Interreligious Dialogue

It's not finished yet but we can't dialogue until murderers have apologized for their murder

therefore back

Go with me. go ahead people
WE’RE HERE TO HELP YOU

God is love love your enemies love me!

The interfaith dialogue based on Don Quixote de la Mancha. Should we really carry it out? I think so. For the following reasoning. Every form of dialogue is disrupted by feminists, homosexuals, bisexuals and other sexual minorities. And they are right. There are of course deficits in relation to human rights in Islam. In states with a majority of Muslims these problems are usually greater than in states with a majority of Christians. Why? Because there are more atheists and believers in God in these states. And because in these states there is a uniform press on the subject of human rights. Here comes the first objection. No, no, no, our press is not a lying press. It fights for the equal rights of all citizens, including women, the disabled, transvestites, etc. In principle you are right here. It is difficult to see why the concept of human rights should be given up by women, for example. This concept has penetrated deep into the subconscious and has greatly changed the subconscious and thus the way people think. For example, in the mass hysteria surrounding Mama Merkel. We want to work through the stories in the hope that both will better understand each other's point of view. Muslims who do not have the ethical values of a Stalinist FDJ member and German feminists who share these Stalinist ethnic values. (It has not yet been proven how Stalinist Mama Merkel really was. We are trying to prove that she really was very Stalinist, but how can you contradict me, right from the start. The next problem are the satirists, including Charly Hebdo, but mainly the German satirists, e.g. Titanic. After the attack on Charlie Hebdo, Pope Francis naturally had to condemn it. But immediately afterwards he outed himself as a real Franciscan, hypocritical and underhanded, like Pope Honorius III, the founder of the Franciscan order. So we want to have an interreligious dialogue here, under the motto of Rosa Luxemburg: Freedom is always freedom of those who think differently. In an atmosphere that is not full of lies, even the worst lie, a lie that consists of 99% truth. And of course we mean with Tucholsky: Satire can do anything. Because satire is an important part of opinion formation in a democracy. A few years of lies by the Lying press is wiped away by a satire. Or hundreds of years of Franciscan lies.
Share by: