---

Trish X

---

Yes mildcigar goebbels (you DO help spread progaganda that inspires nitwits to kill people based on their race and culture).

Quote:

---

Where do you think you would be safer walking down the street, in the heart of nice Republican Orange County or in the deep blue heart of South Central LA? ... I'm assuming that you would leave your hoodie at home if you visit Orange County).

---

Trayvon was SHOT TO DEATH IN A GATED COMMUNITY. Even you admit that in order to feel safe from a threat of death in Orange County I have to dress appropriately. So no, I don't feel safer within any republican stronghold. Hell, how could I when they want to rape women with transvaginal ultrasound probes!!

On your second point, "self-obvious" is not a word. I assume you meant "self-evident." It's an old concept that goes at least as far back as axiomatic geometry of the ancient Greeks. They thought the axioms and postulates of Euclidean geometry were self-evident. They were wrong. Mathematicians no longer recognize "self-evidence" as a path to truth or an allowable form of argumentation. As to the spreading lies that have already been exposed and debunked...that's also frowned upon by those who value truth and reasoned argument. You're a BIG FUCKING FAIL! Oh, and "skinnedness"...it's not a word. Sheesh...what a low-brow!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seanchai

Final warning on this sort of shit.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Yes mildcigar goebbels (you DO help spread progaganda that inspires nitwits to kill people based on their race and culture).

Trayvon was SHOT TO DEATH IN A GATED COMMUNITY. Even you admit that in order to feel safe from a threat of death in Orange County I have to dress appropriately. So no, I don't feel safer within any republican stronghold. Hell, how could I when they want to rape women with transvaginal ultrasound probes!!

On your second point, "self-obvious" is not a word. I assume you meant "self-evident." It's an old concept that goes at least as far back as axiomatic geometry of the ancient Greeks. They thought the axioms and postulates of Euclidean geometry were self-evident. They were wrong. Mathematicians no longer recognize "self-evidence" as a path to truth or an allowable form of argumentation. As to the spreading lies that have already been exposed and debunked...that's also frowned upon by those who value truth and reasoned argument. You're a BIG FUCKING FAIL! Oh, and "skinnedness"...it's not a word. Sheesh...what a low-brow!!

---

My lowbrow gramatics aside, I notice you failed to comment and/or defend the proposed legislation. It seems like there is a big problem with their culture when they propose legislation endorsing necrophlia.

Usually when my opponent in an argument starts becoming hysterical, I can tell I'm winning the argument.
"they want to rape women with transvaginal ultrasound probes!!" WTF???

I think since you don't have a vagina that you would be safe.

It is interesting that you quote the ancient greeks, but try to win you arguments with emotion and name calling rather than logic. If someone gets the better of me in a discussion I'll admit it; I won't resort to childish, emotional name calling.

Mild Cigar - nothing in Islam endorses necrophilia. This is a racist libel and a lie - invented by someone and then reported in low brow tabloid newspapers. I pointed out to you that a clear and learned refutation of this has been posted in another thread and yet you persist on publishing this racist filth. What is with you? It's nothing to do with liberal thin skins buddy. it is to do with inflammatory lies by people like you. There is much that is arguably unnacceptable about some Islamic beleifs and practices - which run counter to our Western values - and intelligent people can debate this. But to repeatedly publish something which is just untrue. It is akin to the blood libel about the Jews. Or do you believe that too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

My lowbrow gramatics aside, I notice you failed to comment and/or defend the proposed legislation.

---

You simply missed it in your hurry to respond. I'll repeat it: As to the spreading lies that have already been exposed and debunked...that's also frowned upon by those who value truth and reasoned argument. Islam does not preach necrophilia. Please notice that pointing out lies is a logical rebuttal and is not the same as name-calling. Moreover, I pointed out that simply claiming a proposition to be "self-evident" is not a valid form of argument. Attempting to make you aware of this new development in logic (dating back to the ancient Greek geometers) is not being hysterical, in fact it is quite logical. Pointing where you FAIL is simply what a responsible rebuttal to your post required.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

Mild Cigar - nothing in Islam endorses necrophilia. This is a racist libel and a lie - invented by someone and then reported in low brow tabloid newspapers. I pointed out to you that a clear and learned refutation of this has been posted in another thread and yet you persist on publishing this racist filth. What is with you? It's nothing to do with liberal thin skins buddy. it is to do with inflammatory lies by people like you. There is much that is arguably unnacceptable about some Islamic beleifs and practices - which run counter to our Western values - and intelligent people can debate this. But to repeatedly publish something which is just untrue. It is akin to the blood libel about the Jews. Or do you believe that too?

---

Please feel free comment on the merits of the practice of female circumcision (the practice seems rampent within some Muslim communities). I suppose this is also just propaganda from us infidels.

Female circumcision is a cultural practice, not a religious one.

thank god for hung angels so i can brush up on my knowledge of the ottoman empire, WW1, necrophilia and the american political system.

Hungangels, the one stop internet forum that meets ALL your needs. (All clients are advised sit down and brace themselves before viewing or reading; and please wash your before and after masturbating.)

Returning to the point of this thread, I think an issue that should be discussed is what happens to a person when they spend a year in solitary confinement. The potential psychological damage, particularly when someone has not been found guilty at trial and sentenced accordingly, could be long-lasting, even permanent, but I don't know how tough mentally CeCe is. CeCe cannot be the first transgendered person to enter the system, it surprises me that they haven't got a policy on it, or do most transgendered people who enter the system go into the men's section?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Returning to the point of this thread, I think an issue that should be discussed is what happens to a person when they spend a year in solitary confinement. The potential psychological damage, particularly when someone has not been found guilty at trial and sentenced accordingly, could be long-lasting, even permanent, but I don't know how tough mentally CeCe is. CeCe cannot be the first transgendered person to enter the system, it surprises me that they haven't got a policy on it, or do most transgendered people who enter the system go into the men's section?

---

Unless the jail has more than one TS at a time, I not sure how solitary confinement is avoided. Assuming that the TS in question still has her male genitalia then housing the TS with the women prisioners doesn't work. Also placing her in with the guys would be like throwing chum in the water and stirring up the Sharks. I will reiterate that her defense counsel must be putting in continuance motions or her 6th ammendment right to a speedy trial will have been violated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by giovanni_hotel

Female circumcision is a cultural practice, not a religious one.

---

It is indeed strange then that all the victims of this barbaric practice seem to be all young Muslim girls.

Strange too that the vast majority of Muslim women are never subjected to the practice. There are Christians, who on religious principle, refuse to let doctors give their children medical care, blood transfusions etc., even when their children's lives are on the line. Should we therefore condemn Christianity?

Moreover, the practice of female circumcision predates Christianity and therefore Islam by at least 4.5 centuries, demonstrating that not all victims' families subscribed Islam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Moreover, the practice of female circumcision predates Christianity and therefore Islam by at least 4.5 centuries, demonstrating that not all victims' families subscribed Islam.

---

The only thing you seem to prove is how dangerous a very little knowledge can be. Well done.

It does show that not all practitioners of female circumcision were Islamic and not all Muslims were practitioners of female circumcision. What's dangerous is to make assumptions about all practitioners of a religion, judge them as if those assumptions were true when in fact they are not, and then encourage others to make the same unfounded judgements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

It is indeed strange then that all the victims of this barbaric practice seem to be all young Muslim girls.

---

It is also rife in many parts of Africa in tribal areas where it has existed since time immemorial, and certainly predates the arrival of Islam. Indeed, the practice is present in many areas where Islam has never taken hold. Regardless of its origins, it is a hideous and entirely unnecessary practice which is condemned by all sides.

You appear to have a pretty fixed and narrow agenda which allows you to continue to proclaim lies and disproved allegations despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Racist or cretin? your choice.

The paralells/opposites between the Cece McDonald and George Zimmerman cases are amazing. Black victim, no police record, vs White victim with a history of violence, and a swatiska tatto. White killer, presumed innocent, and not charged, Black killer immediately jailed, and held for a year without trial. Zimmerman raises 200k, Black unable to post bond. The list goes on, and is quite extensive, in my view.

Thanks Robertlous, Trish and Stavros. But scientific evidence, facts etc seem scarcely to matter when the agenda is breeding race or cultural hate (i guess it is wrong to call the poison being spread about islam racism - hence my ref to cultural hate). If he's not yet been banned I suspect Mlid Cigar will now respond with some equally baleful questions about the veiling of women under islam.
Let me pre-empt that one. It is NOT demanded in the Koran - where the practice is encouraged for the wife of the prophet because of the numbers of strangers visiting his house. But it was also a common practice through the region well before the establishment of slam among Christian women and other faiths. Today adherents of the Wahabi and Salafi threads in islam do, indeed, demand it for women. But many other Muslims view this extreme and fundamentalist form of the faith to be aberrant. And it is also interesting that many Muslim women choose to adopt the veil where it is NOT at all demanded by their local communities in the UK for instance. i have met and talk with young Muslim women who adopt the veil out of a sense of resistance to the growing prejudice against their religion.) For them it is a feminist position!

So Mild Cigar why aren't you bleating about how Ultra orthodox Hassidic Jews demand that their women shave their heads and wear wigs.

As to clitorectomy - as Robert Louis correctly points out.
1. it is a disgusting practice
2. It was widespread well before islam was born.
And as Giovanni says - it is a cultural not a religious practice.

Finally let me remind you that I am not a Muslim nor an advocate of it. But am 100 per cent against the sort of hate and prejudice directed at it. As I am against directed at jews, Christians, Hindus, Mormons et et - while feeling we all have a right to dicsuss and debate and decry elements of any of these faiths when they seek to challenge or impact upon the generally accepted norms of our civilisational values. Hence my dislike of the anti-abortionists (and disgust when they turn to murder, bombings etc) my hatred and disgust for the murderous strands of Islam manifested by al Queda and the Taliban etc etc of widow burning and the caste system under Hinduism etc etc

I find many of the notions and ideas to which even non-radical believers adhere to be wrong-headed. But for millions it is and has been a great source of solace and an important force for social cohesiveness. In societies where the governments are corrupt or inept Mosques have and do offer great and important sources of social help to parts of the community. And Islam's historic contribution to world civilisation massively outweighs those elements which presently run counter to Western enlightenment values.

How do you feel about the Welsh?

Duh... don't much lke Tom Jones old records but he is okay now he is singing the blues. love Dylan Thomas and Richard Burton and Cerys matthews. And all those castles.

And one of my favourite songs is about the old mining valleys.
Help me Rhondda.

North Wales > South Wales.

Ahh - North Wales is better. I love Harlech and Rhuddlan and all of those great medieval places

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

And one of my favourite songs is about the old mining valleys.
Help me Rhondda.

---

Booooooooooooooo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

If he's not yet been banned I suspect Mlid Cigar will now respond with some equally baleful questions about the veiling of women under islam.
Let me pre-empt that one. It is NOT demanded in the Koran - where the practice is encouraged for the wife of the prophet because of the numbers of strangers visiting his house. But it was also a common practice through the region well before the establishment of slam among Christian women and other faiths. Today adherents of the Wahabi and Salafi threads in islam do, indeed, demand it for women. But many other Muslims view this extreme and fundamentalist form of the faith to be aberrant. And it is also interesting that many Muslim women choose to adopt the veil where it is NOT at all demanded by their local communities in the UK for instance. i have met and talk with young Muslim women who adopt the veil out of a sense of resistance to the growing prejudice against their religion.) For them it is a feminist position!.

---

A few points:
1) Frantz Fanon discusses veiling as a form of political resistance, in either The Wretched of the Earth of his collected essays.

2) the precise word Hijab has numerous meanings depending on the context: it can be screen in contemporary English as well as Veil. Also, in the sections on women in the Qu'ran it is evident that many people were naked or semi-naked in 7thc Arabia and that Islam introduced a more modest -if expensive- form of dress, rather in the way that Christian missionaries in Africa and the South Pacific persuaded women and men to cover their bodies. For an interesting discussion on this, the Moroccan feminist, Fatema Mernissi's books, The Veil and the Male Elite; Beyond the Veil are worth investigating.

3) Veiling in my opinion, historically, is more class oriented than religious: I once attended a talk on Russian history in which it was stated that the physician called to attend the Tsarina of Russia, the wife of a 16thc Tsar whose name I cannot recall, discovered that she was veiled and could not remove it because he was not a fit person to look upon her, he was also not allowed to examine her physically. In the Middle East, certainly after the First World War, eyewitness accounts show that the veil was mostly worn by wealthy women -in Syria, Jordan it was Circassians mostly- who could afford to buy clothes. Women would cover their face with their gowns, but in the case of Bedouin women, this is a practical aspect of living in a desert environment. What we have seen in recent years is the opposite of what once happened: veiling is now more closley associated with rural people and the urban poor, or as a political statement, as Prospero has noted, and as is discussed by Leila Ahmad here:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...l_of_ignorance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

Unless the jail has more than one TS at a time, I not sure how solitary confinement is avoided. Assuming that the TS in question still has her male genitalia then housing the TS with the women prisioners doesn't work. Also placing her in with the guys would be like throwing chum in the water and stirring up the Sharks. I will reiterate that her defense counsel must be putting in continuance motions or her 6th ammendment right to a speedy trial will have been violated.

---

You haven't really answered the question but I don't know how one finds out what the prison policy on gender is; the more important factor is the impact of solitary confinement on someone who has not been found guilty of a crime: it seems she did indeed kill that man, in which case she could be suffering extreme forms of guilt unmediated by any other mitigating presence to calm her, rationalise her feeelings. This could have a decisive impact on her testimony in court when the case comes to trial. It seems to me as if she has been locked up and forgotten about at a time when she most needed care and some kind of counselling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Strange too that the vast majority of Muslim women are never subjected to the practice. There are Christians, who on religious principle, refuse to let doctors give their children medical care, blood transfusions etc., even when their children's lives are on the line. Should we therefore condemn Christianity?

---

By all means condemn the Christian Scientists and the Jehovah's Witnesses. To put the record straight I don’t think I implied that all Muslims practice FGM, but the overwhelming majority of FGM are committed by Muslims.

It is interesting why the supposed Liberals of this forum feel the need to try to defend the bizarre cultural/quasi-religious practices of Islam. I can think of almost no culture that would be more unfriendly to the TS community than Islam.

In some of the gay pride parades in the States some of the gay/TS community dresses up as nuns. Just suppose what would happen if you attempted something similar (only anti-Muslim in flavor) in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc.??? Can anyone say beheading?

Your arguments would be like the Jews in the 1930s saying the Nazis are not all that bad, and in the same breath decrying the warmongering of the British.

So with lucidity Mild Cigar makes it clear that hates Muslims. Pure and simple. Muslims = Nazis do they? I rather think if historical parallels are to be employed that they are the Jews (and I can anticipate your response here - that the jews didn't have a substantial coterie of terrorists in their ranks. True. But they were reviled as a group just as you clearly revile Muslims)
Zyklon B your gas of choice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

I can think of almost no culture that would be more unfriendly to the TS community than Islam.

---

You may or may not know thugs of various size and political persuasion have broken up attempts to mount LGBT marches in Russia; that transexuals are in stealth across southern Europe, in China, and that sub-Saharan Africa is hostile to any form of open display of non-heterosexuality, be it Muslim, Christian, Pagan or whatever: in fact the Christian Church in Africa is one of the most extreme conservative segments of the worldwide community.

Liberal attitudes to social behaviour have advanced enormously in my lifetime in Europe, North America, Australasia and parts of South America, but these advances have actually been minor compared to the world as a whole, where social attitudes to gender and sexual diversity are still rigid and wholly different now from what we accept.

Here is Tony Blair squirming in his pants while sitting next to Nobel Peace Prize winner Ellen Johnson Sirleaf who dismisses homosexuality and has no intention of changing the law in Liberia:
Liberia's president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Tony Blair discuss anti-gay law - YouTube

Surely this cannot be the Lynton Blair who was fined £50 for importuning another man in a public toilet in Westminster in 1974? Surely not the Oxford university guitarist known as Miranda to his band-mates...??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

You may or may not know thugs of various size and political persuasion have broken up attempts to mount LGBT marches in Russia; that transexuals are in stealth across southern Europe, in China, and that sub-Saharan Africa is hostile to any form of open display of non-heterosexuality, be it Muslim, Christian, Pagan or whatever: in fact the Christian Church in Africa is one of the most extreme conservative segments of the worldwide community.

Liberal attitudes to social behaviour have advanced enormously in my lifetime in Europe, North America, Australasia and parts of South America, but these advances have actually been minor compared to the world as a whole, where social attitudes to gender and sexual diversity are still rigid and wholly different now from what we accept.

Here is Tony Blair squirming in his pants while sitting next to Nobel Peace Prize winner Ellen Johnson Sirleaf who dismisses homosexuality and has no intention of changing the law in Liberia:
Liberia's president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Tony Blair discuss anti-gay law - YouTube

Surely this cannot be the Lynton Blair who was fined £50 for importuning another man in a public toilet in Westminster in 1974? Surely not the Oxford university guitarist known as Miranda to his band-mates...??

---

And only in the US is there a major party in the developed west which actively promotes anti-homosexual activity. Just thought I'd throw that in....

And yes - the Conservative Party in the UK, for all it's other faults, is actually pretty enlightened about Gay issues.

the difference between this and zimmerman is the lack of castle/syg laws. Nor would they apply to a barfight where a man lost his life over a Buddhist tattoo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nonnonnon

the difference between this and zimmerman is the lack of castle/syg laws. Nor would they apply to a barfight where a man lost his life over a Buddhist tattoo

---

With or without the castle law...either way the victim is screwed. What do the two victims have in common? Ethnicity? How do the two incidents differ? In the incident to which SYG applies the perp was initially excused without a second thought; if it weren't for the public outcry Zimmerman wouldn't even be standing before a judge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

So with lucidity Mild Cigar makes it clear that hates Muslims. Pure and simple. Muslims = Nazis do they?

---

Yes in some cases they do.


Iran's president has repeated a remark from the former ayatollah that Israel should be "wiped out from the map,"

http://articles.cnn.com/2005-10-26/w...ld?_s=PM:WORLD

Obviously Iran does not comprise all Muslim sentiment, but I hear very little condimnation from brother Muslims.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

Yes in some cases they do.


Iran's president has repeated a remark from the former ayatollah that Israel should be "wiped out from the map,"

http://articles.cnn.com/2005-10-26/w...ld?_s=PM:WORLD

Obviously Iran does not comprise all Muslim sentiment, but I hear very little condimnation from brother Muslims.

---

The uncomfortable reality of the Middle East is that it has been home to ex-Nazis, Arab nazi sympathisers -and Jewish fascists -Avraham Stern, a supporter of Mussolini who once offered a trade-off with Hitler (send us Jews and we will fight the British on your behalf) being one stellar example and a man whose campaigns of murder did not spare Jews or Arabs or the British in Palestine in the 1940s. You name it, the Middle East has it, just like the USA, and they don't need to apologise for an idiot like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But the record shows his remark that 'Israel should be wiped out from the map' is a hoax as you would have known if you had bothered to do any research on it -even Israel's Dan Meridor has admitted Ahmadinejad never even used the word map in his speech and anyway was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini. And where is the largest Jewish community in the Middle East outside Israel?....er...in Iran.

You can read about the hoax here if you want to:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...7offthemap.htm

http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/04/19/...l-off-the-map/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nonnonnon

the difference between this and zimmerman is the lack of castle/syg laws. Nor would they apply to a barfight where a man lost his life over a Buddhist tattoo

---

I assume you were referring to the original usbject of the post. The swastica was not discovered until after the deceased was mortally wounded. The incident was reportedly started, when the deceased and three other friends verbally harassed Ms McDonald and other friends as they were passing on the street. It escalated, when McDonald was cut in the face, by the deceased person's friend. When McDonald approached the police, she was covered in blood, my assumption was was that the blood was from her own injury. Perhaps this version is not true. But we can only judge from the facts as were are given.

In the media, it has been inferred that Trayvonn was a 'thug', becuase he had some gold teeth, or the language from his Twitter account. I have not heard of any link between gold teeth and violent behavior. But the deceased in the Mcdonald incident was reported to have a history of violence. In the case of McDonald, the system wanted to immediately send her thru the formal legal process.

When asked whether "Muslims=Nazis," mildcigar confirms

Quote:

---

Yes in some cases they do.

---

. This is the most ridiculously stupid argument yet. Mildcigar wishes to establish the moral superiority of Christianity over Islam with the claim: some "Muslims are Nazis;" yet when Nazi's really did walk the Earth they were allmost all Christian?! So here's the argument:

Premise 1. Some Muslim's are Nazis.
Premise 2. Nazi's are morally inferior.
Premise 3. Almost all Nazis were (and are...after all you gotta count the white supremacists) Christian.
Conclusion: Islam is morally inferior to Christianity.

If there's a valid rule of inference that leads from these premises to the conclusion above, please inform us of it name, how it works and provide a reputable reference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

And one of my favourite songs is about the old mining valleys.
Help me Rhondda.

---

Oh Merthyr-ful God. No more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

When asked whether "Muslims=Nazis," mildcigar confirms . This is the most ridiculously stupid argument yet. Mildcigar wishes to establish the moral superiority of Christianity over Islam with the claim: some "Muslims are Nazis;" yet when Nazi's really did walk the Earth they were allmost all Christian?! So here's the argument:

---

It is a shame that your knowledge of History does not match your knowledge of rhetoric.

It is not a definitive source, but for the purposes of this forum it will do (I'm tired and have to be up at at 5 a.m., so no in deepth research (from the Wikipedia article):

Nazi Attitudes towards Christianity

In a confidential message to the Gauleiter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on June 9, 1941, Martin Bormann - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, had declared that "National Socialism and Christianity are irreconcilable." He also declared that the Churches influence in the leadership of the people "must absolutely and finally be broken." Bormann believed Nazism was based on a "scientific" world-view, and was completely incompatible with Christianity.

Bormann stated:
When we [National Socialists] speak of belief in God, we do not mean, like the naive Christians and their spiritual exploiters, a man-like being sitting around somewhere in the universe. The force governed by natural law by which all these countless planets move in the universe, we call omnipotence or God. The assertion that this universal force can trouble itself about the destiny of each individual being, every smallest earthly bacillus, can be influenced by so-called prayers or other surprising things, depends upon a requisite dose of naivety or else upon shameless professional self-interest.


Other than being a contrarian, I doubt if you really believe Islam is superior to Christianity. I will cheerfully admit that the world has more than its fair share of F’d up Christians, but by almost any measure Islam is a religion stuck in the dark ages. Try exposing your contrarian opinions as a woman in Muslim country and see want happens (a beating or worse). I realize that perhaps because of your TS status you may feel marginalized from mainstream culture, but as bad as western civilization is Islam (particularly the Wahabi sect) is much worse. It makes no real sense just because you dislike me or my arguments, to willfully delude yourself as to the merits of Islam.

Granted I do not know you personally, but a good 50% of the time you make reasonable sense, but the other 50% of the time you veer out of your own lane and plunge headlong into oncoming traffic. You seem to see everything through a racial prism.

I know you believe I am a racist for criticizing other cultures, but nothing could be further from the truth. I am more than willing to criticize other cultures (but that springs from a general belief that western culture is superior). I don’t care what race a man is, but I do care how he acts. Hence in my criticism of Obama, I think him a knave because of his actions not because of his skin color. If it makes you feel any better I have a lower opinion of Clinton than Obama.

Mildcigar!!!
Really man??

http://images.cheezburger.com/comple...5b92ef7789.gif

A confidential letter espousing the aberrant (hence confidential) religious views of one Nazi goes no way toward undermining premise three. Almost all Nazis were Christians and almost all living Nazis are Christian. This of course doesn't justify a general condemnation of Christianity and by the same token the symmetric argument affords no general condemnation of Islam. Claiming Islam is morally inferior to Christianity because there are Muslims who believe the same reprehensible things some Christians believe is patently absurd.

You are right in guessing I do not hold Islam is morally superior to Christianity. Frankly I find the question to be ill formulated and a dangerous waste of time. Why do you find it so important to convince others whom you don't even know of the general moral inferiority of Islam? What does that even mean? What is your measure of moral superiority? What is your personal motivation for pushing this point on those who resist it? Do you hope to improve our general morality or just have us validate yours for you? Are you sure you aren't motivated by unfounded preconceptions?