Sharia Law enables the rape and torture a child

[4a6c1]

.

[DCSL]

That... makes me so angry.

[Delias]

Fucking terrible. I despair of our species ever overcoming its innate douchebaggery.

Edit: Or rather, not innate... contrived might be a better word. I don't know, my brain is scrambled. Still, fucking horrible. I guess that's what I'm getting at.

[waywardgs]

http://www.findingtruthmatters.org/articles/new-morality/God_is_not_great.jpg

[Reltov420]

Misanthropy must be a very wide spread condition, I know I have a terrible case. Besides the laws being absurd, what the fuck was going through the guy's mind who was killing a young girl with a whip? If thats complete religious conviction, I'm not sure I would ever want to experience it.

[waywardgs]

Religious conviction should be listed in the DSM as a mental disorder.

[~Rocktar~]

Depending on your religion, it, or it's beliefs, already are. The big 3 get a pass despite things like this being A-OK. But hey, let's keep being "tolerant" and letting this spread and take a foothold here. We can use more slums and shanty towns filled with ignorant religious zealots standing by while rape victims get beaten to death by the neighbors.

Sharia Law is an abomination, Old Testament Law is nearly as harsh except you don't see Jews beating rape victims to death and hiding those that would maim women and girls because they got snubbed for a date.

Try and defend this IW, where is your peaceful and benevolent Allah now?

[Gan]

This is sickening.

[4a6c1]

My bad. Title is obviously missing (of).

[TheEschaton]

Err, this is a result of lack of intelligence and civilization, as it took place in a backwards ass part of Bangladesh. If it was in a backwards ass part of Alabama a mere 100 years ago, and she was black, she would have been hung from a tree.

The thing is, this results from a lack of education, not as a direct result of Islam. I'm Catholic and my holy book tells me to stone people who mix fabrics. But I'm not fucking ignorant, so I don't do it. Likewise, if the villagers had been Hindu instead of Islamic, they would have found a Hindu law to kill her with, if they were Christian, they would have found plenty of laws to kill her with, if they were atheists, they would have found some other insane as shit reason to kill her.

-TheE-

[diethx]

So being uneducated means you want to kill little girls? Hmm...

Ok, so I get that 100 years ago in Alabama white people killed black people... but for being black. Wasn't this girl the same color/creed/etc as the rest of the villagers? Why would they want to kill her if not for their religion telling them to?

I'm with waywardgs on this.

[Drew]

I read this story a few weeks ago and it said the men who passed the ruling were being charged.

[TheEschaton]

Women have been tortured for millenia by men. Women were the original black people.

[Stanley Burrell]

Not O.K. Definitely not O.K. for Bangladesh.

[RichardCranium]

I thought Dolemite was the original black people.

[TheEschaton]

What I mean to say is, this was a fatwa issued by men, and enforced by men. The man who was punished was sentenced to 201 lashes, and escaped after a handful, and wasn't then re-lashed.

In fact, given that the man's punishment under Sharia law was worse, I don't think you can say Islam led to the torture and rape of a child. No, the root causes are in lack of education, and sexism, the latter being able to exist due to the presence of the former.

[TheEschaton]

So being uneducated means you want to kill little girls? Hmm...

Ok, so I get that 100 years ago in Alabama white people killed black people... but for being black. Wasn't this girl the same color/creed/etc as the rest of the villagers? Why would they want to kill her if not for their religion telling them to?

I'm with waywardgs on this.

Also, being from that part of the world, I can tell you that the difference between the sexes might as well be the differences between two cultures.

[diethx]

Also, being from that part of the world, I can tell you that the difference between the sexes might as well be the differences between two cultures.

Perhaps, but they don't kill all their women for being women, do they?

My point is, it's fine if you don't want to believe that their religion caused this. But don't say something silly like, oh if they were atheists they'd find another reason to kill her, they just aren't educated - because that just doesn't make sense.

[IorakeWarhammer]

step 1: find some ignorant community that has misunderstood Shariah law and clearly victimized an innocent woman

step 2: publicize it in the Western media

step 3: somehow feel good about ourselves when we're killing hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, destablizing countries, dropping depleted uranium and [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24049] possibly nuclear weapons on places like Libya

where were you guys in the 1990s when the most comprehensive sanctions in human history helped to starve millions of Iraqi children?

news flash: you guys don't give a CRAP about this poor Bangladeshi girl, as you blindly accept US foreign policy worldwide

What these Banglas have done is wrong. It's also wrong to use it for propaganda purposes to dismiss the religion of truth as violent and barbaric.

Western values aren't exactly looking too good now either.

waah waah waah shariah law 1 victim [bomb country and kill millions]

classic American hypocritical sob story. don't use this victim in your quest to abolish Islam and other religions. it is what it is - a bunch of ignorant people in a third world country used religion to justify evil. to me, that isn't as bad as a bunch of highly educated people in an advanced Western country using humanitarianism to justify evil.

[Ardwen]

Religion and the ignorance, both intentionally and unintentionally fostered by it has caused more wars and killed more people throughout history then anything this side of the black death. Cultural differences historically cause strife, hell even minor differences have caused major unrest, I doubt thats going to change any time soon.

[IorakeWarhammer]

Religion and the ignorance, both intentionally and unintentionally fostered by it has caused more wars and killed more people throughout history then anything this side of the black death. Cultural differences historically cause strife, hell even minor differences have caused major unrest, I doubt thats going to change any time soon.

under Communism (an ideology that discourages all religious practice) more died than under any ideology in modern history

Just FYI.

[Ardwen]

The vast majority of deaths under communism were those caused/inspired by cultural difference, at least in the soviet union. Stalin much like Hitler used his uncontested power to try to utterly eliminate entire racial and cultural groups. No different then the hate in Iraq between Sunni, Shiite and Kurd, the group in control uses that control to eliminate its traditional enemies, most of those enmities predating the existance of any major religion at all.

[Warriorbird]

Vast amounts of the "deaths under Communism" also occurred due to starvation and WW2.


step 1: find some ignorant community that has misunderstood Shariah law and clearly victimized an innocent woman

step 2: publicize it in the Western media

step 3: somehow feel good about ourselves when we're killing hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, destablizing countries, dropping depleted uranium and [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24049] possibly nuclear weapons on places like Libya

where were you guys in the 1990s when the most comprehensive sanctions in human history helped to starve millions of Iraqi children?

news flash: you guys don't give a CRAP about this poor Bangladeshi girl, as you blindly accept US foreign policy worldwide

What these Banglas have done is wrong. It's also wrong to use it for propaganda purposes to dismiss the religion of truth as violent and barbaric.

Western values aren't exactly looking too good now either.

waah waah waah shariah law 1 victim [bomb country and kill millions]

classic American hypocritical sob story. don't use this victim in your quest to abolish Islam and other religions. it is what it is - a bunch of ignorant people in a third world country used religion to justify evil. to me, that isn't as bad as a bunch of highly educated people in an advanced Western country using humanitarianism to justify evil.

I see. So it's wrong but that doesn't matter because America is bad.

Insightful... and indirectly throwing more innocent Muslims in Libya under the bus.

Stand up for your "people!"

[AnticorRifling]

IW supports rape and murder because it's not as bad as America (but he won't leave because that would require manning up and living in a place where being a hypocrit would get him raped and murdered)

[IorakeWarhammer]

I said it was wrong. But I'm sure you didn't notice because you were preparing to shovel more words into my mouth. (see avatar)

I just find it sad that you guys act like you're concerned about this girl when you really don't give a fuck. You just want to use her death as momentum for your anti-religion arguments.

[Delias]

Religion of truth is oxymoronic.

[IorakeWarhammer]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/us/29texas.html

a 11 year old girl in Texas a victim of several gang rapes over a 3 month period. half of her small community was complicit and never spoke up. yes, no bumbling religious court was involved to make matters worse, but it's still a horrible crime that is worthy of attention.

as such an advanced and civilized nation, perhaps we should make sure that these types of heinous crimes aren't happening in our land before going around pointing fingers at others?

[waywardgs]

What happened to her was a crime, not a punishment.

[Ardwen]

I didnt notice her getting stoned to death or whipped when the crimes were finally reported, thats a pretty vast difference in the end of the actions.

[Atlanteax]

What I mean to say is, this was a fatwa issued by men, and enforced by men. The man who was punished was sentenced to 201 lashes, and escaped after a handful, and wasn't then re-lashed.

In fact, given that the man's punishment under Sharia law was worse, I don't think you can say Islam led to the torture and rape of a child. No, the root causes are in lack of education, and sexism, the latter being able to exist due to the presence of the former.

How it is *not* related to Islam, when educational institutions under the influence of Islam tend to condone/encourage the continued oppression of women?

[Bobmuhthol]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/us/29texas.html

a 11 year old girl in Texas a victim of several gang rapes over a 3 month period. half of her small community was complicit and never spoke up. yes, no bumbling religious court was involved to make matters worse, but it's still a horrible crime that is worthy of attention.

as such an advanced and civilized nation, perhaps we should make sure that these types of heinous crimes aren't happening in our land before going around pointing fingers at others?

Bro, did you really just make the argument that someone committing a crime within a political border is the same as a representative institution committing a crime? You for real bro?

[IorakeWarhammer]

I fully agree that these people used religion to justify butchering a poor kid who was raped. I think these people need to be reformed tremendously, and those involved should be tried (by a different system in Bangladesh, obviously) for what they have done. Justice needs to remedy this situation. Shariah has clearly been misinterpreted here.

i'm just shocked you're all so concerned about this 1 issue when much more grievous misinterpretations of laws are happening worldwide

such as the criminal stretching/misinterpreting of US / International law that our leaders have used to justify a new resource grab in Libya, or the 2 million who died in Iraq after 2003, or the millions who died from the sanctions before..

this seems like a glorious distraction, something that people will use to feign concern about humanity, so they can go home and sleep tight pretending they care.

oh and don't forget!

In the programme Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, which starts on Monday, the former Palestinian foreign minister Nabil Shaath says Mr Bush told him and Mahmoud Abbas, former prime minister and now Palestinian President: "I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George go and end the tyranny in Iraq,' and I did."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-god-told-me-to-invade-iraq-509925.html

Christianity MUST be to blame! There's no chance George Bush is just a deluded idiot!!!

God you guys are dense.

[waywardgs]

In the programme Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, which starts on Monday, the former Palestinian foreign minister Nabil Shaath says Mr Bush told him and Mahmoud Abbas, former prime minister and now Palestinian President: "I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George go and end the tyranny in Iraq,' and I did."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-god-told-me-to-invade-iraq-509925.html

See? Religion poisons everything.

[IorakeWarhammer]

See? Religion poisons everything.

did you see what I did thar? it isn't religion, it's the fact that Bush is a delusional ex coke-head. he just USED religion to justify his actions. does that tarnish Christianity?

does it tarnish Western values when we kill millions of Muslims in the name of peace and humanitarianism and protecting ourselves?

you see what i'm getting at here?!?!?!

[Bobmuhthol]

Christianity blows.

[Tsa`ah]

How it is *not* related to Islam, when educational institutions under the influence of Islam tend to condone/encourage the continued oppression of women?

I believe the point he was making was that it had less to do with Islam and more to do with an ignorance of Islam.

In case you missed it, there have been several cases within the last decade of "Christian" parents beating their children ... often to death ... based upon an ignorance of their own bible. Specifically Judaic laws that they don't follow in the first place.

Now, based upon these beatings and deaths caused by said beatings ... using the logic facilitated in this thread ... we can safely come to the conclusion that the spread of Christianity, and the practice of, is a horrible thing ... after all, Christian understanding of Judaic law allows for the abuse and murder of children does it not?

Or we can just use our fucking brains, not cave into bigotry based in the same fucking ignorance, and conclude that people that do these things in the name of their religion, or specifically the laws prescribed in their religion ... do so out of an ignorance of their own religious laws and chosen theology.

[Delias]

I believe the point he was making was that it had less to do with Islam and more to do with an ignorance of Islam.

In case you missed it, there have been several cases within the last decade of "Christian" parents beating their children ... often to death ... based upon an ignorance of their own bible. Specifically Judaic laws that they don't follow in the first place.

Now, based upon these beatings and deaths caused by said beatings ... using the logic facilitated in this thread ... we can safely come to the conclusion that the spread of Christianity, and the practice of, is a horrible thing ... after all, Christian understanding of Judaic law allows for the abuse and murder of children does it not?

Or we can just use our fucking brains, not cave into bigotry based in the same fucking ignorance, and conclude that people that do these things in the name of their religion, or specifically the laws prescribed in their religion ... do so out of an ignorance of their own religious laws and chosen theology.

Religion exists because of ignorance- the earth shakes because the gods are angry.

[waywardgs]

I believe the point he was making was that it had less to do with Islam and more to do with an ignorance of Islam.

In case you missed it, there have been several cases within the last decade of "Christian" parents beating their children ... often to death ... based upon an ignorance of their own bible. Specifically Judaic laws that they don't follow in the first place.

Now, based upon these beatings and deaths caused by said beatings ... using the logic facilitated in this thread ... we can safely come to the conclusion that the spread of Christianity, and the practice of, is a horrible thing ... after all, Christian understanding of Judaic law allows for the abuse and murder of children does it not?

Or we can just use our fucking brains, not cave into bigotry based in the same fucking ignorance, and conclude that people that do these things in the name of their religion, or specifically the laws prescribed in their religion ... do so out of an ignorance of their own religious laws and chosen theology.

You all are just proving my point. Religious justification is the problem, doesn't matter if the rules have been misinterpreted or not. Religion gives people whatever justification they want for doing whatever they want. It's certainly not exclusive to Islam either, there's no doubt about that. I never claimed it was, and I would say ALL religion suffers from this without exception.

[Tsa`ah]

You all are just proving my point. Religious justification is the problem, doesn't matter if the rules have been misinterpreted or not. Religion gives people whatever justification they want for doing whatever they want. It's certainly not exclusive to Islam either, there's no doubt about that. I never claimed it was, and I would say ALL religion suffers from this without exception.

Religion rarely gives justification for atrocities to be committed ... ignorance of the religion does.

Just because a person or group of people claim religious justification does in no way mean that said means of justification actually exists.

You can transpose "religion" with "constitution" to the same effect.

[AnticorRifling]

I said it was wrong. But I'm sure you didn't notice because you were preparing to shovel more words into my mouth. (see avatar)

I just find it sad that you guys act like you're concerned about this girl when you really don't give a fuck. You just want to use her death as momentum for your anti-religion arguments.

You're retarded, we aren't against the religion we're against the stoning to death of a little girl. You're the one focused on the overall religion of it and not the fact that a little girl was killed. I don't think anyone has said GUYS ALL OF ISLAM IS BAD BECAUSE OF THIS ONE INCIDENT. I think they said guys this one incident is horrid and shit like this shouldn't go on. Let me know if you can't see the difference there.

I do like your example below where the girl was raped in America but she wasn't put to death for being the victim. Nicely done...

[IorakeWarhammer]

Or we can just use our fucking brains, not cave into bigotry based in the same fucking ignorance, and conclude that people that do these things in the name of their religion, or specifically the laws prescribed in their religion ... do so out of an ignorance of their own religious laws and chosen theology.

Thank you. I rest my case. I also pray that Allah upholds justice on behalf of this woman and is holds these men 100% accountable. Islam teaches accountability people! Very few people will receive true justice for the crimes committed against them in this life. The Day of Judgement is where true justice will be seen, as shown in the following verse:

[Zilzal 99:1] When the earth is shaken with its appointed tremor.
[Zilzal 99:2] And the earth throws out its burdens.
[Zilzal 99:3] And man says, “What has happened to it?”
[Zilzal 99:4] On that day earth will narrate its news (about the justice / injustice that happened on its surface)
[Zilzal 99:5] Because your Lord sent a command to it.
[Zilzal 99:6] On that day men will return towards their Lord, in different groups, in order to be shown their deeds.
[Zilzal 99:7] So whoever does a good deed equal to the weight of the minutest particle, will see it.
[Zilzal 99:8] And whoever does an evil deed equal to the weight of the minutest particle, will see it.

I will leave the thread alone now guys. Apologies if you felt I was trolling, and I appreciate your concern for my Muslim sister.

[waywardgs]

Religion rarely gives justification for atrocities to be committed ... ignorance of the religion does.

Just because a person or group of people claim religious justification does in no way mean that said means of justification actually exists.

You can transpose "religion" with "constitution" to the same effect.

Religion is flawed right from the start though- it's a complete misrepresentation of reality. It's no surprise such a deeply flawed system of thought is used by the ignorant and manipulated by the power hungry to ill effect.

[AnticorRifling]

Thank you. I rest my case. I also pray that Allah brings justice to this woman. Islam teaches accountability people. Very few people will receive true justice for the crimes committed against them in this life. The Day of Judgement is where true justice will be seen, as shown in the following verse:

[Zilzal 99:1] When the earth is shaken with its appointed tremor.
[Zilzal 99:2] And the earth throws out its burdens.
[Zilzal 99:3] And man says, “What has happened to it?”
[Zilzal 99:4] On that day earth will narrate its news (about the justice / injustice that happened on its surface)
[Zilzal 99:5] Because your Lord sent a command to it.
[Zilzal 99:6] On that day men will return towards their Lord, in different groups, in order to be shown their deeds.
[Zilzal 99:7] So whoever does a good deed equal to the weight of the minutest particle, will see it.
[Zilzal 99:8] And whoever does an evil deed equal to the weight of the minutest particle, will see it.

I will leave the thread alone now guys. Apologies if you felt I was trolling, and I appreciate your concern for my Muslim sister.

You are trolling. She's not your sister. Excellent job of using a tragic act of "YOUR PEOPLES" to hate on America some more.

[IorakeWarhammer]

You are trolling. She's not your sister. Excellent job of using a tragic act of "YOUR PEOPLES" to hate on America some more.

I like America. I don't like what some Americans do.

I like Islam. I don't like what some Muslims do.

edit: OK IM DONE!!!!!!!!11one


I don't think anyone has said GUYS ALL OF ISLAM IS BAD BECAUSE OF THIS ONE INCIDENT. I think they said guys this one incident is horrid and shit like this shouldn't go on.

If a Muslim doesn't believe in Shariah law (we believe Shariah is the divine law sent by Allah and implemented by Muhammad (salalaahu alayhi wa sallam) and his companions (raDi Allahu aynhum) then there are serious questions about their true loyalty to the faith. I won't go as far to say "it disqualifies them as being Muslims," but many would say it does.

In light of that.. what's the name of this thread again? Yeah.

[Tsa`ah]

Religion is flawed right from the start though- it's a complete misrepresentation of reality. It's no surprise such a deeply flawed system of thought is used by the ignorant and manipulated by the power hungry to ill effect.

That's a matter of perspective.

You can read about the genocides perpetrated by ancient Hebrews as they moved into Israel and come to the conclusion that the genocides were justifiable because they at the command of g-d, or you can read about the genocides and come to the conclusion that they were horrible atrocities that a people committed because they were misguided.

It comes down to perspective ... and ultimately education.

[NocturnalRob]

I like America...edit: OK IM DONE!!!!!!!!11one
lies

[waywardgs]

That's a matter of perspective.

You can read about the genocides perpetrated by ancient Hebrews as they moved into Israel and come to the conclusion that the genocides were justifiable because they at the command of g-d, or you can read about the genocides and come to the conclusion that they were horrible atrocities that a people committed because they were misguided.

It comes down to perspective ... and ultimately education.

The origin of the universe is not "a matter of perspective." And yes, it does come down to education- we know enough now to drop these lies, wake up and live in the real world.

[Tsa`ah]

The origin of the universe is not "a matter of perspective." And yes, it does come down to education- we know enough now to drop these lies, wake up and live in the real world.

You're sort of transposing "perspectives" here.

A person can read their texts and gain the perspective of "history" ... or one can read their texts and gain a perspective of "morality".

See Gould (RIP) and non-overlapping magisteria.

[waywardgs]

A person can read their texts and gain the perspective of "history" ... or one can read their texts and gain a perspective of "morality".


Sure- a fake history and a bullshit morality based on lies, designed to keep people enslaved to said fake history.

[Delias]

You're sort of transposing "perspectives" here.

A person can read their texts and gain the perspective of "history" ... or one can read their texts and gain a perspective of "morality".

See Gould (RIP) and non-overlapping magisteria.

Or, you know... science.

[Tsa`ah]

Sure- a fake history and a bullshit morality based on lies, designed to keep people enslaved to said fake history.

I'd rather say an unproven history that is highly speculative in nature. I wouldn't go as far as saying "being charitable" or "being compassionate" or "not being a murdering, thieving douche bag" are goals to enslave people based upon a bullshit morality or lies.

[Tsa`ah]

Or, you know... science.

You missed the Gould reference didn't you.

[Delias]

I'd rather say an unproven history that is highly speculative in nature. I wouldn't go as far as saying "being charitable" or "being compassionate" or "not being a murdering, thieving douche bag" are goals to enslave people based upon a bullshit morality or lies.

Morality should be approached from a place of compassionate logic, not based on the sacred writing so the spaghetti monster's favored disciple.

[Tsa`ah]

Morality should be approached from a place of compassionate logic, not based on the sacred writing so the spaghetti monster's favored disciple.

Science does not teach morality. Science is actually bereft of morality.

Logic also, is bereft of compassion.

You can take the texts and consider them divine, with a divine message. Or you can take them for what they are ... lessons in morality.

[AnticorRifling]

Logic also, is bereft of compassion.

This is why logic kicks so much ass.

[waywardgs]

I'd rather say an unproven history that is highly speculative in nature. I wouldn't go as far as saying "being charitable" or "being compassionate" or "not being a murdering, thieving douche bag" are goals to enslave people based upon a bullshit morality or lies.

An unproven history? That the world was made in seven days 6000 years ago? That's not "unproven," that's nonsense. But that's just one example. Pick a religion, show me the history of the world they posit, and I will show you lies.

As far as being charitable, compassionate, not murdering- I said it before. If you need stone tablets from god to tell you not to kill people or to be a good person, you fail. Furthermore, those same texts are used to justify horrendous atrocities as often- if not more often- as they are used to justify 'good'.

A system of morality based on an original lie is not one you want to bank on.

[Delias]

Science does not teach morality. Science is actually bereft of morality.

Logic also, is bereft of compassion.

You can take the texts and consider them divine, with a divine message. Or you can take them for what they are ... lessons in morality.

Yes, I know logic is bereft of compassion, but you can temper it with compassion. Anyone who wasn't a retard trying to prove a retarded point would have realized this.

Science may be bereft of morality, but so is the universe we use it to see.

[waywardgs]

Science does not teach morality. Science is actually bereft of morality.

Logic also, is bereft of compassion.



Both completely untrue.

[Tgo01]

How did I know just from reading the title of this thread that IW would show up and try to minimize this horrible act of humanity by telling everyone that America is the real evil in the world?

Am I psychic? Or is IW such a douche that it was obvious to anyone with the ability to read?

[Tsa`ah]

An unproven history? That the world was made in seven days 6000 years ago? That's not "unproven," that's nonsense. But that's just one example. Pick a religion, show me the history of the world they posit, and I will show you lies.

As far as being charitable, compassionate, not murdering- I said it before. If you need stone tablets from god to tell you not to kill people or to be a good person, you fail. Furthermore, those same texts are used to justify horrendous atrocities as often- if not more often- as they are used to justify 'good'.

A system of morality based on an original lie is not one you want to bank on.

You seem to be banging your head on the same wall of ignorance that a religious zealot.

You are taking theological texts, as a zealot would, as a "set in stone" fact ... in which you want to deny. You're doing the same thing a religious nut job would do, just on the opposite side of the coin.

Would you say that it is wrong to kill another person that poses no threat to you and has done you (or anyone else) no wrong? Would you say that it is a good thing to have a law prohibiting this act ... that is tied to some pretty harsh punishments?

Only an idiot would say no ... or a sociopath. Logic nor science helps you arrive at the answer. Morality does.

You can discard the major themes/philosophy provided by any religion based upon the stories you refuse to believe ... but that does not negate the value of the philosophy.

Discarding said texts based upon what you refuse to believe is no different than using said texts to justify heinous acts.

We can't prove Christ existed any more than we can prove Moses, Abraham, Mohammad ... or pretty much any other figure existed. Well, we know Pilot and Nero existed.

In any event, you want to take a creation story as figurative and discard the philosophy attached to it. You wish to take the story of the exodus and say "bull" ... yet ignore the underlying lessons.


Yes, I know logic is bereft of compassion, but you can temper it with compassion. Anyone who wasn't a retard trying to prove a retarded point would have realized this.

Science may be bereft of morality, but so is the universe we use it to see.

Wow ... didn't take you long to get to douche bag did it? I replied to a statement that mixed unrelated terms in an attempt to "prove a retarded point".


Both completely untrue.

Care to prove this?

[Delias]

Wow ... didn't take you long to get to douche bag did it? I replied to a statement that mixed unrelated terms in an attempt to "prove a retarded point".


Does it ever? I try to keep things on a civil level but my bullshit tolerance is very low, and I get easily frustrated when I have to explain things that I've had to explain a hundred times before. It's not your fault- you're just one person at the end of a long line of people I've had to argue the same crap with.

[Tsa`ah]

You haven't made a single salient point to argue as of yet.

[IorakeWarhammer]

How did I know just from reading the title of this thread that IW would show up and try to minimize this horrible act of humanity by telling everyone that America is the real evil in the world?

Am I psychic? Or is IW such a douche that it was obvious to anyone with the ability to read?

let's play devil's advocate here

let's say the thread was named "The United States enables the rape and torture of detainees."

would you care? would you even post? would you call it propaganda?

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/images/2008/12/13/abughraibleash.jpg

[Delias]

You haven't made a single salient point to argue as of yet.

YOUR MOM.

Boom. I just won so hard.

[Tgo01]

let's play devil's advocate here

let's say the thread was named "The United States enables the rape and torture of detainees."

would you care? would you even post? would you call it propaganda?

Are you trying to further prove my point? Cause if so go on, you're doing a great job of showing what an ass you are.

[waywardgs]

You seem to be banging your head on the same wall of ignorance that a religious zealot.

You are taking theological texts, as a zealot would, as a "set in stone" fact ... in which you want to deny. You're doing the same thing a religious nut job would do, just on the opposite side of the coin.

Would you say that it is wrong to kill another person that poses no threat to you and has done you (or anyone else) no wrong? Would you say that it is a good thing to have a law prohibiting this act ... that is tied to some pretty harsh punishments?

Only an idiot would say no ... or a sociopath. Logic nor science helps you arrive at the answer. Morality does.

You can discard the major themes/philosophy provided by any religion based upon the stories you refuse to believe ... but that does not negate the value of the philosophy.

Discarding said texts based upon what you refuse to believe is no different than using said texts to justify heinous acts.

We can't prove Christ existed any more than we can prove Moses, Abraham, Mohammad ... or pretty much any other figure existed. Well, we know Pilot and Nero existed.

In any event, you want to take a creation story as figurative and discard the philosophy attached to it. You wish to take the story of the exodus and say "bull" ... yet ignore the underlying lessons.



Wow ... didn't take you long to get to douche bag did it? I replied to a statement that mixed unrelated terms in an attempt to "prove a retarded point".



Care to prove this?

I'd expound on this but I'm on my phone. Just let me ask you this: how do you get truths about morality from texts full of lies and fantasies? It's all based on wishful thinking, and the problem with that is you can manipulate that wishful thinking to whatever end you want. If your foundation is a house of cards, anything you build on it will fail you.

[Tsa`ah]

So, we should discard any lesson in morality one may glean from any one of Aesop's fables ... because they're based on fictional characters ... and what you now consider lies?

Interesting.

[IorakeWarhammer]

Are you trying to further prove my point? Cause if so go on, you're doing a great job of showing what an ass you are.
I am an ass. No one is debating that.

What I'm trying to prove is "do the posters in this thread care about preventing rape and torture? Yes- but only when it's done by Muslims."

[waywardgs]

I am an ass. No one is debating that.

What I'm trying to prove is "does the PC care about rape and torture? Yes- but only when it's done by Muslims."

C'mon, you know that's bullshit. Clearly rape and torture are awful acts no matter who's perpetrating them. We're not talking about islam anymore, either, I'm arguing an entirely different and broader point.

[IorakeWarhammer]

C'mon, you know that's bullshit. Clearly rape and torture are awful acts no matter who's perpetrating them. We're not talking about islam anymore, either, I'm arguing an entirely different and broader point.

keep going I was just responding to Tg01

[waywardgs]

So, we should discard any lesson in morality one may glean from any one of Aesop's fables ... because they're based on fictional characters ... and what you now consider lies?

Interesting.

So let's take the texts as stories. That's fine. Fiction. You can learn a lot from fiction. But people hold these texts up as the Word of God, and that's where the problem resides. They are posited as Truth with a capital T. They are used, manipulated, based on this assertion. That's what I have a problem with.

[Tgo01]

keep going I was just responding to Tg01

Except I didn't mention Islam either. I just mentioned what an ass you are and you agreed so why are we having this conversation?

[IorakeWarhammer]

if we don't draw morality from religion, where do we draw it from? Greeks, Romans? cuz they CLEARLY had a strong moral code strictly prohibiting sexual acts with children!!

Confucius? Buddha? I'm open to suggestions!

[Tgo01]

So let's take the texts as stories. That's fine. Fiction. You can learn a lot from fiction. But people hold these texts up as the Word of God, and that's where the problem resides. They are posited as Truth with a capital T. They are used, manipulated, based on this assertion. That's what I have a problem with.

Crazy and/or stupid people use ordinary, mundane things all the time as their reasoning to commit crimes. Video games, books, movies, twinkies, music, religion, the list goes on. Why are you singling out religion? Why do you hate it so much?

[waywardgs]

if we don't draw morality from religion, where do we draw it from? Greeks, Romans? cuz they CLEARLY had a strong moral code strictly prohibiting sexual acts with children!!

Confucius? Buddha? I'm open to suggestions!

You draw it from your experience, the experiences of your loved ones. You draw it from the way the world actually works now, in your time, not the way a few deluded "prophets of God" said it did thousands of years ago.

[waywardgs]

Crazy and/or stupid people use ordinary, mundane things all the time as their reasoning to commit crimes. Video games, books, movies, twinkies, music, religion, the list goes on. Why are you singling out religion? Why do you hate it so much?

Because it's poisoned the minds of billions of people for far too long. Those other things have happened, sure, but we deal with them in a rational way. Religion has been pushed into the realm of irrationality for far to long. I believe it to be a pervasive, destructive force that needs to be dealt with.

[Tsa`ah]

So let's take the texts as stories. That's fine. Fiction. You can learn a lot from fiction. But people hold these texts up as the Word of God, and that's where the problem resides. They are posited as Truth with a capital T. They are used, manipulated, based on this assertion. That's what I have a problem with.

So now you concede that it IS perspective.

[waywardgs]

So now you concede that it IS perspective.

That's not what I said at all. Fiction can give insight into other people and other lives. But when you call it "T"ruth, you're entering the danger zone.

[Delias]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fab0nsF1z2I

[Tsa`ah]

That's not what I said at all. Fiction can give insight into other people and other lives. But when you call it "T"ruth, you're entering the danger zone.

You're essentially conceding perspective yet still arguing against it.

[waywardgs]

You're essentially conceding perspective yet still arguing against it.

So you're admitting your religious texts are fiction?

[waywardgs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fab0nsF1z2I

I suppose that was inevitable.

[DCSL]

AR, I know you're reading this ('cause you have to, MOD MONKEY!) and I'm sorry.

[AnticorRifling]

let's play devil's advocate here

let's say the thread was named "The United States enables the rape and torture of detainees."

would you care? would you even post? would you call it propaganda?

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/images/2008/12/13/abughraibleash.jpg

We do care, we did post, we didn't call it propaganda then just like we don't call this propaganda.

Fuck you're retarded. (And a liar because you said you were done but that's not really surprising given your track record of fail).

[waywardgs]

AR, I know you're reading this ('cause you have to, MOD MONKEY!) and I'm sorry.

lol

[AnticorRifling]

AR, I know you're reading this ('cause you have to, MOD MONKEY!) and I'm sorry.

Yeah it's a blasty.

[Androidpk]

So let's take the texts as stories. That's fine. Fiction. You can learn a lot from fiction. But people hold these texts up as the Word of God, and that's where the problem resides. They are posited as Truth with a capital T. They are used, manipulated, based on this assertion. That's what I have a problem with.

Just like science is posited as truth?

[Tsa`ah]

So you're admitting your religious texts are fiction?

I'm agnostic. I question my texts.

[waywardgs]

Just like science is posited as truth?

Well, you actually pointed out one of the conundrums. The answer is, science changes. It is subject to a system that insists on constant re-evaluation, constant trial and error. Religion does not tolerate that kind of flexibility, and in fact condemns it as blasphemy.

[Delias]

Just like science is posited as truth?

There is a difference between altering your stance based on observed and verifiable data (science) and believing in something that a human being said was so back before they realized that bathing could extend your lifespan (religion).

[waywardgs]

I'm agnostic. I question my texts.

Then why bother with the "g-d" bullshit? Just type it out, I'm betting you don't get smote.

Besides, fence-sitters get sore asses.

[Tsa`ah]

Then why bother with the "g-d" bullshit? Just type it out, I'm betting you don't get smote.

Besides, fence-sitters get sore asses.

My use of "g-d" has to do with observance of tradition, not theological belief.

[ClydeR]

Sharia law is how we got Raymond Davis out of Pakistan. The family of the "victims" were paid $2 million, and Davis was released under the terms of Sharia law. Just as nobody seems to know why Davis was in Pakistan, nobody seems to know who paid the $2 million. Hillary Clinton said the United States government did not pay it.

In the United States, we do not dismiss murder charges when the family of the victim is paid money, even if the family members request that the charges be dismissed. In this country, that would be viewed as corrupt and unfair.

[Tgo01]

Because it's poisoned the minds of billions of people for far too long. Those other things have happened, sure, but we deal with them in a rational way. Religion has been pushed into the realm of irrationality for far to long. I believe it to be a pervasive, destructive force that needs to be dealt with.

When someone commits a crime because of music or ghosts rational people blame the person yet when someone commits a crime because of religion rational people blame religion.

Religion has also done a lot of good in the world, do we ignore all of that because of the bad and because it is all based on lies?

[waywardgs]

Religion has also done a lot of good in the world, do we ignore all of that because of the bad and because it is all based on lies?

Yup. The ulterior motives cause more damage. It's a flawed system. Get rid of it.

[Tgo01]

Yup. The ulterior motives cause more damage. It's a flawed system. Get rid of it.

What are the ulterior motives of religion?

[waywardgs]

What are the ulterior motives of religion?

Keeping itself alive. It's like a cancer.



If a system is flawed, you don't keep at it, you find a different way. If that new way doesn't work, you find another way. Discard the trash. Constant change, constant evolution. Holding desperately to something that doesn't work and has been shown to be false is a sign of insanity.

[Gan]

201 lashee: Damn, I got 201 lashes.
201 lasher: Psst! Bro, after the 4th lash or so - bolt and I make it look like I'm trying to catch you.
201 lashee: You are the man! I'll hook you up after things die down.

[NocturnalRob]

Yeah it's a blasty.
What is, "Something most men have said to your wife?"

[Gan]

What is, "Something most men have said to your wife?"

Thanks Alex, I'll take chin omlettes for $1000.

[IorakeWarhammer]

We do care, we did post, we didn't call it propaganda then just like we don't call this propaganda.

Fuck you're retarded. (And a liar because you said you were done but that's not really surprising given your track record of fail).

okay - this being said..

was the United States as a whole blamed, or just a few sadistic troops?

the few sadistic troops were blamed, even though evidence suggests the approval came from top brass.

where in this case, the entire Shariah law system is being blamed, where evidence suggests the crime was perpetrated by a small group of ignorant villagers

the irony!

again thanks for your input Anticor

[Latrinsorm]

Perhaps, but they don't kill all their women for being women, do they?Those Southerners who participated in lynch mobs didn't kill every black person either. Why would they? The whole point of terrorism is to scare people into doing what you want.
Religion exists because of ignorance- the earth shakes because the gods are angry.You should review your Durkheim.
The answer is, science changes. It is subject to a system that insists on constant re-evaluation, constant trial and error. Religion does not tolerate that kind of flexibility, and in fact condemns it as blasphemy.How do you reconcile this with, for instance, the Second Vatican Council? Or from the other side, the experiences of Ignaz Semmelweis?

There are dogmatic people everywhere. An objective observer might even conclude that you yourself are a dogmatic person. Is there an observable difference between a person who vehemently defends dogma for dogma's sake and a person who vehemently defends the truth because it is true?

[Delias]

You should review your Durkheim.

I'll review your face!

Damn, I am on fire today.

[TheEschaton]

How it is *not* related to Islam, when educational institutions under the influence of Islam tend to condone/encourage the continued oppression of women?

That's like saying "educational institutions under the influence of Christianity tend to condone/encourage the continued oppression of women," because, well, they do. The difference in behavior is not because Christianity is inherently better, but because Christianity tends to be present in more Westernized, educated countries. My holy book also says to stone women to death for adultery, and a "woman being raped by a married man" also used to count as adultery in Christianity. The difference is education. I don't go around stoning people who are having affairs because I don't take obscure interpretations of a book thousands of years old in a literal way.

-TheE-

[Delias]

That's like saying "educational institutions under the influence of Christianity tend to condone/encourage the continued oppression of women," because, well, they do. The difference in behavior is not because Christianity is inherently better, but because Christianity tends to be present in more Westernized, educated countries. My holy book also says to stone women to death for adultery, and a "woman being raped by a married man" also used to count as adultery in Christianity. The difference is education. I don't go around stoning people who are having affairs because I don't take obscure interpretations of a book thousands of years old in a literal way.

-TheE-

I just can't afford the stones.

[TheEschaton]

You're retarded, we aren't against the religion we're against the stoning to death of a little girl. You're the one focused on the overall religion of it and not the fact that a little girl was killed. I don't think anyone has said GUYS ALL OF ISLAM IS BAD BECAUSE OF THIS ONE INCIDENT. I think they said guys this one incident is horrid and shit like this shouldn't go on. Let me know if you can't see the difference there.

I do like your example below where the girl was raped in America but she wasn't put to death for being the victim. Nicely done...

The title of the thread is "Shariah Law enables the rape and torture [of] a child". Of course it's saying that Islam is to blame for this incident.

[waywardgs]

There are dogmatic people everywhere. An objective observer might even conclude that you yourself are a dogmatic person. Is there an observable difference between a person who vehemently defends dogma for dogma's sake and a person who vehemently defends the truth because it is true?


The answer is, science changes. It is subject to a system that insists on constant re-evaluation, constant trial and error. Religion does not tolerate that kind of flexibility, and in fact condemns it as blasphemy.

Pretty observable difference. Real truths (lower case) change. They evolve, they move with knowledge. Religious Truth (upper case) finds change vile and offensive. This kind of "T"ruth claims dominance over change, claims victory over knowledge and evolution. Religion rails against movement; it seeks the static and permanent. I submit that this sort of stasis is abhorrent to nature.

[lightwellspam]

step 1: find some ignorant community that has misunderstood Shariah law and clearly victimized an innocent woman

step 2: publicize it in the Western media

step 3: somehow feel good about ourselves when we're killing hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, destablizing countries, dropping depleted uranium and [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24049] possibly nuclear weapons on places like Libya

where were you guys in the 1990s when the most comprehensive sanctions in human history helped to starve millions of Iraqi children?

news flash: you guys don't give a CRAP about this poor Bangladeshi girl, as you blindly accept US foreign policy worldwide

What these Banglas have done is wrong. It's also wrong to use it for propaganda purposes to dismiss the religion of truth as violent and barbaric.

Western values aren't exactly looking too good now either.

waah waah waah shariah law 1 victim [bomb country and kill millions]

classic American hypocritical sob story. don't use this victim in your quest to abolish Islam and other religions. it is what it is - a bunch of ignorant people in a third world country used religion to justify evil. to me, that isn't as bad as a bunch of highly educated people in an advanced Western country using humanitarianism to justify evil.


many places in the world have practices such as this, especially in rural areas. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Kuwait, Indonesia, Somalia to name a few, where this practice is absolutely commonplace. And one of the original posters left out an important thing. Biblical Law is just as violent, just as barbaric, and just as cruel. Not just old testament, but new as well. Like where Jesus orders Luke to murder all those that do not accept him as their king of kings. Or the book of romans 1:24-32 WHERE GOD ORDERS MURDER TO ALL NONBELIEVERS AND ALL HOMOSEXUALS.

It is only a matter of time before the Bible and The Quran join the books of the roman and greek gods on the mythology shelves, and educated people laugh at the stupid as shit fucksticks who believed in stupid shit like men being swallowed by big fish and surviving the pressure of a fish's intestinal tract underwater "because the dungeonmaster... I mean God" says so.

[TheEschaton]

An unproven history? That the world was made in seven days 6000 years ago? That's not "unproven," that's nonsense. But that's just one example. Pick a religion, show me the history of the world they posit, and I will show you lies.

As far as being charitable, compassionate, not murdering- I said it before. If you need stone tablets from god to tell you not to kill people or to be a good person, you fail. Furthermore, those same texts are used to justify horrendous atrocities as often- if not more often- as they are used to justify 'good'.

A system of morality based on an original lie is not one you want to bank on.

People do need a system of morality to tell them that, because, at their very basest nature, human beings are animals, very smart monkeys. That is what science, says, no? Thus, it's in our nature to eliminate our competition, to fight, to assert dominance, for men to spread their seed liberally to propogate their genetic bloodline. With the rise of consciousness, and the rise of an intelligence so potent that this animal nature could literally spell the destruction of the rest of the race (cf nuclear weapons), a system of morality arose because it was needed to remind us we had to be better than the animals we once were.

Furthermore, your anti-religious rhetoric in this thread shows a rather appalling, yet expected lack of knowledge of religion. All the major religions in the world (and I include Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, etc) are, at their base, about treating others with love, respect, and kindness. All of them use myth and story to teach those lessons. But storytelling has *always* been the way humans have communicated history, it is not unique to religion. Do you think the history we know now is how things actually happened? The victors write history, and they tend to write themselves very favorably as the heroes in the situation. All history is untrue, to some degree. Some are outright myth, some downplay the flaws of one side and cry out against the evil of the other.

[AnticorRifling]

okay - this being said..

was the United States as a whole blamed, or just a few sadistic troops?

the few sadistic troops were blamed, even though evidence suggests the approval came from top brass.

where in this case, the entire Shariah law system is being blamed, where evidence suggests the crime was perpetrated by a small group of ignorant villagers

the irony!

again thanks for your input Anticor


No, the entire US military was blamed and dragged thru the mud for a long time, not just a few sadistic troops.

Just like everything else the 10% (or whatever you call the small group that ruins it for the rest of the organization, in the Marine Corps we called the shit birds the 10%) fuck up and focus the media. It's no different when a Marine rapes someone it's not XYZ commits rape it's MARINE or FORMER MARINE. I blame your media.

I'm not blaming all of Islam, I'm blaming the idiots. You, on the other hand, quite a few times say things are AMERICA's fault, not a specific group/person/hypocrit Islam douche, but all of AMERICA.

[AnticorRifling]

The title of the thread is "Shariah Law enables the rape and torture [of] a child". Of course it's saying that Islam is to blame for this incident.

Oh I wasn't aware that because the law enabled it the entire religion was to blame.

[TheEschaton]

Pretty observable difference. Real truths (lower case) change. They evolve, they move with knowledge. Religious Truth (upper case) finds change vile and offensive. This kind of "T"ruth claims dominance over change, claims victory over knowledge and evolution. Religion rails against movement; it seeks the static and permanent. I submit that this sort of stasis is abhorrent to nature.

Again, you know nothing about the religions you speak of. They are changing constantly.

[AnticorRifling]

Wait a minute...

Didn't the article say:

Bangladesh is considered a democratic and moderate Muslim country, and national law forbids the practice of sharia.


So the law didn't enable shit, they were acting illegally right?

So why is this even an argument. Moderate muslims probably don't stand for this shit any more than moderate (insert any other religion or non religion here) would. Also you can replace moderate with non-retarded and the previous still works.

[lightwellspam]

What are the ulterior motives of religion?

To spread and convert people, like cancer. They are stories and myths by human beings, for human beings, to try and understand things never meant to be understood, and collectively gather them under pre-conceived made up bullshit, like "The earth is the center of the universe", or "God created the world in 7 days", or "god sky-fucked this chick and made it look like a virgin birth"

[waywardgs]

People do need a system of morality to tell them that, because, at their very basest nature, human beings are animals, very smart monkeys. That is what science, says, no? Thus, it's in our nature to eliminate our competition, to fight, to assert dominance, for men to spread their seed liberally to propogate their genetic bloodline. With the rise of consciousness, and the rise of an intelligence so potent that this animal nature could literally spell the destruction of the rest of the race (cf nuclear weapons), a system of morality arose because it was needed to remind us we had to be better than the animals we once were.

Furthermore, your anti-religious rhetoric in this thread shows a rather appalling, yet expected lack of knowledge of religion. All the major religions in the world (and I include Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, etc) are, at their base, about treating others with love, respect, and kindness. All of them use myth and story to teach those lessons. But storytelling has *always* been the way humans have communicated history, it is not unique to religion. Do you think the history we know now is how things actually happened? The victors write history, and they tend to write themselves very favorably as the heroes in the situation. All history is untrue, to some degree. Some are outright myth, some downplay the flaws of one side and cry out against the evil of the other.


You're an apologist, though. As far as my knowledge of religion, I've read most of the major religious texts many times. I disagree with your conclusion that at their base, these stories are "about treating others with love, respect, and kindness." I think that's bullshit. That's the cover story for snowing people. At their base, they are lies that posit themselves as Truth. Fancy, long-winded texts whose only purpose is to propagate the original lie. You're right that all history is filtered through the lens of the human mind, and as such is always suspect, but when a history attempts- as these religious histories do- to circumvent that fact, to purport to be truth outside of that subjectivity- it has all the credibility of a cult.

[Latrinsorm]

Pretty observable difference. Real truths (lower case) change. They evolve, they move with knowledge. Religious Truth (upper case) finds change vile and offensive. This kind of "T"ruth claims dominance over change, claims victory over knowledge and evolution. Religion rails against movement; it seeks the static and permanent. I submit that this sort of stasis is abhorrent to nature.Your usage of the term "religious" refers to behaviors not limited to Christianity and Islam, but in fact behaviors that occur in science - hence my reference to Semmelweis. Religions do not function as you have described - hence my reference to the councils of the Roman Catholic church.

I think you are attributing a fundamentalism common among people who are loud, Christian, and American to all religions, and I further think that is a disastrously unfounded generalization. If you are unwilling to revise this in the face of broader evidence, I would be unable to determine if that unwillingness was because you are simply correct or you are simply unable.
I'll review your face!

Damn, I am on fire today.That is one option, although one that seems somewhat hypocritical given your other posts.

[waywardgs]

Again, you know nothing about the religions you speak of. They are changing constantly.

Uh-huh. Constantly. Big ups to John Paul for saying sorry about the inquisition!

[waywardgs]

Your usage of the term "religious" refers to behaviors not limited to Christianity and Islam, but in fact behaviors that occur in science - hence my reference to Semmelweis. Religions do not function as you have described - hence my reference to the councils of the Roman Catholic church.

I think you are attributing a fundamentalism common among people who are loud, Christian, and American to all religions, and I further think that is a disastrously unfounded generalization. If you are unwilling to revise this in the face of broader evidence, I would be unable to determine if that unwillingness was because you are simply correct or you are simply unable.That is one option, although one that seems somewhat hypocritical given your other posts.


I'll reread my Semmelweis if you reread your Nietzsche. Judeo-christian religion is a slave morality.

[TheEschaton]

But believe it or not, the religions have evolved from beyond the texts. Do you still use ancient texts in science, even though they asserted the Truth (which they may have been for their time)? Of course not. You then shouldn't blithely skip over thousands of years of theology to wail and gnash your teeth over a book that was put together in 312 AD. Maybe you have read all these religious texts, so have I. The difference is, I've read the theology that has stemmed from it, including a couple hundred years of theology that says the basis of these religions is love of neighbor, sacrifice for the greater good, etc.


-TheE-

[waywardgs]

But believe it or not, the religions have evolved from beyond the texts. Do you still use ancient texts in science, even though they asserted the Truth (which they may have been for their time)? Of course not. You then shouldn't blithely skip over thousands of years of theology to wail and gnash your teeth over a book that was put together in 312 AD. Maybe you have read all these religious texts, so have I. The difference is, I've read the theology that has stemmed from it, including a couple hundred years of theology that says the basis of these religions is love of neighbor, sacrifice for the greater good, etc.


-TheE-

the etc:
http://users.moscow.com/khakimian/images/crusades2.jpg
http://www.amitiesquebec-israel.org/photos/stoning.jpg
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/inquisition-wheel.jpg
http://bajan.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/slavery.gif

[Delias]

That is one option, although one that seems somewhat hypocritical given your other posts.

I'd like to reconsider, but then I will have flipped, flopped, and flipped back, and that would be even MORE hypocritical.

[TheEschaton]

I'll reread my Semmelweis if you reread your Nietzsche. Judeo-christian religion is a slave morality.

The same guy who went stark raving mad and killed himself?

Yeah, I've read most of his work. People like to often quote him as sayin "God is dead," what they fail to quote is his assertion that we were the ones who killed God, by "unchaining ourselves from [our] center," IE the Godhead, and that even now we cannot smell the putrefication of God's decaying corpse. It's not so much a damnation of the "myth of God" but a damnation of the people who have made God a myth.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr

His work spoke a great deal about how when we remove Christianity as a religion, we remove Christian (or absolute) morality as the touchstone for our behavior. Because morality then becomes relative, or unknowable, we fall into nihilism, where "Everything is permitted," to paraphrase Dostoevsky. Nietzsche's whole attempt at the Ubermensch was his attempt to create "men who were gods" that could form some basis of reality, his whole work a lament of the loss of morality.

[TheEschaton]

Oh I wasn't aware that because the law enabled it the entire religion was to blame.

Shariah law is the law of Islam, in the way that the book of Deuteronomy is the law of Christianity. It is illegal in Bangladesh in the same way Christian, ecclesiastical courts are illegal in the U.S. To say (an incorrect interpretation of) Shariah law is to blame, but not Islam, is disingenuous.

[Latrinsorm]

I'll reread my Semmelweis if you reread your Nietzsche. Judeo-christian religion is a slave morality.This is a well-phrased counter, so I am sorry to inform you that Semmelweis was not someone whose work needs to be read. Semmelweis' findings were only that doctors who dissected corpses should wash their hands before they deliver children. The scientific establishment of the day smiled quietly and informed Semmelweis that he was an idiot, that nothing in the theory of the four humors explained his findings, and that he should leave off bothering them with such flights of fancy. As you may imagine, he became a bit hysterical by the thousands of infant deaths caused by this reticence, was committed to an asylum, was beaten by the guards...

...and died of infection because they didn't wash their hands before administering the beatings. Ha ha!

Now, I think you may read this and lean towards the belief that this must have occurred in a medieval period, where the CATHOLIC CHURCH held sway over science, stifled disagreement, kicked puppies, etc. In fact, it occurred in Austria in the 1800s. No Church. No church. Just scientists, behaving in the way humans tend to: what is right is right, and what disagrees with what is right is wrong.

.

Nietzsche is a dear friend, someone whose work I read regularly. I think his conclusions agree more with my position than yours. Consider the camel - lion - child concept, if you will. The fundamental basis of the child is the divine yes. Allow me to restate, with emphasis: the DIVINE YES. Sacredness is not isolated in religion for Nietzsche. The question is then whether the behaviors you justifiably find so repugnant are attributable to religiousness or sacrednessnessness.

[TheEschaton]

the etc:
http://users.moscow.com/khakimian/images/crusades2.jpg
http://www.amitiesquebec-israel.org/photos/stoning.jpg
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/inquisition-wheel.jpg
http://bajan.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/slavery.gif

And we've gotten better. We don't stone any one, we don't put people on the wheel, we don't have slaves any more, and we're working on the indiscriminate killing of Muslims any more.

I'd note, btw, that most Christian denominations were against the war in Iraq, they were a significant part of the abolitionist movement, and they continue to work for the poor and the oppressed the globe over.

But yanno, that Mother Theresa, that Gandhi, that Martin Luther King, all those other religious types, they were just fucking oppressors themselves. Your shortsightedness is incredible, because, like Tsa`ah said, you're just dogmatically taking the view that these three were the ones "misinterpreting" the "true agenda" of their religions.

[waywardgs]

The same guy who went stark raving mad and killed himself?

I don't see how this pertains to his works.


Yeah, I've read most of his work. People like to often quote him as sayin "God is dead," what they fail to quote is his assertion that we were the ones who killed God, by "unchaining ourselves from [our] center," IE the Godhead, and that even now we cannot smell the putrefication of God's decaying corpse. It's not so much a damnation of the "myth of God" but a damnation of the people who have made God a myth.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr

His work spoke a great deal about how when we remove Christianity as a religion, we remove Christian (or absolute) morality as the touchstone for our behavior. Because morality then becomes relative, or unknowable, we fall into nihilism, where "Everything is permitted," to paraphrase Dostoevsky. Nietzsche's whole attempt at the Ubermensch was his attempt to create "men who were gods" that could form some basis of reality, his whole work a lament of the loss of morality.

And this is the whole point. Nietzsche had no particular political views, his project was almost exclusively concerned with undermining the damaging morality foisted upon us by judeo-christian slave morality. Like I said, it's time for something new.

[Latrinsorm]

I don't see how this pertains to his works.



And this is the whole point. Nietzsche had no particular political views, his project was almost exclusively concerned with undermining the damaging morality foisted upon us by judeo-christian slave morality. Like I said, it's time for something new.Nietzsche died of syphillis, guys. His political views were also incredibly important to him, anti-nationalism chief among them, especially as regarded the new German state.

[waywardgs]

But yanno, that Mother Theresa, that Gandhi, that Martin Luther King, all those other religious types, they were just fucking oppressors themselves. Your shortsightedness is incredible, because, like Tsa`ah said, you're just dogmatically taking the view that these three were the ones "misinterpreting" the "true agenda" of their religions.

"[Mother Teresa] was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction."
— Christopher Hitchens

[waywardgs]

Nietzsche died of syphillis, guys. His political views were also incredibly important to him, anti-nationalism chief among them, especially as regarded the new German state.

True, but it wasn't a major push of his work. The political views that spawn from his work came after him, i.e. Deleuze, Guattari, etc. He hated the nationalism of germany as much as he hated religion.

(Look at his relationship with wagner.)

[TheEschaton]

His madness is somewhat relevant, because he could not formulate a morality where men were gods (ie, a viable secular humanism) that couldn't justify atrocity. His "revaluation of values" drove him mad, and led to his death.

[Cephalopod]

http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/uber.jpg

[Delias]

Nietzsche died of syphillis, guys. His political views were also incredibly important to him, anti-nationalism chief among them, especially as regarded the new German state.

Syphilis is a form of suicide.

[NocturnalRob]

Syphilis is a form of suicide.
By that logic, so is marriage.

[Warriorbird]

You should review your Durkheim.

Step beyond positivism. Enjoy some Malinowski.

[Delias]

By that logic, so is marriage.

by ANY logic, you mean.

[AnticorRifling]

By that logic, so is marriage.

Slow, expensive suicide.

[Asha]

Didn't Neitzsche end up talking to horses?

[Delias]

Slow, expensive suicide.

My friend and his new wife are leaving for Fiji next week. I told him to enjoy his honeymoon and when he gets back and he can start the real part of marriage- counting the days until he dies.

[NocturnalRob]

Slow, expensive suicide.
Sort of defeats the purpose, huh?

[waywardgs]

Didn't Neitzsche end up talking to horses?

Near the end of this life, he broke down while watching a horse getting whipped, ended up in tears, ran to hug it to protect it from the whippings. Yes, it was syphillus, and no, I still don't see how it's relevant. Plenty of geniuses throughout the ages have succumbed to disease and madness.

[Tgo01]

the etc:
http://users.moscow.com/khakimian/images/crusades2.jpg
http://www.amitiesquebec-israel.org/photos/stoning.jpg
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/inquisition-wheel.jpg
http://bajan.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/slavery.gif

Religion has been used as a cover for many atrocities in the past. The Spanish Inquisition used religion as an excuse to increase the governments power. If not for religion they probably would have found something else. For every horrible act people have committed supposedly in the name of religion I can point you to an equally horrible act that had nothing at all to do with religion. The common theme is people. People suck.

[waywardgs]

Religion has been used as a cover for many atrocities in the past.

If you don't have a cover, you can't stay warm.

[Tgo01]

If you don't have a cover, you can't stay warm.

Well I can't argue with that.

[g++]

Gotta love atheism. The fervent belief that people who believe in things are wrong.

[Latrinsorm]

True, but it wasn't a major push of his work. The political views that spawn from his work came after him, i.e. Deleuze, Guattari, etc. He hated the nationalism of germany as much as he hated religion.

(Look at his relationship with wagner.)I would argue that one of the many findings of modern sociology that Nietzsche anticipated was the essential similarity between organized religion and nationalism. Though not made explicit, the criticism and praise he leveled on each are similar in many ways.

As eager as I am to talk up Nietzsche, I am interested in your thoughts on the other points I have raised.
His madness is somewhat relevant, because he could not formulate a morality where men were gods (ie, a viable secular humanism) that couldn't justify atrocity. His "revaluation of values" drove him mad, and led to his death.Oh, pish posh. What drove him mad was having his brain turned into tapioca and maybe his lovers abandoning him. He (philosophically) saw atrocities as God sees them - irrelevant. The overflowingness of God makes them as nothing. If anything they are blessings in that they create an opportunity to more clearly view the majesty, the splendor of the overman.
Step beyond positivism. Enjoy some Malinowski.I enjoy Malinowski very much (but he no help with curveball). Somewhere I have a presentation kicking around where I contrasted their positions at great length. No glitter, I'm sorry to say, the professor already thought I was a little light in the loafers. To be fair, I'm light in any set of shoes, I have a hard time gaining weight.

[waywardgs]

Gotta love atheism. The fervent belief that people who believe in things that are wrong are wrong.

fxt

[g++]

Please quickly prove god does not exist and atheism can feel free to be right.

[Gan]

Near the end of this life, he broke down while watching a horse getting whipped, ended up in tears, ran to hug it to protect it from the whippings. Yes, it was syphillus, and no, I still don't see how it's relevant. Plenty of geniuses throughout the ages have succumbed to disease and madness.

I"m telling you. This is Charlie Sheen all over again.

[waywardgs]

Please quickly prove god does not exist and atheism can feel free to be right.

The burden of proof lies with proving a positive. Prove god exists and we'll talk.

[Warriorbird]

I enjoy Malinowski very much (but he no help with curveball). Somewhere I have a presentation kicking around where I contrasted their positions at great length. No glitter, I'm sorry to say, the professor already thought I was a little light in the loafers. To be fair, I'm light in any set of shoes, I have a hard time gaining weight.

Heh, well. Sociology professors probably would. There's more ways to look at culture than theirs, however. There's also a whole lot of work beyond Durkheim within Sociology.

As for the atheism vs religion bit... magic does make you feel better, be it physics or God.

[g++]

Your belief that there is no god is equally as blind and stupid as a religious nutcase is my point. Its not based on logic and the things you say to prove your position are 90% propaganda. You jumped out of the church and into the cult across the street. Just admit you're a pointless 200 pound heat conductor on a marble spinning down a drain and move the fuck on.

[AnticorRifling]

The burden of proof lies with proving a positive. Prove god exists and we'll talk.

Absense of proof is not proof of absense or something.

[waywardgs]

Your belief that there is no god is equally as blind and stupid as a religious nutcase is my point. Its not based on logic and the things you say to prove your position are 90% propaganda. You jumped out of the church and into the cult across the street. Just admit you're a pointless 200 pound heat conductor on a marble spinning down a drain and move the fuck on.

http://www.boingboing.net/images/noodledoodle_bg3b.jpg

[g++]

While you can't strictly speaking prove a negative, in general absence of proof is sufficient proof of absence- at least for me it is.

Man someone should tell the physicists to stop wasting their time.

[NocturnalRob]

Absense of proof is not proof of absense or something.
Prove it.

[Delias]

Man someone should tell the physicists to stop wasting their time.

I'm not a physicist. I am Joe Beercan.

Edit: What it really comes down to is that no matter how convincing my arguments or how profound my rhetoric, I have never in my entire life convinced someone of something they didn't want to believe. At this point I consider it less worthy of my time than making ridiculous, pointless statements on the PC- and that's saying something.

[waywardgs]

Man someone should tell the priests to stop wasting their time and focus on diddling little boys.

.

[waywardgs]

Edit: What it really comes down to is that no matter how convincing my arguments or how profound my rhetoric, I have never in my entire life convinced someone of something they didn't want to believe. At this point I consider it less worthy of my time than making ridiculous, pointless statements on the PC- and that's saying something.

Truth. You can't win against stupidity. It's bulletproof.

[lightwellspam]

Your belief that there is no god is equally as blind and stupid as a religious nutcase is my point. Its not based on logic and the things you say to prove your position are 90% propaganda. You jumped out of the church and into the cult across the street. Just admit you're a pointless 200 pound heat conductor on a marble spinning down a drain and move the fuck on.

The fundamental problem is that nobody knows god, and therefore nobody is in a position to teach anyone else about god. An atheist is in an equally stupid position, preaching that something doesn't exist. At the same time, atheists aren't so much in the practice of committing mass genocide for their beliefs the way religious nutjobs are.

The person who can admit they don't know is 1000 times more educated and more intelligent on the matter than a congregation that satisfies itself by making shit up, and when proven wrong, either denying it, or modifying it to some new made up shit. A collective of made up shit thats agreed upon by the collective is still made up stupid shit.

[g++]

Im pretty sure of the people in this thread just from what I know from this being my 900th "PC God doesnt exist party thread" that like 95% of the people you are arguing with are agnostic.

[AnticorRifling]

Im pretty sure of the people in this thread just from what I know from this being my 900th "PC God doesnt exist party thread" that like 95% of the people you are arguing with are agnostic.

Agnostic? You mean like after running you've got to use one of those puffer things?

[Delias]

The fundamental problem is that nobody knows god, and therefore nobody is in a position to teach anyone else about god. An atheist is in an equally stupid position, preaching that something doesn't exist. At the same time, atheists aren't so much in the practice of committing mass genocide for their beliefs the way religious nutjobs are.

The person who can admit they don't know is 1000 times more educated and more intelligent on the matter than a congregation that satisfies itself by making shit up, and when proven wrong, either denying it, or modifying it to some new made up shit. A collective of made up shit thats agreed upon by the collective is still made up stupid shit.

I'm the strangest kind of atheist. I believe that there is no higher power, due to lack of evidence, but I hope there is one, because being dead, while incapable of sucking due to the non-existence part, I think I rather prefer the concept of existence to the concept of non-existence. I feel that as long as I exist I can alter my circumstances... unlike with non-existence, in which you have none.

[TheEschaton]

The burden of proof lies on the person showing the negative, it's basic science that you can only prove a positive false by showing proof of the negative, whereas overwhelming proof of the positive does not mean the negative is false.

In other words, Delias's position applies to those who believe in God - overwhelming evidence of God doesn't preclude a possibility of proof of God's absence, and thus negating the hypothesis "There is a God." However, if you could prove, with one example, how there is evidence of a lack of God, then the supposition must be abandoned, and a new theory posited.

As of yet, no one has been able to prove God does not exist, so I wait in eager anticipation of your proof. Yanno, so we can keep things scientific.

[waywardgs]

I'm the strangest kind of atheist. I believe that there is no higher power, due to lack of evidence, but I hope there is one, because being dead, while incapable of sucking due to the non-existence part, I think I rather prefer the concept of existence to the concept of non-existence. I feel that as long as I exist I can alter my circumstances... unlike with non-existence, in which you have none.

You live, you die, you're worm food. Get over it.

[Warriorbird]

Man someone should tell the physicists to stop wasting their time.

They do.

[Delias]

You live, you die, you're worm food. Get over it.

And yet at an atomic level, I will continue to exist. I find that in and of itself to be an amazing sort of afterlife... granted, I can't enjoy it or even acknowledge it as it happens, but I can enjoy the concept of it now while I live.

[g++]

Edit: What it really comes down to is that no matter how convincing my arguments or how profound my rhetoric, I have never in my entire life convinced someone of something they didn't want to believe. At this point I consider it less worthy of my time than making ridiculous, pointless statements on the PC- and that's saying something.

I convinced my friend he was moving to PA for an entire day in Middle School one time. It rocked. Well he was my friend anyway.

[Warriorbird]

The burden of proof lies on the person showing the negative, it's basic science that you can only prove a positive false by showing proof of the negative, whereas overwhelming proof of the positive does not mean the negative is false.

In other words, Delias's position applies to those who believe in God - overwhelming evidence of God doesn't preclude a possibility of proof of God's absence, and thus negating the hypothesis "There is a God." However, if you could prove, with one example, how there is evidence of a lack of God, then the supposition must be abandoned, and a new theory posited.

As of yet, no one has been able to prove God does not exist, so I wait in eager anticipation of your proof. Yanno, so we can keep things scientific.

You're missing something. I consider "God!" and "No God possible!" equally ridiculous. Get to work. It's time to acquire intellectual funding.

[g++]

Careful E might be desperate enough to take that as a job offer. da dum dum.

[Delias]

There is a hidden shrine at my work. Seriously, one of the housekeepers saw god in the clouds. Of course, she was taking anti-depressants and hadn't eaten in three days and later passed out during mass and had to be hospitalized, but still, she tells all the new employees about how she saw god.

[waywardgs]

The burden of proof lies on the person showing the negative, it's basic science that you can only prove a positive false by showing proof of the negative, whereas overwhelming proof of the positive does not mean the negative is false.

In other words, Delias's position applies to those who believe in God - overwhelming evidence of God doesn't preclude a possibility of proof of God's absence, and thus negating the hypothesis "There is a God." However, if you could prove, with one example, how there is evidence of a lack of God, then the supposition must be abandoned, and a new theory posited.

As of yet, no one has been able to prove God does not exist, so I wait in eager anticipation of your proof. Yanno, so we can keep things scientific.

It's been proven over and over.

'How did the world come to be?' -god did it.

Nope, actually it was a chemical/physical process completely knowable to man.

"God made man in his image."

Nope, a biological process of trial and error made man. We call it evolution.

"God made the darkness and the light!"

Nope, that came from the matter that made the sun and our planets.

"God made the birds!"

lol

[g++]

Well as long as its knowable.

[NocturnalRob]

God made the dirt, and the dirt don't hurt.

[Cephalopod]

As of yet, no one has been able to prove God does not exist, so I wait in eager anticipation of your proof. Yanno, so we can keep things scientific.

I don't know, a Google search of 'proof god doesn't exist' yields a lot of results.

proof god does not exist - 1,140,000 results
proof god exists - 1,120,000 results

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_En5vG2QGHL8/SiM5MGFSKQI/AAAAAAAAAjY/Y8GVDcOliOk/s400/Logic.jpg

[NocturnalRob]

Have you seen my baseball?

[Cephalopod]

FRANKS AND BEANS.

[lightwellspam]

It's been proven over and over.

'How did the world come to be?' -god did it.

Nope, actually it was a chemical/physical process completely knowable to man.

"God made man in his image."

Nope, a biological process of trial and error made man. We call it evolution.

"God made the darkness and the light!"

Nope, that came from the matter that made the sun and our planets.

"God made the birds!"

lol

Actually, we’re still trying to study the beginning and how man came to be. There are theories, that look extremely viable, and have varying levels of evidentiary support (god created the universe can be classified as 99.999999% proven wrong, but there’s still that shot in the dark since we don’t have the final proof yet, and the church is basically assaulting the LHC, and the studies of gravitational waves since they lead up that path of discovery.

As for man, evolution is a known fact. That man was the product of evolution is not. It’s a damn good theory, and certainly a much more valid one than some douchebag from the sky creating man, but it’s not proven yet by any means. On that one, we’re actually still a pretty long way from being able to make the connection to lowland ape/howler monkey outside of the pure genetic closeness.

[AnticorRifling]

You believe/care about something I don't you're dumb and I fucking hate you!

You believe/care about something I don't, good for you man live and let live just don't tell me about it unless I ask.


One of these is right, one is wrong.

[NocturnalRob]

One of these is right, one is wrong.
Only God knows the answer.

[Delias]

Only God knows the answer.

He's busy playing baseball.

[waywardgs]

He's busy playing baseball.

What team is he on? I need to bet on that one.

[AnticorRifling]

What team is he on? I need to bet on that one.

The Angels, duh.

[Delias]

What team is he on? I need to bet on that one.

Chicago Cubs.

[TheEschaton]

Seriously, did you not see Angels in the Outfield?

[NocturnalRob]

Seriously, did you not see Angels in the Outfield?
Seriously, did you see Angels in the Outfield?

[waywardgs]

what about
http://www.brentwoodhomepage.com/files/image/Charlie%20sheen-indians-wild-thing.jpg

[Tgo01]

Seriously, did you see Angels in the Outfield?

I'm still trying to forget that I saw it.

[NocturnalRob]

That's Charlie Sheen aka Ricky "Wild Thing" Vaughn. He's got Adonis DNA. But if you adhere to the Grecian telling of Adonis, the man was mortal. Therefore...NO!

[Latrinsorm]

Man someone should tell the physicists to stop wasting their time.Speaking as a physicist, we know. Give us a break, we're physicists.
'How did the world come to be?' -god did it.

Nope, actually it was a chemical/physical process completely knowable to man.

"God made man in his image."

Nope, a biological process of trial and error made man. We call it evolution.

"God made the darkness and the light!"

Nope, that came from the matter that made the sun and our planets.

"God made the birds!"

lolWould it interest you to know that many very serious men have determined that religion did not originate from a desire to explain natural phenomena? Or perhaps a better way to phrase it: could it interest you?

[Warriorbird]

Speaking as a physicist, we know. Give us a break, we're physicists.Would it interest you to know that many very serious men have determined that religion did not originate from a desire to explain natural phenomena? Or perhaps a better way to phrase it: could it interest you?

I'm far more inclined to believe that religion makes people feel happy.

[~Rocktar~]

ANNNNDDDD the fucking ignorance goes on and on . . .



step 1: find some ignorant community that has misunderstood Shariah law and clearly victimized an innocent woman

Umm, the guy that issued the fatwa was a religious leader, no excuse for ignorance there.


step 2: publicize it in the Western media

step 3: somehow feel good about ourselves when we're killing hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, destablizing countries, dropping depleted uranium and [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24049] possibly nuclear weapons on places like Libya

And ignore the question of how your fucked up legal system supports the idea of accusing a rape victim of being an "adulterer". Then follow up with an attempt to distract attention by pointing to other world events that aren't remotely related.


where were you guys in the 1990s when the most comprehensive sanctions in human history helped to starve millions of Iraqi children?

So, Hussein, who intentionally violated such sanctions from the organized world community had no hand in that, yeah, he was such a victim. Again, not relevant.


news flash: you guys don't give a CRAP about this poor Bangladeshi girl

Actually I do you useless sack of piss. I think it is appalling how your so called "enlightened" Middle Eastern death cult likes to adhere to centuries old laws because "Allah" made them.


as you blindly accept US foreign policy worldwide

Again, has not one fucking thing to do with this case and is simply a distraction.


What these Banglas have done is wrong. It's also wrong to use it for propaganda purposes to dismiss the religion of truth as violent and barbaric.

Again, I dismiss your Middle Eastern death cult religion as deeply flawed as well as violent and barbaric. I also dismiss it's cousin Christianity as equally flawed and only somewhat less violent and barbaric.


Western values aren't exactly looking too good now either.

waah waah waah shariah law 1 victim [bomb country and kill millions]

classic American hypocritical sob story. don't use this victim in your quest to abolish Islam and other religions. it is what it is - a bunch of ignorant people in a third world country used religion to justify evil. to me, that isn't as bad as a bunch of highly educated people in an advanced Western country using humanitarianism to justify evil.

Just more of the same distraction pointing out things that have no relevance what so ever to the situation. Where is the world wide outrage from Islamic world leaders? Just like with the actions of terrorists and other fucked up wingnuts, there isn't any.

You want to claim the religion of peace, then preach peace, back it up with something other than a blind eye and tacit approval of bullshit and barbaric butchery.

[waywardgs]

Speaking as a physicist, we know. Give us a break, we're physicists.Would it interest you to know that many very serious men have determined that religion did not originate from a desire to explain natural phenomena? Or perhaps a better way to phrase it: could it interest you?

What did your very serious men invent the man in the sky for then? Enlighten me. I'm interested.

[TheEschaton]

To address the issue of purpose in a species of animal intelligent enough to understand the problems of living life like animals, but not intelligent enough to know inherently how to best live one's life.

[Delias]

To address the issue of purpose in a species of animal intelligent enough to understand the problems of living life like animals, but not intelligent enough to know inherently how to best live one's life.

Doesn't exactly sound like an intelligent design, to me...

[waywardgs]

Religion is an invention of man, and a bad one at that. Get over it, we'll all be better off.

[TheEschaton]

Religion being an invention of man does not preclude the existence of a God. At all.

[Delias]

Here is my favorite part- I actually went and took a three hour nap and this same fucking discussion is taking place, and it is at exactly where it was when I left off in terms of achieving anything.

[Tgo01]

Here is my favorite part- I actually went and took a three hour nap and this same fucking discussion is taking place, and it is at exactly where it was when I left off in terms of achieving anything.

Be sure to keep us updated on your nap to religion discussion achievement ratio.

[waywardgs]

Religion being an invention of man does not preclude the existence of a God. At all.

You're right. God is an invention of man too. God is like a shitty wheel. We've done better.

[Cephalopod]

Here is my favorite part- I actually went and took a three hour nap and this same fucking discussion is taking place, and it is at exactly where it was when I left off in terms of achieving anything.

This pretty sums up any religious discussion for the last couple thousand years. You could take a significantly longer nap, if you want.

[Delias]

This pretty sums up any religious discussion for the last couple thousand years. You could take a significantly longer nap, if you want.

BRILLIANT!
You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar. I bow to your wisdom.

[Asha]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjuNuqIev8M&feature=watch_response_rev

This video perfectly explains my country's stance on the whole thing.

[Latrinsorm]

I'm far more inclined to believe that religion makes people feel happy.Oh it does, it does, but why. That's the interesting part! See next:
What did your very serious men invent the man in the sky for then? Enlighten me. I'm interested.The serious men were investigating, not inventing. The people who did the inventing, as you put it, were men and women, big singing groups of them. What makes people people is other people - this is something we all have an intestinal sense of, but something that no one can casually explain. Look at how we use the words "monster", "freak": these aren't biological claims, or psychological claims. They could be, but that's not how we actually use them. When we get together a group of people we have created something that wasn't in any of us before... or have we discovered something? In any event, there is definitely a tangible something, and in recognition of that we made totems, a way of saying "here is where we are", or more accurately "here is where the we is".

Now, if you think we have created something, then what happens later is that we might abstract from the totem to a being, and so on until we reach an invisible sky man. If, on the other hand, you think we have discovered something, then what happens later is we might use the same abstract understanding to recognize that what the totem represents is a being. Then again, we might not do any abstraction at all. Totemic religions survive to this day, after all, and more are created all the time.

.

This might seem a bit silly to you, but I would contend that is more* proof that it is accurate. Humans are a bit silly, after all. By more* I mean that obviously you shouldn't take my word for it. Review your Durkheim! Follow Warriorbird's advice, page through some Malinowski! The vulgar discussion of religion may have remained unchanged for millennia, but science has really taken off in the past 100 years, give it a try! :)

Having exhausted my comma quota for probably the next month or so, (drat!) it is probably time to close this post.

[Warriorbird]

Oh it does, it does, but why. That's the interesting part! See next:The serious men were investigating, not inventing. The people who did the inventing, as you put it, were men and women, big singing groups of them. What makes people people is other people - this is something we all have an intestinal sense of, but something that no one can casually explain. Look at how we use the words "monster", "freak": these aren't biological claims, or psychological claims. They could be, but that's not how we actually use them. When we get together a group of people we have created something that wasn't in any of us before... or have we discovered something? In any event, there is definitely a tangible something, and in recognition of that we made totems, a way of saying "here is where we are", or more accurately "here is where the we is".

Now, if you think we have created something, then what happens later is that we might abstract from the totem to a being, and so on until we reach an invisible sky man. If, on the other hand, you think we have discovered something, then what happens later is we might use the same abstract understanding to recognize that what the totem represents is a being. Then again, we might not do any abstraction at all. Totemic religions survive to this day, after all, and more are created all the time.

.

This might seem a bit silly to you, but I would contend that is more* proof that it is accurate. Humans are a bit silly, after all. By more* I mean that obviously you shouldn't take my word for it. Review your Durkheim! Follow Warriorbird's advice, page through some Malinowski! The vulgar discussion of religion may have remained unchanged for millennia, but science has really taken off in the past 100 years, give it a try! :)

Having exhausted my comma quota for probably the next month or so, (drat!) it is probably time to close this post.

Very well reasoned. What I think we've discovered is just that believing in something makes us happy, however, not the actual something.

[AnticorRifling]

Very well reasoned. What I think we've discovered is just that believing in something makes us happy, however, not the actual something.

Do you acknowledge pie exists? I dare you to tell me pie makes you unhappy. The belief, the thought, nay the very hope of getting pie (fruit, sugar, pecan, hair, etc) will make you happy. Getting pie also makes you happy.

You sir have just been lawyered, pie style.

[4a6c1]

http://mathonweb.com/entrtain/numbers/pi1000.gif

[Latrinsorm]

Very well reasoned.Thanks!
What I think we've discovered is just that believing in something makes us happy, however, not the actual something.Oh my yes. I am also a fan of Mary Douglas for this reason, although unfortunately not a big enough fan to ever remember her last name. I should bookmark the google search "sacred profane sociology mary". Eliade is a much easier name to remember, maybe I should just stick with him.

[Warriorbird]

Do you acknowledge pie exists? I dare you to tell me pie makes you unhappy. The belief, the thought, nay the very hope of getting pie (fruit, sugar, pecan, hair, etc) will make you happy. Getting pie also makes you happy.

You sir have just been lawyered, pie style.

Ha ha. Classic. Though thoughts of Great Cthulhu make me happy and I'm pretty sure he isn't as real as pie.

[waywardgs]

neg Sharia Law enables the... 04-01-2011 03:43 PM You are the dumbest, and most ignorant person alive. Please hang from a cliff by your ballsack.

What about all that compassion talk? Sheesh, you believers are touchy.

[g++]

Once again the only person in this thread who is frothing at the mouth about their belief is you.

[~Rocktar~]

http://mathonweb.com/entrtain/numbers/pi1000.gif

THAT


is a lot of Pi

[Delias]

THAT


is a lot of Pi

and it's fucking delicious.

[Asha]

and it's fucking delicious.

I don't know why but that made me burst out laughing

[Tsa`ah]

Sharia Law enables the... 04-01-2011 08:45 PM Retarded is not spelled a-g-n-o-s-t-i-c. Dipshit.

How very PB of you.