Crosswords2 mins ago
Them Muslims
71 Answers
What is it with the Muslims?
From this,
http://rt.com/Top_New...sts-hit-dagestan.html
To this,
http://rt.com/Top_New...s-against-terror.html
Which one is the true face of Islam?
Or is it really just a question of your own personal prejudices?
From this,
http://rt.com/Top_New...sts-hit-dagestan.html
To this,
http://rt.com/Top_New...s-against-terror.html
Which one is the true face of Islam?
Or is it really just a question of your own personal prejudices?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
123everton - “In answer to your question, no I couldn't, it's a stupid question [Can you give me one example of a good deed done by a religious person that could not be done by an atheist?].”
No it isn't. It's a very sensible question because it makes you ask the alternative question – or didn't you consider that with your myopically simplistic perspective?
The alternative question being, “Can you think of an abhorrent deed the can and is carried out by a religious person that could not be done by an atheist?”
Personally, I can think of a great many. Male and female genital mutilation perhaps or murdering people who don't agree with your belief that your particular God should never be painted, drawn or depicted visually in any way? Or how about killing people for even having the temerity to question your beliefs?
All of the above abhorrent acts are permissible if you believe in the Islamic God. These religious pronouncements are codified in the Koran and are actively encouraged in Islamic controlled countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, etc.
No it isn't. It's a very sensible question because it makes you ask the alternative question – or didn't you consider that with your myopically simplistic perspective?
The alternative question being, “Can you think of an abhorrent deed the can and is carried out by a religious person that could not be done by an atheist?”
Personally, I can think of a great many. Male and female genital mutilation perhaps or murdering people who don't agree with your belief that your particular God should never be painted, drawn or depicted visually in any way? Or how about killing people for even having the temerity to question your beliefs?
All of the above abhorrent acts are permissible if you believe in the Islamic God. These religious pronouncements are codified in the Koran and are actively encouraged in Islamic controlled countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, etc.
Continued....
“Your take on religion is entirely different to my experience” - That's because you don't live in a corrupt, totalitarian, religiously controlled country. Lucky you. But unfortunately many people do and your apologist attitude is repeated time and again by people who are unable or unwilling to see religion for what it truly is.
And as for your comment - “As for hatred and control, politics defines hatred much more succinctly...” - I am almost speechless in my incredulity. So you think that politics is somehow disconnected from religion?
Your naivety is astonishing.
“Your take on religion is entirely different to my experience” - That's because you don't live in a corrupt, totalitarian, religiously controlled country. Lucky you. But unfortunately many people do and your apologist attitude is repeated time and again by people who are unable or unwilling to see religion for what it truly is.
And as for your comment - “As for hatred and control, politics defines hatred much more succinctly...” - I am almost speechless in my incredulity. So you think that politics is somehow disconnected from religion?
Your naivety is astonishing.
Oh dear oh dear, try drawing a moustache on Mao's face, try lampooning Stalin back in the day, try questioning N.S.D.A.P policy (John Rabe did) see where it got you, try wanting a different government under the Argentine Junta, do you want me to continue?
I don't view atheists as evil (despite the best efforts of one dishonest contributor), when one loses sight of anothers humanity problems occur.
The justification for despicable acts are littered with political (and religious) motives, but, they're all perpetrated by people.
I don't view atheists as evil (despite the best efforts of one dishonest contributor), when one loses sight of anothers humanity problems occur.
The justification for despicable acts are littered with political (and religious) motives, but, they're all perpetrated by people.
Ha ha! Oh yes, Everton. Comical indeed. Remember how we all roared with laughter when you defended the Jehovah Witness parents’ rights to refuse their children life saving blood transfusions? Hilarious!
//Should the Russian Muslims demonstrating against terrorist acts committed in their name be commended, further reviled or ignored? //
None of the above. Their action has been acknowledged, but I can’t see why anyone who speaks out against terrorism should be especially commended when they’re saying no more than the rest of the world is saying. Let's face it. None of us, apart from suicide bombers, want to be blown up. And I don’t understand you when you say ‘further revile’. Who here has reviled them then? Have I missed a post or two? Ah, but maybe I’ve got the wrong end of the stick and you think they deserve commendation because they’re especially brave in saying something that might upset supporters of terrorism within their own religion. I suspect they might revile them - or worse still - murder them.
//Should the Russian Muslims demonstrating against terrorist acts committed in their name be commended, further reviled or ignored? //
None of the above. Their action has been acknowledged, but I can’t see why anyone who speaks out against terrorism should be especially commended when they’re saying no more than the rest of the world is saying. Let's face it. None of us, apart from suicide bombers, want to be blown up. And I don’t understand you when you say ‘further revile’. Who here has reviled them then? Have I missed a post or two? Ah, but maybe I’ve got the wrong end of the stick and you think they deserve commendation because they’re especially brave in saying something that might upset supporters of terrorism within their own religion. I suspect they might revile them - or worse still - murder them.
123everton – Regarding your last post, I have never asked that question either.
Your quote, “... try drawing a moustache on Mao's face, try lampooning Stalin back in the day...”
These people were monstrous but luckily for the rest of humanity, they were contained in their own countries. However, you insult religion today at your peril. It doesn't matter what country you're in. If you insult, oh I don't don't know... let's say, Islam for instance... then your life is potentially in danger no matter where you are.
The common argument from religious apologists like yourself is – people who didn't or don't believe in God can be just as evil as those that do.
But that's not an argument for religious belief. Neither is it an argument for non-belief. It's a statement of fact about the human condition.
Your quote, “... try drawing a moustache on Mao's face, try lampooning Stalin back in the day...”
These people were monstrous but luckily for the rest of humanity, they were contained in their own countries. However, you insult religion today at your peril. It doesn't matter what country you're in. If you insult, oh I don't don't know... let's say, Islam for instance... then your life is potentially in danger no matter where you are.
The common argument from religious apologists like yourself is – people who didn't or don't believe in God can be just as evil as those that do.
But that's not an argument for religious belief. Neither is it an argument for non-belief. It's a statement of fact about the human condition.
Continued....
Some people are evil and some people are not. But it is a cold hard fact that people do kill other people in the 'name' of religion. They do it because their religion (which, let's not forget is just a book or series of books written by men) tells them to kill the unbelievers. Suicide bombers are the most obvious examples of this – these pathetically brainwashed individuals deliberately kill themselves and others in the name of their religion because they're fed the lie that they'll be 'rewarded' in the 'afterlife'. Please....
To paraphrase, Steven Weinberg, “Without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
By the way, you still haven't answered my question... “Can you give me one example of a good deed done by a religious person that could not be done by an atheist?”.
(It's okay. I know you won't answer it because the answer undermines your position. Better to just ignore it or call the question itself 'stupid', rather than tackle it...)
Some people are evil and some people are not. But it is a cold hard fact that people do kill other people in the 'name' of religion. They do it because their religion (which, let's not forget is just a book or series of books written by men) tells them to kill the unbelievers. Suicide bombers are the most obvious examples of this – these pathetically brainwashed individuals deliberately kill themselves and others in the name of their religion because they're fed the lie that they'll be 'rewarded' in the 'afterlife'. Please....
To paraphrase, Steven Weinberg, “Without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
By the way, you still haven't answered my question... “Can you give me one example of a good deed done by a religious person that could not be done by an atheist?”.
(It's okay. I know you won't answer it because the answer undermines your position. Better to just ignore it or call the question itself 'stupid', rather than tackle it...)
(Sat 10:07 24/Apr/10)
Question Author
In answer to your question, no I couldn't, it's a stupid question.
Takes all sorts to make a world, good and bad, for whatever reason.
I get the impression that you and people like you profess to know the absolute truth, that your way is the right way and the only correct way, and that people who disagree with you are by definition bad people.
Not a bit like a fundamentalist, lol.
Question Author
In answer to your question, no I couldn't, it's a stupid question.
Takes all sorts to make a world, good and bad, for whatever reason.
I get the impression that you and people like you profess to know the absolute truth, that your way is the right way and the only correct way, and that people who disagree with you are by definition bad people.
Not a bit like a fundamentalist, lol.
You stated earlier, “... The only ones who have launched into diatribes about God have always been atheists, so who's got the problem in reality?”
The 'problem' as you weakly put it is that people like me are absolutely sick to the back teeth of being told to 'respect' religious beliefs – no matter how moronic and ridiculous those beliefs are. What you are basically saying is 'shut up and keep quiet'.
Sorry, but I will continue to criticise religions of every denomination because they all have the same basic flaws-
1.They are intrinsically irrational;
2.They are intolerant of criticism (helpfully demonstrated by yourself);
3.They deny reality if it contradicts with their doctrine;
4.They stifle the human spirit by telling their adhereant that they are slaves;
5.They apologise for gross violations of human rights;
Etc.
The 'problem' as you weakly put it is that people like me are absolutely sick to the back teeth of being told to 'respect' religious beliefs – no matter how moronic and ridiculous those beliefs are. What you are basically saying is 'shut up and keep quiet'.
Sorry, but I will continue to criticise religions of every denomination because they all have the same basic flaws-
1.They are intrinsically irrational;
2.They are intolerant of criticism (helpfully demonstrated by yourself);
3.They deny reality if it contradicts with their doctrine;
4.They stifle the human spirit by telling their adhereant that they are slaves;
5.They apologise for gross violations of human rights;
Etc.
Continued...
123everton - “I get the impression that you and people like you profess to know the absolute truth, that your way is the right way and the only correct way, and that people who disagree with you are by definition bad people.”
That quote describes religion beautifully. You were clumsily attempting to describe atheism and have inadvertently described religion.
Congratulations.
Your above quote speaks volumes. You think that atheists claim to know the 'absolute truth'? Hardly! Atheists accept that they know no such thing. Atheists know that they don't know everything – it is the antithesis of religion, which claims to to know everything. Do you even understand what non-belief is? I'm beginning to wonder if you understand this argument at all...
What people like yourself cannot stand is that fact that atheists now have a voice – and it is voice that is getting more support every day.
The 'churches' (of whatever religion) in a nutshell have always said, 'Believe in my doctrine, do not question it. Be complicit and obey my pronouncements.'. But now we can hear descenting voices and opinions and you and religious apologists like you do not like it one little bit.
Tough.
123everton - “I get the impression that you and people like you profess to know the absolute truth, that your way is the right way and the only correct way, and that people who disagree with you are by definition bad people.”
That quote describes religion beautifully. You were clumsily attempting to describe atheism and have inadvertently described religion.
Congratulations.
Your above quote speaks volumes. You think that atheists claim to know the 'absolute truth'? Hardly! Atheists accept that they know no such thing. Atheists know that they don't know everything – it is the antithesis of religion, which claims to to know everything. Do you even understand what non-belief is? I'm beginning to wonder if you understand this argument at all...
What people like yourself cannot stand is that fact that atheists now have a voice – and it is voice that is getting more support every day.
The 'churches' (of whatever religion) in a nutshell have always said, 'Believe in my doctrine, do not question it. Be complicit and obey my pronouncements.'. But now we can hear descenting voices and opinions and you and religious apologists like you do not like it one little bit.
Tough.
Birdie, I didn't say atheists, I said you and people like you, I'm not describing atheism per se, but you, I'm suggesting (clumsily?) that you're atheistic expression is just as extreme and unflinching as any evangelist.
Far from wanting atheists to shut up I am an exponent of free speech and free expression even (especially) when I don't like it or disagree with it (see my many posts on the B.N.P and also the burkha), indeed it is not I who has stated in the past that religion should not be practised in public.
Far from wanting atheists to shut up I am an exponent of free speech and free expression even (especially) when I don't like it or disagree with it (see my many posts on the B.N.P and also the burkha), indeed it is not I who has stated in the past that religion should not be practised in public.
“Birdie, I didn't say atheists, I said you and people like you...”
Sophistry.
“... you're atheistic expression is just as extreme and unflinching as any evangelist”.
Very clever that statement. The way you've attempted to merge evangelism and vocal atheism into one amorphous mass. Clever though the statement may be, it doesn't make it factually correct. Vocal atheism is not comparable with evangelism for one very simple reason – Reason.
Evangelism makes pronouncements that by their very definition are fantastical and unprovable. Atheism (vocal or otherwise) makes no such claims. What it does do is systematically analyse those claims made by religion and applies logic to those arguments. In doing so, it strips away the nonsense, revealing the utterly vacuous nature of religion therefore demonstrating that it is based on a lie and perpetuated by individuals who have a vested interest in maintaining the status-quo. If atheism has any resemblance to evangelism, I would say that it is equivalently tenacious.
“Far from wanting atheists to shut up I am an exponent of free speech and free expression...”
This is something we can both agree on.
“... it is not I who has stated in the past that religion should not be practised in public.”
And neither have I. I fail to see why you have made the above statement. I doesn't apply to me and yet your response was specifically addressed to me.
No matter. It's pretty clear where we both stand.
Sophistry.
“... you're atheistic expression is just as extreme and unflinching as any evangelist”.
Very clever that statement. The way you've attempted to merge evangelism and vocal atheism into one amorphous mass. Clever though the statement may be, it doesn't make it factually correct. Vocal atheism is not comparable with evangelism for one very simple reason – Reason.
Evangelism makes pronouncements that by their very definition are fantastical and unprovable. Atheism (vocal or otherwise) makes no such claims. What it does do is systematically analyse those claims made by religion and applies logic to those arguments. In doing so, it strips away the nonsense, revealing the utterly vacuous nature of religion therefore demonstrating that it is based on a lie and perpetuated by individuals who have a vested interest in maintaining the status-quo. If atheism has any resemblance to evangelism, I would say that it is equivalently tenacious.
“Far from wanting atheists to shut up I am an exponent of free speech and free expression...”
This is something we can both agree on.
“... it is not I who has stated in the past that religion should not be practised in public.”
And neither have I. I fail to see why you have made the above statement. I doesn't apply to me and yet your response was specifically addressed to me.
No matter. It's pretty clear where we both stand.
Addressed to you, and, people like you, so not every remark was referring to you.
My suggestion is that you're contempt for people of an opposite view is equal to that of any evangelist etc.
Personally I don't care what God you believe in, or none for that matter, not all Muslims (or theists) are bad.
Islam is a much maligned faith, I wonder how much of this approbum is due in no small part to mild form of brain washing.
Think about it, how many films have you seen that show Muslim's in a good light?
My suggestion is that you're contempt for people of an opposite view is equal to that of any evangelist etc.
Personally I don't care what God you believe in, or none for that matter, not all Muslims (or theists) are bad.
Islam is a much maligned faith, I wonder how much of this approbum is due in no small part to mild form of brain washing.
Think about it, how many films have you seen that show Muslim's in a good light?
Latest Posts
If An Ordinary American Citizen Faced...
News8 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
Nigel Farage Making An Emergency...
News17 mins ago
