Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on May 20, 2014 13:07:53 GMT -5
M'yes but there's generally only one who's adherents have a tendency to mass violence and threats to assert it (q.v. cartoons protests around the world, Egypt over the last few years, the current Nigeria situation, the on/off thing in Morocco, etc, etc, etc). Really? So the Lord's Resistance Army are Muslims? The Shining Path? The Naxalites? The Tamil Tigers? ETA? The IRA? Etc etc? None of them Muslims. It's that old hip-hop hypocrisy of selective indignation again! Oh, FFS! ETA, IRA, etc, etc, etc, etc, (yawn!) are/were not using violence to further a religious belief, as has been explained to you before and which it is not unreasonable to assume someone of even average intelligence and reading would be well aware of. The issue is that of the propensity for islam to promulgate and advocate violence in the enforcement of its unreformed and outdated teachings or for any perceived slight. That a group wishing to achieve the expulsion of what they see/saw as an occupying foreign power and the joining of their province with the neighbouring state, as but one example from your list, is comparing apples with oranges; whilst comprising members who are Catholic the IRA fight was not to further the cause or defend the name of Catholicism, or carried out in the name of Catholicism. How many IRA bombers are documented as crying out, "This one's for the Pope!" as they pressed the button...?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 20, 2014 16:15:04 GMT -5
Religion IS dogmatism and intolerance. The degree of intolerance differs, it's a scale of 1 to Islam. So is atheism. I'd marginally rather live in Saudi Arabia than North Korea if you held a gun to my head and forced me to choose. So, we're back to ner, ner, ner? What exactly is my 'dogma'? Marginally? Ha ha ha ha ha, not exactly keen to go then
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 20, 2014 19:47:55 GMT -5
Fret commented, “ . . . Religion IS dogmatism and intolerance. The degree of intolerance differs, it's a scale of 1 to Islam. . . “
Lady Linda replied, “ . . . So is atheism. . . . . . I'd marginally rather live in Saudi Arabia than North Korea if you held a gun to my head and forced me to choose. . . . “
So, Atheism is (IS) dogmatism and intolerance? Poppycock! There are many (although a small percentage of the entire population) who profess to be Atheists, but few who actually are Atheists. But please, feel free to define and detail this. . . . . . . dogmatism . . . . . of Atheism. It can't be North Korea because that is merely a dictatorship which cares not for Atheism nor Religion as the dictator will use whichever fits the needs of the moment. Maybe then Humanism? This often used semi-philosophical mishmash of confused thoughts is merely a political grab bag to gain power.
Just in case there is a problem finding this dogmatic definition, I'll help you. Look to Jean-Paul Sartre and Existentialistic Atheism. Beyond the obvious of no need to believe in a God, this philosophical foundation is really quite simple, specifically it is that each and everyone of us, as an individual, is responsible, that is, responsible for what we do, responsible for who we are, responsible for the way we face and deal with the world, responsible, ultimately, for the way the world is. In other words, it is the philosophy of no excuses.
With such a philosophy Atheism, Existentialist Atheism is neither dogmatic nor intolerant.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 21, 2014 2:36:14 GMT -5
from the previous page """""Thus, if apostates cause no harm to the Muslim community and do not call for spreading hostility towards Islam, they should not to be punished; rather they should be advised kindly and wisely to learn the truth about Islam."""""
note the wording very carefully,,,it doesn't say apostates should not be punished...it argues with an argument one could drive a horse and cart through..the operating word here is """IF""""they cause no harm.....one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to work out how that can be interpreted am apostate by very virtue of wanting to leave islam....causes harm....and by virtue of living spreads hostility toward islam as usual the weasel words of islam can mean what ever the person speaking them intends....
and given that the majority of muslims are not well educated..literate and have been on the end of constant indoctrination since birth thus lacking the verbal and knowledge skills to debate and discuss the finer points hence the hysteria and violence over the cartoons..and night club...the happiness over the twin towers..the quiet satisfaction of the tube/bus bombs and various other atrocities to many to recount
by their deeds they are known...by their silence they are known...and understood
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on May 21, 2014 4:11:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 21, 2014 4:46:36 GMT -5
well worth a read... """"""As Ayaan Hirsi Ali has pointed out, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Boko Haram don't use Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar to recruit young en. They use the Quran and the Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. All they have to do it cite it verbatim. No "interpretation" needed. Take from that what you can."""""" HIRSI has it spot on..and I would take the word of a muslim or ex muslim over the excuses offered by non muslim fellow travellers any day
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 21, 2014 7:14:55 GMT -5
Fret commented, “ . . . Religion IS dogmatism and intolerance. The degree of intolerance differs, it's a scale of 1 to Islam. . . “ Lady Linda replied, “ . . . So is atheism. . . . . . I'd marginally rather live in Saudi Arabia than North Korea if you held a gun to my head and forced me to choose. . . . “ So, Atheism is (IS) dogmatism and intolerance? Poppycock! There are many (although a small percentage of the entire population) who profess to be Atheists, but few who actually are Atheists. But please, feel free to define and detail this. . . . . . . dogmatism . . . . . of Atheism. It can't be North Korea because that is merely a dictatorship which cares not for Atheism nor Religion as the dictator will use whichever fits the needs of the moment. Maybe then Humanism? This often used semi-philosophical mishmash of confused thoughts is merely a political grab bag to gain power. Just in case there is a problem finding this dogmatic definition, I'll help you. Look to Jean-Paul Sartre and Existentialistic Atheism. Beyond the obvious of no need to believe in a God, this philosophical foundation is really quite simple, specifically it is that each and everyone of us, as an individual, is responsible, that is, responsible for what we do, responsible for who we are, responsible for the way we face and deal with the world, responsible, ultimately, for the way the world is. In other words, it is the philosophy of no excuses. With such a philosophy Atheism, Existentialist Atheism is neither dogmatic nor intolerant. Precisely, men an tol . Every now and again one hears these silly arguments that atheism is somehow equal to theism, when clearly it is not
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 21, 2014 9:52:40 GMT -5
So is atheism. I'd marginally rather live in Saudi Arabia than North Korea if you held a gun to my head and forced me to choose. So, we're back to ner, ner, ner? What exactly is my 'dogma'? Marginally? Ha ha ha ha ha, not exactly keen to go then I don't think it's wrong to say that some things are worse than others and that even one bad thing can be less bad than another. North Korea seems to me marginally worse than Saudi Arabia. I think on the whole most people would agree with that. As for dogmatism it's the automatic statement that Islam 'is' evil when a) Islam isn't a monolithic belief system so WHICH version of Islam are you talking about? After all, saying Christianity 'is' evil - or good - is equally silly when there are many different variations of it; b) your opinion on any belief is only an opinion. You can argue about facts - Flat Earthists for the sake of argument are denying provable FACTS - but anyone who either condemns or supports Islam is only expressing an opinion. And trying to make out that your opinion IS a fact is dogmatic. And you've said many times that you 'know' there is no God when in fact you can't 'know' either way. That's what I mean by dogmatism. And I'd be the first to admit that compared with the infallible Bishops of Rome, the dogmatic mad mullahs, the dogmatic Marxists of North Korea and so on your dogmatism is much milder and less harmful.
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 21, 2014 9:54:27 GMT -5
Fret commented, “ . . . Religion IS dogmatism and intolerance. The degree of intolerance differs, it's a scale of 1 to Islam. . . “ Lady Linda replied, “ . . . So is atheism. . . . . . I'd marginally rather live in Saudi Arabia than North Korea if you held a gun to my head and forced me to choose. . . . “ So, Atheism is (IS) dogmatism and intolerance? Poppycock! There are many (although a small percentage of the entire population) who profess to be Atheists, but few who actually are Atheists. But please, feel free to define and detail this. . . . . . . dogmatism . . . . . of Atheism. It can't be North Korea because that is merely a dictatorship which cares not for Atheism nor Religion as the dictator will use whichever fits the needs of the moment. Maybe then Humanism? This often used semi-philosophical mishmash of confused thoughts is merely a political grab bag to gain power. Just in case there is a problem finding this dogmatic definition, I'll help you. Look to Jean-Paul Sartre and Existentialistic Atheism. Beyond the obvious of no need to believe in a God, this philosophical foundation is really quite simple, specifically it is that each and everyone of us, as an individual, is responsible, that is, responsible for what we do, responsible for who we are, responsible for the way we face and deal with the world, responsible, ultimately, for the way the world is. In other words, it is the philosophy of no excuses. With such a philosophy Atheism, Existentialist Atheism is neither dogmatic nor intolerant. Precisely, men an tol . Every now and again one hears these silly arguments that atheism is somehow equal to theism, when clearly it is not Well, let's put it simply. Atheism - like theism - is going BEYOND the evidence and claiming something to be a FACT when it's only an OPINION. I might believe in Christianity but I freely admit it's an act of faith on my part. Why don't you atheists have the balls to admit that YOUR atheist ideas are every bit as much an act of faith on your part?
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 21, 2014 9:57:07 GMT -5
well worth a read... """"""As Ayaan Hirsi Ali has pointed out, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Boko Haram don't use Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar to recruit young en. They use the Quran and the Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. All they have to do it cite it verbatim. No "interpretation" needed. Take from that what you can."""""" HIRSI has it spot on..and I would take the word of a muslim or ex muslim over the excuses offered by non muslim fellow travellers any day Well, Mouse, I've already posted the relevant parts from the Quran proving that apostasy is NOT punishable by death and it IS allowed for Muslims to convert AWAY from the religion. So any 'Muslim' that claims differently is obviously NOT a real Muslim but a heretic and blasphemer PRETENDING to be a Muslim!
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 21, 2014 10:31:39 GMT -5
Lady Linda responded with the following: “ . . . Well, let's put it simply. . . . . Atheism - like theism - is going BEYOND the evidence and claiming something to be a FACT when it's only an OPINION. . . . I might believe in Christianity but I freely admit it's an act of faith on my part. . . . . . Why don't you atheists have the balls to admit that YOUR atheist ideas are every bit as much an act of faith on your part? . . . “
Thank you for your response, however, you continue to try and define Atheism through the eyes of a Theist. They are not connected in any way shape or form. It is not an act of faith to view the world as it is, without coloring through the lens of myth, supposition and faith in something not definable with any of our human sensing attributes.
Life obviously has difficulties, life is full of challenges, circumstances may seemingly at times be impossible, there are clearly obstacles in life, not the least of which are our own personalities, characters, emotions, limited usable resources, and less than fully used intelligence. Even so, to the Atheist there is no excuse to our being responsible as individuals. While Theists may feel relived to go through some process of shifting that individual responsibility onto a God, the Atheist has no excuse for relief of that individual and personal responsibility through a shift to an unreachable concept.
As an aside, in my talks with people I strongly suggest that they adhere to their faith, stay true to their God, to 'not' even play with the idea of being an Atheist. The reason is that most people require that 'excuse' of a controlling God to which they can shift their personal responsibility. To have 'no excuse' for accepting one's personal responsibility is not a way that most people can accept.
As with most people who live in an illusion, those who are Theists can only (must) view others as also living in a world of faith, I understand that need to continue and maintain the illusion and I support them in that need because if they recognized the reality of an Atheist their faith would no longer be absolute. But as an Atheist I always find it amazing that such individuals cannot not accept that others (Atheists in this case) do not need to live in that misty world of faith.
Please keep in mind, outside of the need to have faith, philosophical concepts have been developed and evolved both with those who are Theists as well as those who are do not recognize faith. These philosophical schools can be (have been) debated and have evolved without the requirement of faith or no faith. But so often these areas are mixed within the exchanges supposedly focused on faith (or no faith) but they are a separate area. Debating faith is an exercise in futility as when one has faith, nothing should (or can) shake it. And for those who are truly without faith no argument supporting faith can have an impact.
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on May 21, 2014 11:12:36 GMT -5
I should think the only differences between Saudi and DPRK, at least in the context of totalitarianism and human rights, are oil and it's somewhat easier to enter (and leave) Saudi.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 21, 2014 12:06:57 GMT -5
well worth a read... """"""As Ayaan Hirsi Ali has pointed out, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Boko Haram don't use Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar to recruit young en. They use the Quran and the Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad. All they have to do it cite it verbatim. No "interpretation" needed. Take from that what you can."""""" HIRSI has it spot on..and I would take the word of a muslim or ex muslim over the excuses offered by non muslim fellow travellers any day Well, Mouse, I've already posted the relevant parts from the Quran proving that apostasy is NOT punishable by death and it IS allowed for Muslims to convert AWAY from the religion. So any 'Muslim' that claims differently is obviously NOT a real Muslim but a heretic and blasphemer PRETENDING to be a Muslim! oh dear... your confusing your theory/take/understanding of interpretation with custom and practise....tempuses link is interesting especially the point he makes about al quits/talitubbies and boko harem v the koran
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 21, 2014 12:37:51 GMT -5
No, Mouse, I've posted QUOTES from the Quran which show that you're WRONG.
That's not 'confusing' anything with anything else.
And custom and practice also support me; MOST Muslim countries do NOT follow the stupidities of the lunatic fringe.
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 21, 2014 12:40:20 GMT -5
I should think the only differences between Saudi and DPRK, at least in the context of totalitarianism and human rights, are oil and it's somewhat easier to enter (and leave) Saudi. Well, as I've actually lived in Saudi and I know a refugee from North Korea I'd say you were pretty poorly informed, Tempus. Saudi is bad but Korea is worse.
|
|