Islam? A better religion for minorites

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52344 wrote:

MONGOLS WEREN"T CHRISTIANS!! SHeeash!!! What part of that can't you can't you GET@!! ROTFL!!

But the europeans were!!!!

what is so hard to understand about that?

@Fatal Freedoms,

Fatal_Freedoms;52345 wrote:

for the last time i'm not muslim, i just happen to believe in religious equality, you bigot.

why would the christians need to "conquer" the holy land if they were just defending themselves? The crusades aren't even comparable to "recoquista" not by a long shot. The crusaders killed the children and men and raped the women, can that be said of the moors to the same extent? NO! The crusades cannot be justified.

If you believe all religions are equal -- then you are the fool. Especially when some preach "truths' that are at polar opposites. it's "nice" and PC to think that they are all equal - but they are not. That has nothing to do with bigotry - and everything to do with fact. Two opposing ideas, at opposite sides of reality, by definition cannot be "equally" valid.

I stated the crusades were taking the "holy land" back. Obviously an offensive aspect for the individual acts. But as a whole, the crusades were a response to Muslim expansion and conquering, so in THAT perspective they were "defensive". And it took a few hundred years of muslim aggression (including inroads of CONQUEST in to Spain and Italy) before the west finally fought back with the Crusades. Go ahead and use your foolish PC "all are equal" dogma and justify your belief the crusades were bad. If it weren't for them -- you wouldn't even be here espousing any debate today. The Crusades were a RESPONSE to Islamic expansion by the sword. There was raping and pillaging on all sides -- that has been how mankind has ALWAYS did it's war thing - on ALL sides, including the moors. The problem is that people like you seem to denigrate the west, judging the past in todays eyes, and let slide the atrocities committed by those we have fought against - including those who have ATTACKED us. In your PC striving to show how "all are equal" you willfully blind yourself to the atrocities on "the other" side, only seeing the bad in your own historic ancestral past (if you're one of those PC apologetic-for-Islam western fools) -- and you willfully and ignorantly fail to see that all religions are NOT equal.
Regardless of the past, what is going on today?? I promise you Christians will NOT cut off your head for disbelieving -- but Muslims in Muslim lands, in the name of their god, and based on the previous acts of their prophet, whom they try to emulate, will...... You have three choices in Islam (per Muhammed and the koran (and I refuse to spell it other than it's english spelling - I will give it no "respect"). Per the Koran:: Submit to dhimittude (worse than "jim crow" laws - look at Sharia, bro! you, as an unbeliver, are NOTHING!), convert....or die. See!! No compulsion!! You have choices!! --Now, While you can point to historical aspects of Christianity doing the same hundreds of years ago -- the problem is that Islam is doing that TODAY!!! That's the difference! And by the way, it was white, Christian rich men using imperial power of their nations who put an end to the AGE OLD, from the dawn of mankind institution called SLAVERY!!! ANd do you know that in Islam slavery is ALLOWED and permissablbe and is practised in islam TODAY - because their false prophet did it himself.....And he also married a 6 year old girl and consumated that marriage when she was 9. That's their OWN history - not my "bigotted" views. Digest all that, Bro. I beg to differ-- all religions are NOT "equal".

ANd by the way, who says I'm Christian?? I just see all of history in an unbiased eye -- and see that YES!! It IS a better religion than Islam!!

Hey! If "all religions are equal" -- Why don't we allow some Incans to practive their religion of cutting the hearts out of live human sacrifices to their god's!! Do you SEE the foolishness of your "all religions are equal" statement??

2 Replies

@Fatal Freedoms,

Fatal_Freedoms;52346 wrote:

But the europeans were!!!!

what is so hard to understand about that?

Yes, of course!! But you listed a gazillion "wars" claiming they were Christian wars -- but most were just human wars - and you listed Mongols in there. Unless you listed them because Christians were involved in that they were defending themselves against mongols, so somehow you think those were "christian" wars. As if Christians started them and how evil and warlike they, too, are....which is pretty disengenuos on your part.

Dude, so far from what I have heard you speak - despite your statement you aren't Muslim, what I see/hear is that you ARE a Muslim - practicing Taqiyya. Either that, or you really are just a misguided, uninformed and ignorant westerner who has no knowledge of real world history....

For those that can google and wikipedia and read books and see ALL sides and learn and grow - I leave that up to you all to decide..... Fatal Freedom is either a Muslim praciticing his koran and mohammed sanctioned taqiyya, or he is a young and ignorant westerner who has only been taught one side of history, and consequently, in his own bigoted perspective, hates his own people and the very history that has helped to allow him to be who he is today -- someone he couldn't even be in an Islamic world....

Religions are NOT all equal - If you believe they are, then why should we not allow others to practice their religion today of cutting the hearts out of live human sacrifices to their gods -- or cutting the heads off captive humans...in the name of their "god" (as sanctioned in Islam, because mohammed did it).....[[Remeber Nick Berg, Daniel Pearl...and the thousands of others TODAY!]]

If you really believe "all religions are equal" -- the only thing I can say is....Grow up...read...learn. Don't "submit".....

3 Replies

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52348 wrote:

Yes, of course!! But you listed a gazillion "wars" claiming they were Christian wars -- but most were just human wars - and you listed Mongols in there. Unless you listed them because Christians were involved in that they were defending themselves against mongols, so somehow you think those were "christian" wars.

Yes in fact i did list them because christians were involved in the conflicts, i never stated that all of those wars were provoked by christians....and if you're gonna come in here talking crap please know what the **** we were talking about, before you spout your two cents off, because that list was in response about all wars of Muslims not just religiously motivated or provoked ones.

If R-knight can use darfur as an example of a muslim war then i can use the mongol invasion as an exmaple of a christian war...

1 Reply

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52347 wrote:

If you believe all religions are equal -- then you are the fool. Especially when some preach "truths' that are at polar opposites. it's "nice" and PC to think that they are all equal - but they are not. That has nothing to do with bigotry - and everything to do with fact. Two opposing ideas, at opposite sides of reality, by definition cannot be "equally" valid.

All religions are equally foolish and violent, you assume because i hold them all as equals that i hold them in high regard....which is a mistake on your behalf.

1 Reply

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52348 wrote:

Fatal Freedom is either a Muslim praciticing his koran and mohammed sanctioned taqiyya, or he is a young and ignorant westerner who has only been taught one side of history, and consequently, in his own bigoted perspective, hates his own people and the very history that has helped to allow him to be who he is today -- someone he couldn't even be in an Islamic world....

I am for the last time, NOT a muslim that could not be further from the truth, in fact i'm an atheist and i see how violent ALL religions are, this includes Islam as well as christanity. If anyone sees one side of the issue it is you not I, I know christians are violent and I know muslims are violent, this is both sides, unlike you who likes to pretend his people are better than everyone else. But you must face reality.

1 Reply

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52347 wrote:

I stated the crusades were taking the "holy land" back. Obviously an offensive aspect for the individual acts. But as a whole, the crusades were a response to Muslim expansion and conquering, so in THAT perspective they were "defensive". And it took a few hundred years of muslim aggression (including inroads of CONQUEST in to Spain and Italy) before the west finally fought back with the Crusades. Go ahead and use your foolish PC "all are equal" dogma and justify your belief the crusades were bad. If it weren't for them -- you wouldn't even be here espousing any debate today. The Crusades were a RESPONSE to Islamic expansion by the sword. There was raping and pillaging on all sides -- that has been how mankind has ALWAYS did it's war thing - on ALL sides, including the moors. The problem is that people like you seem to denigrate the west, judging the past in todays eyes, and let slide the atrocities committed by those we have fought against - including those who have ATTACKED us.

Did i condone the muslim conquest? NO, i did not. The muslim conquest and the christian conquest were both HORRIBLE. But don't sit there and tell me that the christians were just defending themselves and that someone the horrible atrocities of the crusades were justified, that is a big load of bullshit and you know it!

The crusades were NOT defensive, maybe the first crusade could have counted as a retaliation but there is still 8 more crusades reaching deep in muslim land for the sake of land and riches NOT defensive in any way shape or form. The crusades were for POWER and to ignore this fact is a delusion.
You can distort history all you want but the Christians are just as guilty as the muslims.

1 Reply

@mousy,

Quote:

If R-knight can use darfur as an example of a muslim war then i can use the mongol invasion as an exmaple of a christian war...

Let's quote me as ever directly saying that. That was just something you decided to infer, cause, what the hell, you can, can't you?

Quote:

All religions are equally foolish and violent, you assume because i hold them all as equals that i hold them in high regard....which is a mistake on your behalf.

Oh, cool, so all black people are as violent as the Crips too, no?

Quote:

The crusades were NOT defensive, maybe the first crusade could have counted as a retaliation but there is still 8 more crusades reaching deep in muslim land for the sake of land and riches NOT defensive in any way shape or form. The crusades were for POWER and to ignore this fact is a delusion.
You can distort history all you want but the Christians are just as guilty as the muslims.

If they were for power, then they would be more of a product of human nature than religion, wouldn't they? If not, why couldn't the rest of the Crusades simply have been furthering and protecting the goals of the first? The Muslims never stopped fighting.

1 Reply

@Reagaknight,

Reagaknight;52548 wrote:

Let's quote me as ever directly saying that. That was just something you decided to infer, cause, what the hell, you can, can't you?

I was using Darfur as an example of non-religious violence and it was you that pointed out that sudan was a muslim nation and still counted towards muslim violence....

Quote:

Oh, cool, so all black people are as violent as the Crips too, no?

when did race enter this equation?

Quote:

If they were for power, then they would be more of a product of human nature than religion, wouldn't they? If not, why couldn't the rest of the Crusades simply have been furthering and protecting the goals of the first? The Muslims never stopped fighting.

could the same not be said of muslims?

0 Replies

@mousy,

Quote:

I was using Darfur as an example of non-religious violence and it was you that pointed out that sudan was a muslim nation and still counted towards muslim violence....

I did say they were Muslim, but I believe I conceded that it was not necessarily Muslim violence.

Quote:

when did race enter this equation?

If all religions are =, why not all people of a single race?

Quote:

could the same not be said of muslims?

Problem would be that the Muslims were the ones who started it, attacking hundreds of years before the Crusades, and they've never stopped in all the years since.

1 Reply

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52348 wrote:

Yes, of course!! But you listed a gazillion "wars" claiming they were Christian wars -- but most were just human wars - and you listed Mongols in there. Unless you listed them because Christians were involved in that they were defending themselves against mongols, so somehow you think those were "christian" wars. As if Christians started them and how evil and warlike they, too, are....which is pretty disengenuos on your part.

Dude, so far from what I have heard you speak - despite your statement you aren't Muslim, what I see/hear is that you ARE a Muslim - practicing Taqiyya. Either that, or you really are just a misguided, uninformed and ignorant westerner who has no knowledge of real world history....

For those that can google and wikipedia and read books and see ALL sides and learn and grow - I leave that up to you all to decide..... Fatal Freedom is either a Muslim praciticing his koran and mohammed sanctioned taqiyya, or he is a young and ignorant westerner who has only been taught one side of history, and consequently, in his own bigoted perspective, hates his own people and the very history that has helped to allow him to be who he is today -- someone he couldn't even be in an Islamic world....

Religions are NOT all equal - If you believe they are, then why should we not allow others to practice their religion today of cutting the hearts out of live human sacrifices to their gods -- or cutting the heads off captive humans...in the name of their "god" (as sanctioned in Islam, because mohammed did it).....[[Remeber Nick Berg, Daniel Pearl...and the thousands of others TODAY!]]

If you really believe "all religions are equal" -- the only thing I can say is....Grow up...read...learn. Don't "submit".....

Jo-Jo: Welcome to FF. Don't get too dizzy trying to follow his logic. Remember, while you're getting dizzy chasing him, he's just kick'n it, in a log cabin, deep in the backwoods of Michigan, buried in snow, sipping hot cider. :headbang:

1 Reply

@Reagaknight,

Reagaknight;52604 wrote:

I did say they were Muslim, but I believe I conceded that it was not necessarily Muslim violence.

then why did you mention it at all? In-fact i remember asking you if you wanted to go down that road and you said yes. which is really an error on your part.

Quote:

If all religions are =, why not all people of a single race?

You actually bring up a very interesting point, but the answer lies not in the race or religion of the individual but in the circumstances that person finds themselves in....as with both religion and race, if you are a desperate uneducated person you will be more prone to violence.

Quote:

Problem would be that the Muslims were the ones who started it, attacking hundreds of years before the Crusades, and they've never stopped in all the years since.

if the muslim "reconquista" was hundreds of years before the crusades then how can you possibly consider the crusades as self-defense? And last time i checked muslim armies weren't invading europe.

0 Replies

@mousy,

FF wrote:

Christanity rose in popularity through conquest!

RK wrote:

Did I ever say that every war perpetuated by Muslims must be religious?

Religion is a factor in wars. Not the only factor, not always a factor, but a big factor.

FF wrote:

HA! If your talking about all wars started by a religion christanity wins hands down, there is nothing that even comes close, but if you really wanna go down that road be my guest.

The Sudan issue was already resolved, we are talking about religious wars.

Quote:

You actually bring up a very interesting point, but the answer lies not in the race or religion of the individual but in the circumstances that person finds themselves in....as with both religion and race, if you are a desperate uneducated person you will be more prone to violence.

The truth would be that neither religions nor people are equal simply because they are clumped together in the same category (often with their polar opposites.) However your religion or race may put you in such circumstances, in which case the details of the religion or race must bear responsibility. For examply, in the South not too long ago, if you were a white male, chances were you might have been involved in a lynching. This is because of the culture of violence in the south. The violence was validated by their basic beliefs, which they were exposed to exclusively from birth, so they saw lynching as acceptable. Likewise with religion: Muslims in many countries live in a culture of violence perpetrated by those who claim justification through their holy books, and use the holy books to prove it; a culture that has evolved through the centuries, based on aspects of their religion. In such a culture, they are much more likely to be drawn towards those beliefs and that lifestyle, that is all they have known from birth. On the other hand, you don't see people stoning adulterers in the streets of New York because Christianity has evolved in a different way, focusing on the nonviolent, forgiving teachings of Jesus rather than the Old Testament, (from which they still draw some moral values but do not practice some of the punishments) so Western culture now contains a different kind of Christianity which has supported and nurtured and in turn been supported and nurtured by Western civilization as a whole. To say that, under these conditions, modern Christianity and modern Islam are equally violent, is ridiculous.

Quote:

if the muslim "reconquista" was hundreds of years before the crusades then how can you possibly consider the crusades as self-defense? And last time i checked muslim armies weren't invading europe.

Muslim reconquista? That was a Spanish Christian movement to regain their lands from Muslim invaders. The Muslims did invade Christian Iberia, North Africa, Asia Minor, and the Levant, and made other less successful conquests and forays into other Christian places (Italy, France.)

Do you know why the first Crusade was started?

Muslim armies don't need to invade Europe, Islam is booming there. However there has been a continuous cycle of attacks for a long time.

1 Reply

@Fatal Freedoms,

Fatal_Freedoms;52520 wrote:

If R-knight can use darfur as an example of a muslim war then i can use the mongol invasion as an exmaple of a christian war...

Apples and oranges, bro. The Mongols invaded/attacked, and christian nations were defending from those attacks. Darfur has been a pet peeve of mine for decades, because it HAS been political AND religious! You do realize that in Islam, there is NO separation of church and state that the west and christianity has evolved to, don't you? In other words, Darfur is due to the MUSLIM governments persecution of christians and black muslim peoples in the south of Sudan. While it's "political" it is ALSO religious - because islam is the national religion BY LAW - as it is in ALL muslim nations!! SInce there is NO separation of church and state, the political IS also religious in islam. Plus, the quotes from you that RK lists, PROVES by your own words you were calling your list Christian wars (implying christians started them, actually) - NOT just showing all wars christians were involved in.

0 Replies

@Fatal Freedoms,

Fatal_Freedoms;52521 wrote:

All religions are equally foolish and violent, you assume because i hold them all as equals that i hold them in high regard....which is a mistake on your behalf.

Now we're getting somewhere. While you, as an atheist, can believe all religions are equally foolish, to call them equally violent is ridulous. Tell that to Mahatma Ghandi (well, if he were still alive) or the Dalai Lhama. I would say that it's the heart of mankind that is equally violent. Since the atheistic nations of the old USSR and China (via communism) have killed hundreds of millions in the name of their own ideologies....which are atheistic just as you are......

Just as fire can be used to cook our food, keep us warm, and push back the darkness, but also can get out of control and burn down the house, so, too, can the evolutionarily derived memes of "religion" be used for good, or evil.

It's the heart of mankind where the violence resides - and religion can be used to dampen the fires in our hearts, or stoke them.

Which relgion is currently stoking the fires of it's people?? **hint: Islam!**

1 Reply

@Fatal Freedoms,

Fatal_Freedoms;52522 wrote:

I am for the last time, NOT a muslim that could not be further from the truth, in fact i'm an atheist and i see how violent ALL religions are, this includes Islam as well as christanity. If anyone sees one side of the issue it is you not I, I know christians are violent and I know muslims are violent, this is both sides, unlike you who likes to pretend his people are better than everyone else. But you must face reality.

What you know is that christians ONCE were violent -and what you should see is that Islamists STILL ARE!! The christians prophet said "turn the other cheek" and "pray for them that persecute you". The muslims prophet says to chop off their heads - and they ARE -- TODAY!!! What Islam needs is a reformation, just as christianity has had its own reformation and evolved. But it's 7th century dogma doesn't allow for change!!

As for thinking "my people" are better -- well, it's more western culture I think that is better - not any particular "people". The same culture that alllows you to disagree. In a muslim nation, they literally would kill you!! And for you to not see the difference in how some religions have evolved, and how some are still barbaric 7th centruy dogma - is to willfully blind yourself, due to your hate of religion in general.

Yes, I do believe western culture, with a firm foundation of judeao-christian culture, is better than other cultures, as the western culture has done more good for the most of humanity than any other culture that has preceded it. And while western culture has progressed, the Islamic culture/nations cannot grow up in to this modern day and age, due to their religion. They need a reformation, and a separation of "mosque and state", as christianity had. And I further believe the west and it's judeao-christian heritage is DEFINITELY better than the atheistic nations progress in human rights and "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". I'd be a fool to think otherwise....

By the way, here's an interesting "foolish" tidbit from the judaic heritage that might get you to wonder.....Certainly you've heard of the battle of Jericho -- where the jewish God told them to siege the city. He told them to march around it x amount of days (millions of marching feet, in lock-step, as has always been military tradition), periodically stopping to face the city walls and scream and blow trumpets and other horns at the top of their millions of lungs. As the "old myths" tell us, the walls eventually crumbled and fell, allowing them easy entrance to rush in and defeat the city.

Foolish religion? Or maybe what we now know of as "mechanical resonance", as told to them by their God.....
Even today, military formations do not march in lockstep to cross bridges - due to that ol' mechanical resonance thing. I doubt the ancient peoples knew about it (no bridges long enough to ever see it's effects) yet, somehow the God of a "foolish" religion told them what they needed to do to bring down solid stone walls.....Tons of pressure waves/resonance by sound, in the air, pushing on the walls (much like a singer hitting a high note and shattering a glass), and mechanical resonance of the land, due to millions of marching feet, vibrating to the walls and eventually crumbling them....Interesting, to say the, least.
Foolish?? Or is there maybe something there.....

0 Replies

@Fatal Freedoms,

Fatal_Freedoms;52523 wrote:

Did i condone the muslim conquest? NO, i did not. The muslim conquest and the christian conquest were both HORRIBLE. But don't sit there and tell me that the christians were just defending themselves and that someone the horrible atrocities of the crusades were justified, that is a big load of bull**** and you know it!

The crusades were NOT defensive, maybe the first crusade could have counted as a retaliation but there is still 8 more crusades reaching deep in muslim land for the sake of land and riches NOT defensive in any way shape or form. The crusades were for POWER and to ignore this fact is a delusion.
You can distort history all you want but the Christians are just as guilty as the muslims.

And conquering (or be conquered) is what all mankind has done since the dawn of man. And raping and pillaging has always been a part of it. No, from my modern eyes I don't agree with it, as you don't either - but judging and condemning the past by our modern eyes without applying that same principal to those doing it TODAY is foolish. WE should learn from the past - and we have. Others HAVEN'T - and it's them that you and I need to unite against - because they will gladly cut off BOTH of our heads!! TODAY!

It's funny how you state the first crusade might have been ok for retaliation, but since it was done, we should have stopped, and then go on to state the other crusades were merely for power to "take muslim lands". Ummm would these be the same lands that were Christian to begin with that the muslims conqured and we never freed during the first crusade?? It took ALL the crusdades to finally TAKE BACK what was once christian nations. Sheesh! you moral relativists are so funny! And hey, salahmad (sp?) took them back later -- which is why they are muslim today.

I'm not distorting history -- it's YOU who doesn't even KNOW history! You only see one side, that justifies your atheistic beliefs, lumping all "religions" in to one category, and not fully looking at ALL history and humanity.

Yes, Christianity had it's bad moments. HAD being the operative word. And they've evolved and grown up. Islam hasn't!! That's the point! And it really would behoove you to join christians and jews and non-believers alike who see the threat that Islam poses to YOU and me and others, TODAY!!!

1 Reply

@Pinochet73,

Pinochet73;52612 wrote:

Jo-Jo: Welcome to FF. Don't get too dizzy trying to follow his logic. Remember, while you're getting dizzy chasing him, he's just kick'n it, in a log cabin, deep in the backwoods of Michigan, buried in snow, sipping hot cider. :headbang:

Hey Pinochet -
I find it interesting actually -- and I hope I cna make some headway in to showing him the fallacies in his mode of thought. It's because of his extreme hatred of religion - so it'll be hard. Instead of seeing the good that religion has brought, he only sees the bad -- and, of course, fails to see the bad that has been done in the name of atheism (eg: communism, not to mention National Socialism).

0 Replies

@Reagaknight,

FF - you really are blind if you state the crusades couldn't have been "defensive" against Muslim invasion because of hundreds of years before christian nations fought back. In your modern thinking, you forget that everything moved much slower back then. The inroads of islam in to the west weren't all at once - it was a bit here, a bit there. And the christian world couldn't unite enough to get in the fight until they saw the peril. Actually, like what's going on today......
Yes, some few hundreds of years after the muslim conquests, christianity finally united and fought back with the crusades. To TAKE BACK what were once christian lands. And it took ALL the crusades to finally do it. It was also on many fronts (as it is today, yet again)- Spain, Italy, and then reclaiming the "holy land". We took back spain and italy, and, after many crusades, the "holy land" and vicinity, but never got the turkish region back.

No matter any atrocities of the crusades, if it weren't for them, you truly would not be here today having this debate, as Islam would have taken over europe way back when - and we'd all be living like 7th century barbarians.

Unfortunately, Islam is at it again! Taking a bit here, a bit there....and unless we all unite, they will cause the destruction of the modern world as we know it. This isn't "unrealistic", and I'm sure the Romans thought they, too, were "invincible". It's happening - piece by piece - and I'll gladly fight along side you. You have to be willing to fight to save yourself, though. And you and our way of life really is in peril. Look at the entire world -- look at the links I've provided in other posts (like this one TheReligionofPeace.com - Islam: Making a True Difference in the World ). The islamists are fighting on many fronts all over the world, in the name of their god. America is NOT invincible - and, just as Rome (and all other great powers) fell, it will be due to the rot from within, allowing barbarians to come in and conquer. Nations rise and fall - that is history --and we are not immune.

1 Reply

@JoJoJams,

JoJoJams;52643 wrote:

Now we're getting somewhere. While you, as an atheist, can believe all religions are equally foolish, to call them equally violent is ridulous. Tell that to Mahatma Ghandi (well, if he were still alive) or the Dalai Lhama.

You realize Ghandi was born up within religious violence, right? He spent 30+ years of his life trying to stop hindu violence because of course ghandi himself was a hindu, so i'm not sure where you were going with that example but it shows that it isn't just Islam that is violent it's all people in impovershed areas.

Quote:

I would say that it's the heart of mankind that is equally violent. Since the atheistic nations of the old USSR and China (via communism) have killed hundreds of millions in the name of their own ideologies....which are atheistic just as you are......

That's silly, stalin, Mao, Fidel etc... were all communists their violence is atributed more to their political agendas than their personal beliefs although stalin killed many more people than hitler stalin did not commit genocide thus the reason why hitler is more infamous than stalin. Stalin did not kill people because of his atheism he killed them because they opposed his corrupt polocies and criticized his actions the same goes for Mao and Fidel. You cannot attribute his violence to his non-belief in god any more than you can attribute world violence to non-belief in the easter bunny.

Just as fire can be used to cook our food, keep us warm, and push back the darkness, but also can get out of control and burn down the house, so, too, can the evolutionarily derived memes of "religion" be used for good, or evil.

Quote:

It's the heart of mankind where the violence resides - and religion can be used to dampen the fires in our hearts, or stoke them.

I agree with you here.

1 Reply

Islam? A better religion for minorites

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know