BDV wrote:
Islam does speak against anyone non-muslim, and does say go to war with them, but the old testament preaches quite abit of revenge and war also.
Which is exactly why they should both be placed in the library as historically interesting fictions.
Eorl wrote:Shinobi, I understand quite a bit about various religions, and before I understood anything about Islam I was very open-minded and accepting....but the more I know about the LESS I accept it.
The most damage to my view of Islam has been done by Muslims themselves. I'm yet to speak with one who thinks I should be permitted to live. The Koran is quite specific in making sure everyone knows that their god expects them to kill me.
Islam is extreme, even when it's "moderate". I'm yet to see a good reason why I should not do my best to destroy it. Can you give me one?
You seem to have bad experience with some muslims, so you are seing them throu that. While you are seeing things in that way, no discussion with you is relevant.
The origins of a religion are impossible to discern. The fact is, these religions are here as such. The only thing i was tring to say was, try to accept difference!
Shinobi wrote:Eorl wrote:Shinobi, I understand quite a bit about various religions, and before I understood anything about Islam I was very open-minded and accepting....but the more I know about the LESS I accept it.
The most damage to my view of Islam has been done by Muslims themselves. I'm yet to speak with one who thinks I should be permitted to live. The Koran is quite specific in making sure everyone knows that their god expects them to kill me.
Islam is extreme, even when it's "moderate". I'm yet to see a good reason why I should not do my best to destroy it. Can you give me one?
You seem to have bad experience with some muslims, so you are seing them throu that. While you are seeing things in that way, no discussion with you is relevant.
The origins of a religion are impossible to discern. The fact is, these religions are here as such. The only thing i was tring to say was, try to accept difference!
Why is it so many believe something must be tolerated and accepted simply because it exists? This kind of mushy political correctness is naught but useless and counterproductive tripe masquerading as higher thought.
Islam should not be tolerated, it should be extinguished. Brutally and swiftly.
Bloody hell thats a tad extreme, so hows the best way to do this? the gas chambers maybe!!!! Do you know nothing of history?
Doktor S wrote:Shinobi wrote:Eorl wrote:Shinobi, I understand quite a bit about various religions, and before I understood anything about Islam I was very open-minded and accepting....but the more I know about the LESS I accept it.
The most damage to my view of Islam has been done by Muslims themselves. I'm yet to speak with one who thinks I should be permitted to live. The Koran is quite specific in making sure everyone knows that their god expects them to kill me.
Islam is extreme, even when it's "moderate". I'm yet to see a good reason why I should not do my best to destroy it. Can you give me one?
You seem to have bad experience with some muslims, so you are seing them throu that. While you are seeing things in that way, no discussion with you is relevant.
The origins of a religion are impossible to discern. The fact is, these religions are here as such. The only thing i was tring to say was, try to accept difference!
Why is it so many believe something must be tolerated and accepted simply because it exists? This kind of mushy political correctness is naught but useless and counterproductive tripe masquerading as higher thought.
Islam should not be tolerated, it should be extinguished. Brutally and swiftly.
BDV wrote:Bloody hell thats a tad extreme, so hows the best way to do this? the gas chambers maybe!!!! Do you know nothing of history?
History...
Yes I know a thing or two about history. How many, historically speaking, do you suppose have been mutilated, oppressed, or executed in the name of islam in the last thousand years?
Compare that to the damage hitler did, as you seem to be alluding to it anyway.
The figures aren't close.And further, Hitler is long dead, and isn't killing or oppressing anyone while islam is only getting worse;ie gaining more influence and thereby causing more deaths, opression, ignorance and all that other fun stuff islam does
The best way to be rid of it? Gas chambers? Naw, impractical.
The best way to fight ignorance is with education, but in the case of religious ignorance this becomes tricky, as the religious possess the ultimate shield against knowledge - faith.
So in that light, I'd say just nuke em all, and let allah sort em out.
You have some serious issues. I wouldn't even waste my time trying to explain why you are soooo wrong, go see a shrink.
Doktor S wrote:BDV wrote:Bloody hell thats a tad extreme, so hows the best way to do this? the gas chambers maybe!!!! Do you know nothing of history?
History...
Yes I know a thing or two about history. How many, historically speaking, do you suppose have been mutilated, oppressed, or executed in the name of islam in the last thousand years?
Compare that to the damage hitler did, as you seem to be alluding to it anyway.
The figures aren't close.And further, Hitler is long dead, and isn't killing or oppressing anyone while islam is only getting worse;ie gaining more influence and thereby causing more deaths, opression, ignorance and all that other fun stuff islam does
The best way to be rid of it? Gas chambers? Naw, impractical.
The best way to fight ignorance is with education, but in the case of religious ignorance this becomes tricky, as the religious possess the ultimate shield against knowledge - faith.
So in that light, I'd say just nuke em all, and let allah sort em out.
BDV wrote:You have some serious issues. I wouldn't even waste my time trying to explain why you are soooo wrong, go see a shrink.
Right..well if the 'neener neener' aproach makes you feel better, have at it.
Doktor S wrote:The best way to be rid of it? Gas chambers? Naw, impractical.
The best way to fight ignorance is with education, but in the case of religious ignorance this becomes tricky, as the religious possess the ultimate shield against knowledge - faith.
So in that light, I'd say just nuke em all, and let allah sort em out.
The main problem with you, Doctor S, is that you do not believe in God.
You claim to be a person of knowledge and science (and you consider religious people as "ignorant"). However, when you asked about proof for the existence of your Creator, you rejected all the proof I provided, remember?
http://www.able2know.com/forums/a2k-post1804146.html#1804146
Here is another proof. Would you mind reading and re-reading it carefully?
Quote:Proof of existence of God.
The universe is large, but is still a 'finite' space. NO scientist could ever prove using hard facts that the universe has no bounds. In fact when they say the universe arose from a Big Bang and is expanding they inherently admit it is finite in size, otherwise it could not expand! There is nothing in reality which is unlimited. No matter how hard we try, man is unable to find anything unlimited around him. All he can perceive is the finite and limited.
A further attribute of everything around us is that they are all needy and dependent in order to continue existing. They are not self sustaining or independent. Man has needs. He has to satisfy in order to survive. He has organic needs. Man must eat and drink if he is to survive. If he does not he will die. We see need and dependency in plants and animals. They depend On other parts Of the food chain for their existence. The water cycle is dependent On the sun, which is dependent on the laws of the galaxies and of burning mass, and SO on... Nothing man can perceive is self-subsistent. So things exist, but do not have the power of existence. They cannot control when they die or when other bodies die. There is one fact that emerges from all this. If something is limited and finite, and does not have the power to be self-subsistent then it must have been created.
Applying this to everything we see will bring us to a conclusion. If everything in the universe is created because it has not the power of being in existence on its own, and is finite and limited, then there must be a Creator. This Creator by contrast has to be unlimited and not needy and dependent on anything to bring It into, or sustain It's existence.
The universe; the sum of finite and dependent objects is finite and dependent -but dependent on what? Dependent on something to start and sustain life, something to plan and develop life. The only rational and intellectual solution to the question Of creation is that there is a Creator which has accounted for all that we see and perceive. Rational tells us that nothing can be created without a creator. Ultimately there must be a Creator who is unlimited in every aspect.
Conclusion: Since everything in the universe is limited, then it must mean that it didnt exist at one point. Therefore it had to be created by a Creator (God).
LOL muslim, you're 'proofs' are only 'proof' of one thing: your own gullibility.
Take this 'proof' offered here. Boiled down, it spells out to ' Nothing creates itself, everything is finite, therefore god exists'
Do you not see the enormous leap in logic required to get from (shaky) premise to (non sequitur) conclusion?
This is not proof, nor is it evidence..it is weak sauce, engineered to convert those with fuzzy minds. Those of us with a clear grasp of logic and reason just chuckle and shake our heads.
Doktor S wrote:LOL muslim, you're 'proofs' are only 'proof' of one thing: your own gullibility.
Take this 'proof' offered here. Boiled down, it spells out to ' Nothing creates itself, everything is finite, therefore god exists'
Do you not see the enormous leap in logic required to get from (shaky) premise to (non sequitur) conclusion?
This is not proof, nor is it evidence..it is weak sauce, engineered to convert those with fuzzy minds. Those of us with a clear grasp of logic and reason just chuckle and shake our heads.
Indeed. Or we politely move on and leave such to their own delusions. But when religion is used to manipulate people to carry out acts harmful to society, it is time to stand up and point out such folly. I cant leave alone the fact that the four suicide bombers who attacked London a year ago were English born and bred. They weren't supporters of Saddam Hussein or the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. They killed themselves and many others because someone somewhere exploited their gullibility. They were told they were doing the will of God and would be rewarded in heaven with virgins. They killed in the name of Islam.
Some ideas are just plain bad ideas, whether dressed up as religion or not. Its time to expose them for what they are, and if that means treading on the finer religious sensibilities of some, then so be it.
Shinobi wrote:The origins of a religion are impossible to discern. The fact is, these religions are here as such. The only thing i was tring to say was, try to accept difference!
Poppycock. While the origin of humankind's propensity to invent religions is a matter of conjecture, the origins of of extant religions occurring within literate cultures is matter of record. History is mystery only to those steeped in ignorance.
muslim1 wrote: .... <bunchatwaddle> ...
The ludicrous maunderings you offer as "proof" lack the sophistication necessary even to be considered sophistry.
Muslim1,
Every proof of the existence of God (teleological, cosmological, ontological, argument out of miracle) has at least one severe weakness , and vice versa. The only argument whose weakness I am not aware of is Pascal's argument (the disputed immorality of the argument is irrelevant), but it's disputable if it truly is an argument or pure "planing" for the future.
As for the proof you quoted:
The Big Bang is only one of many theories. And, although the best, is still a hypothesis with a lot of tiny and huge holes.
Creation? Can human (a "finite" being) create a finite object? So, why does Man's Creator need to be unlimited? And, why does the Creator have to be "sentient" or "intelligent" or whatever you will.
How can you use the racionalis (in homo racionalis) to prove something unlimited, omnipotent? Or how can you a posteriori prove it?
Everything in the world is limited, finite? Ever heard of Deterministic chaos?
The conclusion is hazy, and not connected with the premises
Timberlandko ,
It is true that religions are the product of mostly illiterate and undereducated people, but you must be aware that "faith" and "will" make the basis of any religion, and that they can not be disregarded. As such, you can not disprove religion, any more than you can prove it. In spite that I'm a student of science, I too have seen the "strength" of faith in arguments. For, anyone can effectively disprove your science with some simple Logic and "faith" and "will" issues. The only way to be sure from such an attack is with faith and will. Thus you have a paradox.
And, if you feel that history is clear: Prove it short of any doubt.
Some are steeped in ignorance, while others in vastly superior knowledge.
Doktor S,
Ecce homo!
Have you ever heard of Ethical virtues?
You are in some ways as bad as the Muslims you hate. They go to one end, and you to the other.
About the "victims of Islam throughout history" read an older post by about quantifying guilt and the dead.
Nuke them? Does that make you any better than them in your mind?
Education, someone might say that education is a way of oppressing someone's opinion? And, on the other hand, education must be accepted freely to work, you can not force someone. For forcing him, you would get the opposite effect.
Do you reject what many philosophers with a firm grasp of logic have said? Do you view yourself as the bearer of truth and logic?
When working with logic, you can not say: It summarizes (or boils down to) to, From X throu Y comes Z. You can not simplify a complex judgement.
Everything represents a part of the diverse existence. To destroy something different is to destroy it's potential good and bad sides.
Political correctness?! What political correctness?
Destroy something without trying to understand it and you cripple yourself in the long run. Assimilate. Do not change your surroundings, change yourself. Do not try to by determined in an indeterminate universe.
Islam is spreading and causing oppression? Aren't we being a little hypocritical?
Well, why shouldn't we then create a "Brave New World" of our own. Let's stop any "unwelcome" ideas in their root, lets produce humans in a factory. Then all would be "normal".
Steve,
A bad idea for one, is a good one for another.
Define a universally bad idea?
Is a bad idea when the majority say it so, or when the figure of power says so?
Does every person define a bad idea for himself?
Does a Higher Being define a bad idea?
--
Audentes fortuna iuvat.
Shinobi wrote:
Steve,
A bad idea for one, is a good one for another.
Define a universally bad idea?
Is a bad idea when the majority say it so, or when the figure of power says so?
Does every person define a bad idea for himself?
Does a Higher Being define a bad idea?
You're lost man in a soup of moral relativism.
answering in order
not necessarily
that which does universal harm
when common sense prevails
no there are guidelines, law, community, family etc
whats an HB?
I am of course having a go at Islam because I think its nonsense. Literally it makes no sense. But Islam doesnt have a monopoly of bad ideas. I watched (on tv) a small child being berated by two or three adults. She was crying pitifully, waving her arms about trying to ward off the assaults. It brings a tear to my eye thinking about it. These were nominally Christians who had got it in their stupid fat heads that this little girl was possessed by Kindoku. They were trying to drive evil spirits out of her. And if it didnt work...worse was to come. I say the idea that a beautiful little girl has to be tortured because she is possessed by Kindoku is a bad idea. And I say any religion or sect within a religion that promotes such an idea is a bad religion.
Putting bombs on a transport system because you believe you are doing the will of god is also a bad idea.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
You're lost man in a soup of moral relativism.
I'm lost? Maybe I've found myself?
Do you know the definition of morality?
Moral, relativism? Think about it.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
answering in order
not necessarily
So, an idea that you find good is good for me?
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:that which does universal harm
Define universal harm. Take any example you wish.
The world is not black and white. I believe it's in color.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:when common sense prevails
Define common sense. But be carefull, many atrocities were made out of common sense.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:no there are guidelines, law, community, family etc
What if one community is in disagreement with another? De facto, history is a tale of such conflicts.
Is law absolute? Is law always "right"?
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:whats an HB?
Take it as you wish: God, Prime Substance, etc.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:I am of course having a go at Islam because I think its nonsense. Literally it makes no sense. But Islam doesnt have a monopoly of bad ideas. I watched (on tv) a small child being berated by two or three adults. She was crying pitifully, waving her arms about trying to ward off the assaults. It brings a tear to my eye thinking about it. These were nominally Christians who had got it in their stupid fat heads that this little girl was possessed by Kindoku. They were trying to drive evil spirits out of her. And if it didnt work...worse was to come. I say the idea that a beautiful little girl has to be tortured because she is possessed by Kindoku is a bad idea. And I say any religion or sect within a religion that promotes such an idea is a bad religion.
Putting bombs on a transport system because you believe you are doing the will of god is also a bad idea.
They believe it is a good idea. Prove it beyond the fact that you or people like you don't like it.
Many things are nonsense. It's life.
Shinobi wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Putting bombs on a transport system because you believe you are doing the will of god is also a bad idea.
They believe it is a good idea. Prove it beyond the fact that you or people like you don't like it.
Many things are nonsense. It's life.
Are you seriously asking me to "prove beyond the fact" - whatever that means- that I dont like the idea of putting bombs on trains? What if I said I really really really dont like it? Would that suffice? You are talking nonsense. I thought at first you had some sensible contribution to make, I was wrong.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Shinobi wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Putting bombs on a transport system because you believe you are doing the will of god is also a bad idea.
They believe it is a good idea. Prove it beyond the fact that you or people like you don't like it.
Many things are nonsense. It's life.
Are you seriously asking me to "prove beyond the fact" - whatever that means- that I dont like the idea of putting bombs on trains? What if I said I really really really dont like it? Would that suffice? You are talking nonsense. I thought at first you had some sensible contribution to make, I was wrong.
Slow down. This wasn't meant for only the last sentance, but for the whole column.
Now I notice the sentence is unclear. Sorry, my mistake. That's what happens when you rush it...
--
Prove this beyond the simple argument that you or people like you don't agree with it. More clearly, can you show that your way of life and your ideals are better then theirs? If you think they are, show us why.
Place yourself in their position.
--
Before disregarding my whole "thesis" on one lapsus lingue, remember
Errare humanum est.
Shinobi wrote:Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Shinobi wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Putting bombs on a transport system because you believe you are doing the will of god is also a bad idea.
They believe it is a good idea. Prove it beyond the fact that you or people like you don't like it.
Many things are nonsense. It's life.
Are you seriously asking me to "prove beyond the fact" - whatever that means- that I dont like the idea of putting bombs on trains? What if I said I really really really dont like it? Would that suffice? You are talking nonsense. I thought at first you had some sensible contribution to make, I was wrong.
Slow down. This wasn't meant for only the last sentance, but for the whole column.
Now I notice the sentence is unclear. Sorry, my mistake. That's what happens when you rush it...
--
Prove this beyond the simple argument that you or people like you don't agree with it. More clearly, can you show that your way of life and your ideals are better then theirs? If you think they are, show us why.
Place yourself in their position.
--
Before disregarding my whole "thesis" on one lapsus lingue, remember
Errare humanum est.
Getting sleepy...
I missed an important part of your statement:
Quote:that I dont like the idea of putting bombs on trains?
The bombs were not put because they wanted to see fireworks.
They belive they are working for a higher cause.
Remember that when answering the questions.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Shinobi wrote:And, it seems to me that most westerners are demanding understanding from those people, but giving little or none in return.
Its nothing personal we have against muslims. Its just a fact that they tend to get in the way of our extraction of middle eastern oil and gas.
This condenses it, doesn't it. Bone chilling!
Johnnys in america, low-techs at the
Wheel
No-one needs anyone, they dont even
Just pretend
Johnnys in america
Im afraid of americans
Im afraid of the world
Im afraid I cant help it
Im afraid I cant
Johnnys in america.
God is an American
