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 12:50:04 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. Men an tol, atheists do NOT 'view the world as it is;' they view the world as they'd LIKE it to be. Because the idea that there could be anything in the universe greater than them affronts their vanity they - as Nietzsche put it with untypical honesty - 'if there were gods, how could I endure not to be God? Therefore there are no gods.' That fundamental arrogance is shown in far too many atheist apologists. Not all, I agree, but far too many of them. The fundamental FACT is that you CAN'T prove that God doesn't exist anymore than I can prove He does. Atheism makes a strong claim about the world which is that God DOESN'T exist. Just as theism claims that God DOES exist. Both claims go BEYOND any degree of evidence and can't be proved or disproved logically or refuted with data. So, like it or not, atheism IS every bit as much an act of faith as theism. It's making a claim to KNOWLEDGE when there's NO rational basis to claim KNOWLEDGE or CERTAINTY. I'm married to an agnostic and his attitude is that there may or may not be a God but a) we can't be sure either way; b) he probably feels that it's more likely that God doesn't exist than that he does but it's not an impossible hypothesis. But I don't think someone who's an atheist is stupid; I've got two atheist friends and we argue all the time in a good-natured way about it. I just think they ought to have the intellectual and moral guts to ADMIT that their beliefs go beyond the evidence and are every bit an act of faith, an attitude of mind, as theism. Why do atheists seem to find that so hard to do? Why do they pretend to have knowledge and certainty when they can't possibly have either on this subject?
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 21, 2014 14:32:02 GMT -5
Lady Linda responded with the following, “ . . . Men an tol, atheists do NOT 'view the world as it is;' they view the world as they'd LIKE it to be. . . . . . . Because the idea that there could be anything in the universe greater than them affronts their vanity they - as Nietzsche put it with untypical honesty - 'if there were gods, how could I endure not to be God? Therefore there are no gods.' . . . . That fundamental arrogance is shown in far too many atheist apologists. . . . . . . . Not all, I agree, but far too many of them. . . . . . . The fundamental FACT is that you CAN'T prove that God doesn't exist anymore than I can prove He does. . . . . . . . Atheism makes a strong claim about the world which is that God DOESN'T exist. . . . . . . . . . Just as theism claims that God DOES exist. . . . . . . . Both claims go BEYOND any degree of evidence and can't be proved or disproved logically or refuted with data. . . . . . . So, like it or not, atheism IS every bit as much an act of faith as theism. . . . . . . . It's making a claim to KNOWLEDGE when there's NO rational basis to claim KNOWLEDGE or CERTAINTY. . . . . . . . . . I'm married to an agnostic and his attitude is that there may or may not be a God but a) we can't be sure either way; b) he probably feels that it's more likely that God doesn't exist than that he does but it's not an impossible hypothesis. . . . . . . . . . . But I don't think someone who's an atheist is stupid; I've got two atheist friends and we argue all the time in a good-natured way about it. . . . . . . . I just think they ought to have the intellectual and moral guts to ADMIT that their beliefs go beyond the evidence and are every bit an act of faith, an attitude of mind, as theism. . . . . . . . Why do atheists seem to find that so hard to do? Why do they pretend to have knowledge and certainty when they can't possibly have either on this subject? . . . . . . .
As should be obvious, not all who refer to themselves as Atheists speak from the same perspective. For example the youth moving from home to the world of a college will often loudly and repeatedly reject the world of their parents including the parents religion and become an Atheist. Without knowledge they will proclaim how mistreated Atheists are by the Theists and in a short period of years they will (for the most part) return to the world of the Theists. For all of their shouting, they were never Atheists.
So too with those Atheist activists such as Madalyn Murray O'Hair who were more interested in making a name as an Atheist rather than simply being an Atheist. Along with her are such as Humanists who also are more concerned with activism rather than simply being an Atheist. Nearly all who are Atheists are more quiet than not and those who are Existential Atheists are more focused on what I described in my previous post.
Interestingly, your comment, “ . . . atheists do NOT 'view the world as it is;' they view the world as they'd LIKE it to be. . . . . . . Because the idea that there could be anything in the universe greater than them affronts their vanity. . . . “ has nothing to do with Atheism and is reflective of how many Theists want Atheists to be. Without the world of mysticism there is only left, the reality of the world and the life of Atheists consists of understanding that world. For an Atheist to accept the idea, that there could nothing in the universe greater than them, is to reject the fundamental concept of individual self responsibility, that won't happen.
Ah yes, Friedrich Nietzsche, the ultimate fall back of the Theist in their denouncement of Atheism. While I think that Nietzsche's book “The Will to Power” would be informative, but easier to read would be a book by Lester Hunt “Nietzsche and the Origin of Virtue.” Nietzsche's famous most often misunderstood one liner, “God is Dead” had a meaning more closer to “God is now dead in the minds of man.” But Nietzsche as definer of Atheism is more of a academic exercise and few have actually read his works.
Arrogance? Atheists don't care enough about Theists and their myths to be arrogant about this. The fundamental fact is that I don't have to prove there isn't a God I know that there is no evidence for the existence of a God (any God) in the 'reality of the World. And, frankly I don't care whether you have to prove that there is a God or not, that is your problem not mine. Most Atheists (except for the youth and activists and humanists) are not concerned about proving or not proving whether there is a God and believe that if those who want to be Theists, please, do so with our blessing (pun intended). The only thing most Atheists ask is to be left alone by the Theists, of course we know that won't happen.
|
|
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 15:21:59 GMT -5
Lady Linda responded with the following, “ . . . Men an tol, atheists do NOT 'view the world as it is;' they view the world as they'd LIKE it to be. . . . . . . Because the idea that there could be anything in the universe greater than them affronts their vanity they - as Nietzsche put it with untypical honesty - 'if there were gods, how could I endure not to be God? Therefore there are no gods.' . . . . That fundamental arrogance is shown in far too many atheist apologists. . . . . . . . Not all, I agree, but far too many of them. . . . . . . The fundamental FACT is that you CAN'T prove that God doesn't exist anymore than I can prove He does. . . . . . . . Atheism makes a strong claim about the world which is that God DOESN'T exist. . . . . . . . . . Just as theism claims that God DOES exist. . . . . . . . Both claims go BEYOND any degree of evidence and can't be proved or disproved logically or refuted with data. . . . . . . So, like it or not, atheism IS every bit as much an act of faith as theism. . . . . . . . It's making a claim to KNOWLEDGE when there's NO rational basis to claim KNOWLEDGE or CERTAINTY. . . . . . . . . . I'm married to an agnostic and his attitude is that there may or may not be a God but a) we can't be sure either way; b) he probably feels that it's more likely that God doesn't exist than that he does but it's not an impossible hypothesis. . . . . . . . . . . But I don't think someone who's an atheist is stupid; I've got two atheist friends and we argue all the time in a good-natured way about it. . . . . . . . I just think they ought to have the intellectual and moral guts to ADMIT that their beliefs go beyond the evidence and are every bit an act of faith, an attitude of mind, as theism. . . . . . . . Why do atheists seem to find that so hard to do? Why do they pretend to have knowledge and certainty when they can't possibly have either on this subject? . . . . . . . As should be obvious, not all who refer to themselves as Atheists speak from the same perspective. For example the youth moving from home to the world of a college will often loudly and repeatedly reject the world of their parents including the parents religion and become an Atheist. Without knowledge they will proclaim how mistreated Atheists are by the Theists and in a short period of years they will (for the most part) return to the world of the Theists. For all of their shouting, they were never Atheists. So too with those Atheist activists such as Madalyn Murray O'Hair who were more interested in making a name as an Atheist rather than simply being an Atheist. Along with her are such as Humanists who also are more concerned with activism rather than simply being an Atheist. Nearly all who are Atheists are more quiet than not and those who are Existential Atheists are more focused on what I described in my previous post. Interestingly, your comment, “ . . . atheists do NOT 'view the world as it is;' they view the world as they'd LIKE it to be. . . . . . . Because the idea that there could be anything in the universe greater than them affronts their vanity. . . . “ has nothing to do with Atheism and is reflective of how many Theists want Atheists to be. Without the world of mysticism there is only left, the reality of the world and the life of Atheists consists of understanding that world. For an Atheist to accept the idea, that there could nothing in the universe greater than them, is to reject the fundamental concept of individual self responsibility, that won't happen. Ah yes, Friedrich Nietzsche, the ultimate fall back of the Theist in their denouncement of Atheism. While I think that Nietzsche's book “The Will to Power” would be informative, but easier to read would be a book by Lester Hunt “Nietzsche and the Origin of Virtue.” Nietzsche's famous most often misunderstood one liner, “God is Dead” had a meaning more closer to “God is now dead in the minds of man.” But Nietzsche as definer of Atheism is more of a academic exercise and few have actually read his works. Arrogance? Atheists don't care enough about Theists and their myths to be arrogant about this. The fundamental fact is that I don't have to prove there isn't a God I know that there is no evidence for the existence of a God (any God) in the 'reality of the World. And, frankly I don't care whether you have to prove that there is a God or not, that is your problem not mine. Most Atheists (except for the youth and activists and humanists) are not concerned about proving or not proving whether there is a God and believe that if those who want to be Theists, please, do so with our blessing (pun intended). The only thing most Atheists ask is to be left alone by the Theists, of course we know that won't happen. The fundamental difference between you and me on this issue, Men an tol, is that you confuse BELIEF with KNOWLEDGE. You DON'T 'know' that 'there is no evidence for the existence of God' - what you KNOW is that in your OPINION you can't see any evidence for that. That's not the same thing at all. And it seems to me that in recent years there's been a whole crop of militant atheists trying to force their opinions on other people. Perhaps especially in America where they're regularly going to courts to stop people putting crosses to remember victims of violent death and similarly obscene interference with people's rights to grieve as they want to. All I want atheists to do is to have the guts to ADMIT that their lack of belief is only an OPINION about the universe and NOT a FACT of the world. It's a fact that you don't believe in a God and that I do; our belief or non-belief doesn't make the slightest difference to whether or not our opinions are TRUE or not. So atheism simply IS an act of faith in exactly the same way as theism. All I want you and other atheists to do is to ADMIT that you DON'T 'know' and that you only 'believe' there's no God. How difficult is that for you to do?
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on May 21, 2014 15:44:29 GMT -5
I work with actual evidence. Evidence that an Engineer would use to build a building, to manufacture a car, for an attorney to take into court. I don't work with myth and superstition. In that world I'm always open to new evidence, so. . . . . . . . show me the evidence, the evidence in the above context that shows me a God.
You know there is no such thing. However, I accept that for some people belief is enough without such evidence. That's fine with me. I support the person who wants to exist on that believe, in fact in my community I often work with clergy to help them when idiots attack them. I'm know in my community as an Atheist but no one is harder on the pseudo Atheists than I am.
I also realize that in your Theist beliefs you can't really accept that Atheism isn't a 'belief' but rather a factual way (like an engineer) of understanding and working with the world. I support you in you wanting, desiring, must have, a belief, but you cannot understand (and certainly not accept) an Atheist not working on any belief but rather working only with the reality of the world.
|
|
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 16:45:23 GMT -5
Well, Men an tol, here's a post that might interest you.
It's written by an atheist who freely admits that atheism IS a belief system and can't understand why other atheists are so unwilling to admit that it is.
Cubik's Rube Regular blogging on atheism, skepticism, genderism, journalism, anarchism, politics, and other stuff that infuriates or inspires me.
Atheism is a belief system August 17, 2008 by writerJames
Yep. I’m an atheist, for those of you who hadn’t picked up on that, and atheism is a belief system.
Even this is apparently controversial among many atheists, who insist that their position is simply a “lack” of one particular belief, but I don’t know why the idea of a “belief system” is something so many people find off-putting. Presumably anyone who believes anything in any non-random fashion has a system of some sort. I know I do.
I’ve seen some atheists get unnecessarily defensive in asserting that their position isn’t a positive claim. I say “unnecessarily” because there’s nothing shameful about making positive claims about the nature of the universe and things beyond. I positively consider the idea of a creator god very improbable, and the likelihood of the Christian god as described in the Bible to be negligible. But even if I were just to say that I am without god-belief, this doesn’t get me off the hook from having to defend my position.
It is an intellectual position even to withhold from professing a belief in a god, and inherent in that position is the assertion that your position is a tenable one. Unless you’re completely abstaining from any sort of decision, and only claiming not to have any knowledge or opinion about anything, this position (sometimes labelled “weak atheism”) can really be expressed as, “I don’t have a belief in any particular god, and this is a reasonable belief for me not to have.”
To see why this is true, imagine that my friend Bob were to say:
I profess a lack of belief that the Sun exists. I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, but while everyone else sees a bright fiery ball crossing the sky in perfect order every day and leaps to conclusions about some kind of “Sun”, I’m staying on the fence.
I’d be quite comfortable labelling this as ridiculous. To refuse to take a position on something so apparently unequivocal as whether the Sun exists is silly; actively believing that it’s really there is the only reasonable way to think. (Assume that Bob’s not suggesting we’re in the Matrix, or that he’s dreaming, or anything like that which would throw the whole of reality into question; it’s just the Sun he’s doubtful about.)
Someone else might claim to not know whether, say, the Holocaust really happened – they might not deny it, as such, but they don’t know enough on the matter to actually profess a belief in it. And I think you have to allow for the possibility that this might be fair. My own conviction is that the extermination of millions of Jews in Nazi Germany was a genuine event, but this is based largely on the historical and scientific consensus among people who’ve studied it and seem to know what they’re talking about, more than my knowledge of the actual facts. Although I’ve read Michael Shermer’s explanations of why Holocaust denialism is bunk, and have a reasoned trust in the academic research methods that have almost unanimously reached this conclusion, I couldn’t personally argue the case at all well right now. If I were even less informed, and had given it even less thought, I probably wouldn’t even be comfortable asserting a belief one way or the other.
And then there’s atheism, in which people do not profess a belief in any particular god, or in the concept of God in any general terms. And part of the belief system of anyone who calls themself an atheist in this way is the claim that this is not like maintaining a lack of belief in the Sun, it’s not obvious that I ought to believe based on what’s right before my eyes, I can reasonably and rationally make the claim that I don’t have to believe in a god if I want to avoid being ridiculous.
Unless your lack of belief stems entirely from a lack of interest, this is a belief that needs to be justified.
As an atheist, I think this can be done, and that exploring the justifications can only be enlightening, and get me better acquainted with my belief system.
Let’s go back to Bob for a second. Bob’s not denying the Sun might exist, but he’s not willing to stick his neck out and take a side on the issue. Chances are, if he ever brings this up in conversation, the reaction he gets will be a rather confused one. His buddy Dave, for instance, might say:
What the hell do you mean, you “don’t believe in the Sun?” It’s right there, for frig’s sake! It’s in the sky, you can see it! Also, after millennia of observing the heavens and decades of sending stuff up there to take pictures and look around, we have a pretty good idea of our place in the solar system, specifically that our roughly spherical planet is held in an elliptical orbit around the Sun by the gravitational force suggested by Newtonian mechanics, but more important, it’s right sodding there up in the sky, you cretin.
Dave’s a little tetchy. He thinks Bob’s being ridiculous, because he thinks that his arguments in favour of believing in the existence of the Sun are sufficient that you really should believe in it; anyone who doesn’t must be either completely irrational, or deeply uninformed, unintelligent, or uninterested, to an extent rarely seen in modern humans with full mental faculties. And I’d be inclined to agree. I mean, the Sun’s right there.
For Bob to have any chance of being taken seriously, there must be some reason why Dave’s argument doesn’t convince him. If he can’t explain why he maintains his position, in the face of any new argument or evidence presented that might undermine it, he can’t claim to be using sound reasoning. He’s not obliged to explain himself again in detail every time, to everyone who ever brings up any objection, but there must be a reason, in each case, why this new argument doesn’t make him change his mind. And “The Sun’s right there, why wouldn’t you believe in it?” is something I think he’d struggle to answer.
Similarly, atheists need to have a reason for maintaining a lack of belief. We might be starting off from the default position, but as soon as someone asks, “Where did the Universe and all this cool stuff it’s got come from?” we need to have a reason for not being persuaded by this to believe in a god.
(It’s important to note that this is not the same as saying we need to answer the question. The question itself isn’t an argument for a god’s existence, because a question can’t be declaring anything. The argument implicit in the question might go something like: The Universe exists, and has all this cool stuff in it, which couldn’t have come from nothing, and couldn’t just be here with no reason, therefore it must have been (or probably was) created by some divine being. Atheism needs a reason why it doesn’t reach this same conclusion. Yes, the arguments do get a lot more intricate and sophisticated and complex than this, and address all manner of different subjects; I’m just describing the framework.)
I won’t get into the details here of where the rest of that argument goes. The point is that atheism is a position which needs to be able to logically support itself against any theistic arguments, and we atheists positively assert that this can be done. Further, I claim that the theistic belief system does not adequately address atheistic counter-arguments which suggest that a belief in a god is unfounded, or even that many particular gods are highly unlikely to exist. To me, this is what the atheist belief system is.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 21, 2014 16:52:39 GMT -5
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. "Islam isn't a monolithic belief system so WHICH version of Islam are you talking about? "I thought you were up on these matters, I'm referring to the sects that are in the ascendancy. The ones who are setting the benchmarks. I take it you can work out which sects I'm referring to, but just in case you can't... one is in total control in your favoured destination of Saudi Arabia and the other was recently deposed in Egypt. "And you've said many times that you 'know' there is no God "Have you found some proof to the contrary or are you just reaffirming your faith? An accurate evaluation of the (total lack of) evidence for the existence of any deity is hardly dogmatic. It's rational. "the automatic statement that Islam 'is' evil "This is blatant mumbo jumbo talk. I actually said: "It's a barbaric 7th century mindset" How peaceful have the peaceful ones been this year so far? "Militants have launched a spate of attacks in Kashmir to deter people from taking part in the ongoing Indian general election. Kashmir police officials say that separatist Islamist insurgents, many of them of foreign origin, are trying to disrupt the elections in the state." - www.ibtimes.co.uk/islamist-militants-launch-spate-attacks-kashmir-disrupt-elections-1445585"A suicide bomber killed at least 35 people at Russia's busiest airport on Monday, state TV said, in an attack on the capital that bore the hallmarks of militants fighting for an Islamist state in the North Caucasus region." - www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/24/us-russia-blast-airport-idUSTRE70N2TQ20110124"An Islamist militia behind prior attacks in Libya is thought to be responsible for the execution-style shootings of seven Egyptian Christians found yesterday east of Benghazi." - morningstarnews.org/2014/02/islamist-militia-group-in-libya-suspected-in-killing-of-seven-copts/"Kenya Seen Facing Escalated Threat of Attacks by Islamists" - www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-03/kenya-seen-facing-escalated-risk-of-attacks-by-islamist-groups.html"Islamist militants kill 30 in attacks around Iraq" - dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Apr-17/253638-gunmen-attack-iraq-military-base-kill-10-soldiers.ashx#axzz32OAqyZNqShall we include Boko Haram? They've been very busy.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 21, 2014 17:00:19 GMT -5
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? "Atheism - like theism..."No it isn't . You believe, I look at evidence. You choose a quaint ancient belief system with a father/son/holy ghost at the apex. That was probably pretty progressive in its day, I prefer to do my own thinking
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on May 22, 2014 2:53:59 GMT -5
If you have evidence of the existence of a deity then, by all means, present it for our examination.
|
|
Tempus Fugit
Global Facilitator
Contributing Member
Science - making religion look stupid since the 17th century.
Posts: 7,474
|
Post by Tempus Fugit on May 22, 2014 2:55:45 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. Having established you don't do irony I think we're now on our way to establishing that you don't do sarcasm, either!
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 22, 2014 7:08:45 GMT -5
"Islam isn't a monolithic belief system so WHICH version of Islam are you talking about? "
I thought you were up on these matters, I'm referring to the sects that are in the ascendancy. The ones who are setting the benchmarks. I take it you can work out which sects I'm referring to, but just in case you can't... one is in total control in your favoured destination of Saudi Arabia and the other was recently deposed in Egypt.You're assuming that these sects ARE in the ascendancy. They just make more noise. And as far as Saudi is concerned as I've shown in several news items I've posted the OPPOSITE is happening in that country; the extremists have LESS power and influence than they once did. So you're factually wrong. In any case it's 'blatant mumbo-jumbo talk' to pretend that the actions of a minority can be used as an excuse to condemn the overwhelming majority of people in a particular group. "the automatic statement that Islam 'is' evil "
This is blatant mumbo jumbo talk. I actually said: "It's a barbaric 7th century mindset" Well, it's arguable that there's much real difference between the two statements. And of course calling it barbaric is only an opinion and NOT a fact. How peaceful have the peaceful ones been this year so far?
"Militants have launched a spate of attacks in Kashmir to deter people from taking part in the ongoing Indian general election. Kashmir police officials say that separatist Islamist insurgents, many of them of foreign origin, are trying to disrupt the elections in the state." - www.ibtimes.co.uk/islamist-militants-launch-spate-attacks-kashmir-disrupt-elections-1445585
"A suicide bomber killed at least 35 people at Russia's busiest airport on Monday, state TV said, in an attack on the capital that bore the hallmarks of militants fighting for an Islamist state in the North Caucasus region." - www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/24/us-russia-blast-airport-idUSTRE70N2TQ20110124
"An Islamist militia behind prior attacks in Libya is thought to be responsible for the execution-style shootings of seven Egyptian Christians found yesterday east of Benghazi." - morningstarnews.org/2014/02/islamist-militia-group-in-libya-suspected-in-killing-of-seven-copts/
"Kenya Seen Facing Escalated Threat of Attacks by Islamists" - www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-03/kenya-seen-facing-escalated-risk-of-attacks-by-islamist-groups.html
"Islamist militants kill 30 in attacks around Iraq" - dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Apr-17/253638-gunmen-attack-iraq-military-base-kill-10-soldiers.ashx#axzz32OAqyZNq
Shall we include Boko Haram? They've been very busy.I've NEVER denied that there are Muslim terrorists NOR have I ever done anything other than condemn them. I've never once seen you condemn NON-MUSLIM terrorists. Selective indignation again, I guess.
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 22, 2014 7:14:06 GMT -5
"Atheism - like theism..."
No it isn't . You believe, I look at evidence. You choose a quaint ancient belief system with a father/son/holy ghost at the apex. That was probably pretty progressive in its day, I prefer to do my own thinking
Yes it is. You believe, I believe. Both of us look at evidence and interpret it differently.
You choose a comforting ancient belief system with human beings at the apex. That may have seemed progressive in the nineteenth century but it's pretty antiquated now.
And I am about as independent a thinker as you'll come across.
But of course you prefer to believe in atheism because it flatters human arrogance.
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 22, 2014 7:15:04 GMT -5
If you have evidence of the existence of a deity then, by all means, present it for our examination. If you have evidence of the non-existence of a deity by all means present it for our examination. I'll look at it with a genuinely open mind!
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 22, 2014 7:17:13 GMT -5
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. Having established you don't do irony I think we're now on our way to establishing that you don't do sarcasm, either! Well, as I've frequently used irony on here - the most recent example I think was when I said that people who were privately educated went to those schools because they didn't have the brains to succeed in the state system - your argument doesn't hold water. As for sarcasm I try to avoid it because it's just childish and hurts people. I prefer to have a light-hearted banter rather than get nasty.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 22, 2014 7:20:46 GMT -5
"Islam isn't a monolithic belief system so WHICH version of Islam are you talking about? "
I thought you were up on these matters, I'm referring to the sects that are in the ascendancy. The ones who are setting the benchmarks. I take it you can work out which sects I'm referring to, but just in case you can't... one is in total control in your favoured destination of Saudi Arabia and the other was recently deposed in Egypt.You're assuming that these sects ARE in the ascendancy. They just make more noise. And as far as Saudi is concerned as I've shown in several news items I've posted the OPPOSITE is happening in that country; the extremists have LESS power and influence than they once did. So you're factually wrong. In any case it's 'blatant mumbo-jumbo talk' to pretend that the actions of a minority can be used as an excuse to condemn the overwhelming majority of people in a particular group. "the automatic statement that Islam 'is' evil "
This is blatant mumbo jumbo talk. I actually said: "It's a barbaric 7th century mindset" Well, it's arguable that there's much real difference between the two statements. And of course calling it barbaric is only an opinion and NOT a fact. How peaceful have the peaceful ones been this year so far?
"Militants have launched a spate of attacks in Kashmir to deter people from taking part in the ongoing Indian general election. Kashmir police officials say that separatist Islamist insurgents, many of them of foreign origin, are trying to disrupt the elections in the state." - www.ibtimes.co.uk/islamist-militants-launch-spate-attacks-kashmir-disrupt-elections-1445585
"A suicide bomber killed at least 35 people at Russia's busiest airport on Monday, state TV said, in an attack on the capital that bore the hallmarks of militants fighting for an Islamist state in the North Caucasus region." - www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/24/us-russia-blast-airport-idUSTRE70N2TQ20110124
"An Islamist militia behind prior attacks in Libya is thought to be responsible for the execution-style shootings of seven Egyptian Christians found yesterday east of Benghazi." - morningstarnews.org/2014/02/islamist-militia-group-in-libya-suspected-in-killing-of-seven-copts/
"Kenya Seen Facing Escalated Threat of Attacks by Islamists" - www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-03/kenya-seen-facing-escalated-risk-of-attacks-by-islamist-groups.html
"Islamist militants kill 30 in attacks around Iraq" - dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Apr-17/253638-gunmen-attack-iraq-military-base-kill-10-soldiers.ashx#axzz32OAqyZNq
Shall we include Boko Haram? They've been very busy.I've NEVER denied that there are Muslim terrorists NOR have I ever done anything other than condemn them. I've never once seen you condemn NON-MUSLIM terrorists. Selective indignation again, I guess. Current events kind of show who's in the ascendancy, you can deny it if you like, but it doesn't change the reality. "I've never once seen you condemn NON-MUSLIM terrorists"Who did you have in mind?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 22, 2014 7:22:51 GMT -5
"Atheism - like theism..."
No it isn't . You believe, I look at evidence. You choose a quaint ancient belief system with a father/son/holy ghost at the apex. That was probably pretty progressive in its day, I prefer to do my own thinkingYes it is. You believe, I believe. Both of us look at evidence and interpret it differently. You choose a comforting ancient belief system with human beings at the apex. That may have seemed progressive in the nineteenth century but it's pretty antiquated now. And I am about as independent a thinker as you'll come across. But of course you prefer to believe in atheism because it flatters human arrogance. I believe in atheism? You really cannot think outside the religious box, Lin.
|
|