Quotes From A Peaceful Islam

[heyrabbit]

"It is the same whether or not you forwarn them [the unbelievers], they will have no faith" (2:6). A fire "whose fuel is men and stones" awaits them (2:24). They will be "rewarded with disgrace in this world and with grievous punishment on the Day of Resurrection" (2:85). "God's curse be upon the infidels!" (2:89). "they have incurred God's most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits [them]" (2:90). "God is the enemy of the unbelievers" (2:98). "The unbelievers among the People of the Book [Christians and Jews], and the pagans, resent that any blessing should have been sent down to you from your Lord" (2:105). "[We] shall let them live awhile, and then shall drag them into the scourge of the Fire. Evil shall be their fate" (2:126). "Do not say that those slain in the cause of God are dead. They are alive, but you are not aware of them" (2:154). "But the infidels who die unbelievers shall incur the curse of God, the angels, and all men. Under it they shall remain for ever; their punishment shall not be lightened, nor shall they be reprieved" (2:162). "The unbelievers are like beasts which, call out to them as one may, can hear nothing but a shout of a cry. Deaf, dumb, and blind, they understand nothing" (2:172)."How steadfastly they seek the Fire! That is because God has revealed the Book with truth; those that disagree about it are in extreme schism" (2:176). "Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage." . . . f they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they desist, God is forgiving and merciful. Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers" (2:190-93). "Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it. But you may hate a thing although it is good for you, and love a thing although it is bad for you. God knows, but you know not" (2:216) "They will not cease to fight against you until they force you to renounce your faith--if they are able. But whoever of you recants and dies and unbeliever, his works shall come to nothing in this world and in the world to come. Such men shall be the tenants of Hell, wherein they shall abide forever. Those that have embraced the faith, and those that have fled their land and fought for the cause of God, may hope for God's mercy" (2:217-18). "Those that deny God's revelations shall be sternly punished; God is might and capable of revenge" (3:5). "Say to the unbelievers: 'You shall be overthrown and driven into Hell--an evil resting place!'" (3:12). "Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which their breasts conceal" (3:118). "If you have suffered a defeat, so did the enemy. We alternate these vicissitudes among mankind so that God may know the true believers and choose martyrs from among you (God does not love the evil-doers); and that God may test the faithful and annihilate the infidels" (3:140). "Believers, if you yield to the infidels they will drag you back to unbelief and you will return headlong to perdition.... We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers....The Fire shall be their home" (3:149-51). "Those that suffered persecution for My sake and fought and were slain: I shall forgive them their sins and admit them to gardens watered by running streams, as a reward from God; God holds the richest recompense. Do not be deceived by the fortunes of the unbelievers in the land. Their prosperity is brief. Hell shall be their home, a dismal resting place" (3:195-96). "Such are those that are damned by their own sins. They shall drink scalding water and be sternly punished for their unbelief" (6:70).

 

It goes on like that...

 

This is not "extreme" Islam. These quotes are fundamentalistic, indeed, because they are fundamental to islam. Quotes of this nature can be found on almost every page of the Quran. They make up about 7 or 8 percent of the entire book.

 

Oh I almost forgot. There's one ambiguous quote that can be considered a denouncement of suicide, if that's how you interpret it.

 

"Do not destroy yourselves" (4:29)

 

This quote, of course, is in direct contradiction with the dozens of calls to war. If didn't already know that religions tend to be contradictory, now you do. Mulsims are instructed not to attack until they themselves are attacked, although Islam is so intolerant of everything that almost anything can be rationalized an "attack" on their religion. And this is obviously the case. With the war in Iraq therein lies an endless excuse to purposefully kill innocent 'infidels'. Considering that entire cultures, millions, literally live by this writing, it's easy to see how this doctrine could easily dehumanize nonbelievers in the minds of anyone who subscribes to its validity(exactly like the dehumanization of the Jews by Christians before and during WW2). Really, it seems as though a moderate Islamsist would have to make a severe and willful attempt to ignore much of their doctrine in order to rationalize association with any non-muslim, and therefore it should not be a surprise that this type of moderation does not exist. To me it seems almost inconceivable that anyone who reads the Quran religiously wouldn't be influenced in some manner to think less of every non-muslim.

 

Keep in mind that the quotes above are a mere fraction of the intolerance and hate in the Quran. They are just a sample of a consistent and tediously endless antipathy toward nonbelievers. It's repeated over and over ad nauseam.

 

The Hadith constitutes various other documented traditions which are important to Islamic culture. Here's an example of one. (taken from End of Faith, as were the quotes)

Jihad is your duty under any ruler, be he godly or wicked.

 

A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah's Cause in the forenoon or in the afternoon is better than the world and whatever is in it.

 

A day and night fighting on the frontier is better than a month of fasting and prayer.

 

Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to the world and get killed again (in Allah's Cause).

 

He who dies without having taken part in a campaign dies in a kind of unbelief.

 

Paradise is in the shadow of swords.

 

Edited February 25, 2007 by heyrabbit

[Some Random]

so strap on your armour, mount your shiny white horse and go on a fuckin' crusade.

[HoboFactory]

Are you always on?

[Some Random]

me? pretty much, i guess. i have no life.

[HoboFactory]

No, not you.

[heyrabbit]

I wrote stuff above, see? ;)

[HoboFactory]

Well what I mean is this is like the 3rd thread that's something of a long-winded, arrogant anti-religious spiel from you. It's silly in that there's all this anger over something that can't and won't ever really be different.

[heyrabbit]

if you want to trivialize my posts then you should want to give reasons otherwise yours will be the opinion that seems trivial and arrogant. I'm not above criticism. in fact, I go out of my way to quantify my points and to respond to everything everyone says.

 

what makes you think that religion will last forever? faith is subjective opinion. people gain it and lose it all the time and there's every reason to believe that it's possible, even likely, to go the way of the "flat-earth" belief.

[HoboFactory]

What other reason is needed other than you've said it all before on a couple of threads on the past few days and so the repitition is just well, demonstrative of some sort of arrogant frustration. I mean why bother with the, "Ooooh look everybody, the teachings of Islam really ARE violent and extreme! Those moderate Muslims are just filthy hypocrites and they make the world a bad place!" As you know, there are hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout the world. Are you saying you'd feel better about it all if instead of a minority of Muslims genuinely making it their goal to kill infidels and follow the above-mentioned teachings that every single Muslim on the planet would make such an effort (because at least then they'd not be hypocritical moderates)?

 

Religion will last forever in some form or another. Maybe there will be a time when Islam, Christianity, etc will no longer be practiced, but there will be other things to take their place. Maybe not involving some supernatural being(s), it could be a religious devotion to a state (as we've seen with communism), or even to something like scientific logic, as illustrated in Zamyatin's "We". I'm not sure if you've read that one, but one of the points it expresses is that, you can do away with what we think of as religion today, you can potentially bring on an era when everyone thinks of as God as some fairy tale, like we think of Hades or whoever else in the present, but there will be some new subject of religion-like devotion to take the place.

Edited February 27, 2007 by HoboFactory

[Moonlight_Graham]

hobo, to put things in context, heyrabbit's thread here is in large part a response to a conversation we were having in another thread. He said he'd find some quotes for me about violence in the Koran, but i guess he just decided to make it a thread of its own. So this isn't just an out-of-the-blue "why Islam sucks" thread.

 

Oh and heyrabbit thanks for the quotes, interesting.

 

On a seperate note, just to jump in on this argument u & hobo are having, overall i find it very ironic that you preach anger, disrespect, and intolerance (though in-direct & non-violent) towards those with different beliefs than you. We, the God-believers, are irrational & dillusional in our beliefs & it seems your hope is that we all convert to athieism or agnosticism or something that isn't believing in aliens. Don't u find that incredibly ironic & contradictory? You are acting like "white-man" sailing toward the shores of North America, "enlightening" the heathen natives on their stupid beliefs & showing them the "truth".

[marx marvelous]

Anyone who can get C-SPAN, turn it on now to hear a speech from the leader of the Nation of Islam. Amazing. The entire speech has been about Jesus coming back to slay the wicked, and that India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons because they're gearing up for Armageddon. I thought of you, heyrabbit.

[Stryfe]

hobo, to put things in context, heyrabbit's thread here is in large part a response to a conversation we were having in another thread. He said he'd find some quotes for me about violence in the Koran, but i guess he just decided to make it a thread of its own. So this isn't just an out-of-the-blue "why Islam sucks" thread.

 

Oh and heyrabbit thanks for the quotes, interesting.

 

On a seperate note, just to jump in on this argument u & hobo are having, overall i find it very ironic that you preach anger, disrespect, and intolerance (though in-direct & non-violent) towards those with different beliefs than you. We, the God-believers, are irrational & dillusional in our beliefs & it seems your hope is that we all convert to athieism or agnosticism or something that isn't believing in aliens. Don't u find that incredibly ironic & contradictory? You are acting like "white-man" sailing toward the shores of North America, "enlightening" the heathen natives on their stupid beliefs & showing them the "truth".

Since you are a god-believer I have one quick question? Do you believe in prayer? If so then why does god choose to ignore the thousands of starving orphans in africa? I bet they pray for food every day.

[marx marvelous]

hobo, to put things in context, heyrabbit's thread here is in large part a response to a conversation we were having in another thread.

Edited February 27, 2007 by NotFromOklahoma

[Stryfe]

"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it, and it will be yours.

~ Mark 11:22, 24

 

"For I know the plans I have for you," declares the Lord, "plans to proper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you."

~ Jeremiah 29:11-12.

 

But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

~ Matthew 6:6

 

Clearly the bible states that your prayers will be answered.

 

Proving that prayer is superstition

 

EDIT- This really is the wrong thread for this.

Edited February 27, 2007 by Stryfe

[HoboFactory]

hobo, to put things in context, heyrabbit's thread here is in large part a response to a conversation we were having in another thread. He said he'd find some quotes for me about violence in the Koran, but i guess he just decided to make it a thread of its own. So this isn't just an out-of-the-blue "why Islam sucks" thread.

 

...

Ah. My mistake then.

[heyrabbit]

What other reason is needed other than you've said it all before on a couple of threads on the past few days and so the repitition is just well, demonstrative of some sort of arrogant frustration. I mean why bother with the, "Ooooh look everybody, the teachings of Islam really ARE violent and extreme! Those moderate Muslims are just filthy hypocrites and they make the world a bad place!" As you know, there are hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout the world. Are you saying you'd feel better about it all if instead of a minority of Muslims genuinely making it their goal to kill infidels and follow the above-mentioned teachings that every single Muslim on the planet would make such an effort (because at least then they'd not be hypocritical moderates)?

 

Religion will last forever in some form or another. Maybe there will be a time when Islam, Christianity, etc will no longer be practiced, but there will be other things to take their place. Maybe not involving some supernatural being(s), it could be a religious devotion to a state (as we've seen with communism), or even to something like scientific logic, as illustrated in Zamyatin's "We". I'm not sure if you've read that one, but one of the points it expresses is that, you can do away with what we think of as religion today, you can potentially bring on an era when everyone thinks of as God as some fairy tale, like we think of Hades or whoever else in the present, but there will be some new subject of religion-like devotion to take the place.

 

I haven't said everything that could be said on the subject, not by any stretch. again, how am I arrogant? I'd like to point out that I never called muslims filthy, or even moderate for that matter. my most recent posts, including the introductory post, have been dedicated specifically to explaining that moderate Islam does not exist in the MidEast! So don't trivialize my posts when you haven't even read them.

 

I've said before that I think it's an important issue. You've also done this before. you ignore most of my points, and then presumingly conclude that my argument is a pointless one because "religion will always exist". Well, I don't know that that's true and, of course, you're not offering any reasons for why it is true. Even if we're going to assume, for arguments sake, that mass delusion will always exist, then tell me why that's that a good reason to ignore the problems posed by religious faith? Murders will always exist so why bother ? it's an entirely assuming and defeatist position to take. You fail to note the significance of what it would mean for these religions to cease to exist. If, one day, nobody believes in god, it won't be because he exists and "we just don't know it". It should really tell you something. people are suffering severe consequences for these beliefs. If these beliefs are are false then we should want to come to this conclusion sooner rather than later because a lot of people are dying for nothing.

 

hobo, to put things in context, heyrabbit's thread here is in large part a response to a conversation we were having in another thread. He said he'd find some quotes for me about violence in the Koran, but i guess he just decided to make it a thread of its own. So this isn't just an out-of-the-blue "why Islam sucks" thread.

 

Oh and heyrabbit thanks for the quotes, interesting.

 

On a seperate note, just to jump in on this argument u & hobo are having, overall i find it very ironic that you preach anger, disrespect, and intolerance (though in-direct & non-violent) towards those with different beliefs than you. We, the God-believers, are irrational & dillusional in our beliefs & it seems your hope is that we all convert to athieism or agnosticism or something that isn't believing in aliens. Don't u find that incredibly ironic & contradictory? You are acting like "white-man" sailing toward the shores of North America, "enlightening" the heathen natives on their stupid beliefs & showing them the "truth".

 

It might as well be an "out of the blue" thread. I make no apologies for it and it won't the last one I make.

 

 

I don't advocate anger or disrespect. All I'm saying is that we should criticize religious belief in the same way that we criticize every other belief. There really is no equivalence between how we criticize religious faith and how we criticize every other marginalized belief. There's not even an equivalence between how we normally criticize faith and how we criticize the Inquisition, say. Everybody admits that the horrors of the Inquisition were immoral. This is a problem because the men of the inquisition were not extremists, they were catholic(in the same way that Islamic terrorists are not "extremists"). I don't want anybody to blindly accept anything I'm saying. That would be hypocritical of me, indeed, and it would miss the point. I want people to have reasons for their beliefs.

And as carl sagan said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Well, there is no extraordinary evidence.

 

 

 

 

There is really something to be said about testing prayer with the scientific method. I don't think it's a coincidence that the results of prayer are always consistent with random chance. you'd get the same results praying to god as you would praying to a brick. That really should not be a satisfactory outcome.

Edited February 27, 2007 by heyrabbit

[Moonlight_Graham]

Since you are a god-believer I have one quick question? Do you believe in prayer? If so then why does god choose to ignore the thousands of starving orphans in africa? I bet they pray for food every day.

yes. And in my personal opinion, its not God's failure to ease the suffering of all the poor people in Africa & around the world, its ours.

 

Lets all have our Xbox 360's & plasma TV's & fat bellies & let God sort out all that yucky stuff so we don't have to worry about it.

[HoboFactory]

I haven't said everything that could be said on the subject, not by any stretch. again, how am I arrogant?  I'd like to point out that I never called muslims filthy, or even moderate for that matter. my most recent posts, including the introductory post, have been dedicated specifically to explaining that moderate Islam does not exist in the MidEast! So don't trivialize my posts when you haven't even read them.

 

I've said before that I think it's an important issue. You've also done this before. you ignore most of my points, and then presumingly conclude that my argument is a pointless one because "religion will always exist". Well, I don't know that that's true and, of course, you're not offering any reasons for why it is true.  Even if we're going to assume, for arguments sake, that mass delusion will always exist, then tell me why that's that a good reason to ignore the problems posed by religious faith? Murders will always exist so why bother ? it's an entirely assuming and defeatist position to take. You fail to note the significance of what it would mean for these religions to cease to exist. If, one day, nobody believes in god, it won't be because he exists and "we just don't know it". It should really tell you something.  people are suffering severe consequences for these beliefs. If these beliefs are are false then we should want to come to this conclusion sooner rather than later because a lot of people are dying for nothing.

I've read what ya put, what I meant wasn't that you've said everything that could be said on the subject... but you have said essentially everything you're saying in this thread in other posts, only this time citing specific examples. Basically summed up, if I'm understanding you correctly: "X, Y, and Z are examples of violent teachings in Islam, therefore, anyone who is a true Muslim should adhere to said teachings. If they don't, then they're stupid and make the world a bad place since they live in some sort of nonsensical disconnection betwen their beliefs and their actions." The "filthy" thing was just an example of the belittling tone you've used in talking about religious people in general throughout the other threads and posts.

 

I think the arrogance thing comes from the air of superiority, for instance, assuming you know more about the practice and principles of Islam than Muslims do. Have you ever talked to a Muslim about these things, particularly if they're well-versed in their doctrine. I very much doubt they'll just cop out and tell you, "Well, some of that stuff is pretty much optional" or something like that.

 

It's not as defeatist as saying "murder will always exist so why bother?" because preventing or punishing murder is something that applies to an individual or a group, but prevention and punishment is decided upon and carried out by the society. In contrast, with religion or mass delusion or whatever you wanna call it, it applies to the masses, but the control of it would also fall to the masses. So to make the murder scenario analogous, it would be like allowing the murderer to decide whether or not murder is wrong and if/how the murderer should be punished. No one is above a society, unless it's a different and perhaps more powerful society, so there is not way it can be kept "in check."

Edited February 27, 2007 by HoboFactory

[heyrabbit]

What I'm saying is that hate,violence,fear and elitism are the fundametal to Islam. the problem is not that they should adhere to the quran, it's that they do adhere to it, and they are negatively influenced by it as a consequence. I didn't call anyone stupid and I really don't think intelligence dictates a person's faith or lack thereof. And I'm not saying that there's a disconnection between their faith and actions. My argument is the exact opposite of that. I think there's a direct connection between belief and action.

 

I never once claimed to know more about quran than mulsims do. my knowledge on the quran is actually extremely limited. However, I'd argue that I don't require an extensive knowledge on the quran or the bible in order to discredit either one. While I haven't talked religion with a muslim since high-school, I suspect that I'd receive a response similar to those usually given by christian moderates - they'd either evade the question(usually by saying it's a matter of "interpretation", or hypocritically denounce its significance. That's if I were talk to a local muslim. I think it would be a different story if I were to discuss the quran with someone currently living in the MidEast.

 

 

okay, to the murder analogy.let's not lose perspective. you essentially said that it's pointless to argue about religion because it will always exist. well, people can lose faith in the same way that people lose the notion to kill. it's really a crappy analogy because violent extremists are murderers, but whatever. the point is that when we decide that something is dangerous, it's not only not impossible to do something about it, but it's immoral to do nothing about it.

 

also, it would be the those who disapprove of murder who should decide how we treat murders in society, just as it is now. punishments and whatever is just taking it too far and confusing the analogy.

Edited February 28, 2007 by heyrabbit

[HoboFactory]

What I'm saying is that hate,violence,fear and elitism are the fundametal to Islam. the problem is not that they should adhere to the quran, it's that they do adhere to it, and they are negatively influenced by it as a consequence. I didn't call anyone stupid and I really don't think intelligence dictates a person's faith or lack thereof. And I'm not saying that there's a disconnection between their faith and actions. My argument is the exact opposite of that. I think there's a direct connection between belief and action.

 

I never once claimed to know more about quran than mulsims do. my knowledge on the quran is actually extremely limited. However, I'd argue that I don't require an extensive knowledge on the quran or the bible in order to discredit either one. While I haven't talked religion with a muslim since high-school, I suspect that I'd receive a response similar to those usually given by christian moderates - they'd either evade the question(usually by saying it's a matter of "interpretation", or hypocritically denounce its significance. That's if I were talk to a local muslim. I think it would be a different story if I were to discuss the quran with someone currently living in the MidEast.

 

 

okay, to the murder analogy.let's not lose perspective. you essentially said that it's pointless to argue about religion because it will always exist. well, people can lose faith in the same way that people lose the notion to kill. it's really a crappy analogy because violent extremists are murderers, but whatever. the point is that when we decide that something is dangerous, it's not only not impossible to do something about it, but it's immoral to do nothing about it.

 

also, it would be the those who disapprove of murder who should decide how we treat murders in society, just as it is now.  punishments and whatever is just taking it too far and confusing the analogy.

But clearly far from all Muslims do adhere to it, even in the Middle East.

 

I think youp probably DO need to know a lot about a given religion's teachings before you can argue with it, not necessarily to make certain of whether it's true or something like that, but to make sure you've the full picture and aren't making arguments that could easily be refuted by someone who simply knows more on the subject. Even if you're making an argument using a fact, a fact without a full and proper context can still make for fallacious arguments. Just like if a creationist was to argue, "Evolution is a falsehood because if people come from apes, why are there still apes?" Such an argument would just be demonstrative of an insufficient understanding of evolution rather than it being a flaw in evolutionary theory. That isn't to say that your analysis of Islam is that grievous of an oversimplification, but I think with an admittedly limited knowledge of the subject at hand, it's not an authoritative analysis.

 

Sure an individual can lose faith, but conversely, a person can gain faith as well.

 

Sure it's immoral to not do something about so potentially dangerous a situation, but at the same time nothing can really be done. Have you ever talked to a hardcore Islamic fundamentalist? Suppose tomorrow you could get a sit-down with the president of Iran. How productive do you think that debate would be? You could throw all of your most sensible arguments, use all of the rationality and logic you're capable of mustering, and such an individual would still say you're just an infidel who has been deceived by Satan. In contrast you may able to shake the belief of a moderate, since if they are simply "closet agnostics" as you once put it, but it's not the closet agnostics that make it their aim to kill people in the name of Allah, after all murder/suicide is a pretty big investment to make in a belief if you only think of it as kinda-sorta true.

 

In regards to the murder analogy, what I meant is, that yes, murder is a problem, and people can/should do something about it, but the only reason something can be done is because murder is generally done by an individual or group, and so a society is able to decide it's wrong, and to make efforts to control it. But because a society is what decides what is right and wrong within it, and the society is what is subject to religious thinking in one form or another wouldn't be able to do away with its nature... (IMO).

Edited March 1, 2007 by HoboFactory

[heyrabbit]

yes, but I am arguing about the truth and being an authority on a subject does not make a person's opinion any more or less valid. there's a general fallacy that says that the more you read the bible, the more truth you discover. so to treat someone as though they their opinion holds more weight, because they;ve memorized more scripture, is really to concede to this religious fallacy.

 

it's obviously helpful to know the literature you're arguing about, but it's not imperative that you memorize every detail in order to philosophize about it. religious claims are philosophical stand points and anyone can argue them with or without scripture present.indeed, many people have memorized the bible. and as we know, the bible is open to so much interpretation that simply knowing it does not make you an authority on the context of it. and if you let a person fall back on scripture in a debate, it gives the illusion of a fair and equal argument, much like debates in this message board. the bible is really too easy to discredit. people claim that it's the word of god but how can that be so if I can improve it in 5 seconds? I can improve the bible and the koran in 5 seconds!

 

 

 

Taht's exactly why I bug the moderates, because you'd think that they the ones who could be changed and they are the ones who must be changed.although, I do somethimes doubt it. if every violent fundamentalist "converted" to atheism, it still would not solve the problem. if ever moderate converted atheism, then I'd hope that we'd have a society which would weed out terrorists instead of supporting and apologizing for them as is the case right now.

Now you say that a society is subject to a catch-22. that way of thinking assumes a couple of things. first it assumes that all people are religious, and that's obbiously not true. secondly, it assumes that people aren't capable of coming to new realizations on their own... that's a bit of a scary thought. now I know that I;m a minority, so I view it as my job to do so. now that's a bit hypocritical, but there's a difference between save someone from hell,and saving someone from being blown up. we don't know what happens in the next life but we do know what happens in this one.

 

for the people who act like religious faith will last forever, they should realize that's not only not impossible to get rid of it, it could very easily go all but extinct in one generation. all that's required to end faith is that people not lie to their children when they ask questions. that's why it disgusts me that it does exist.

Edited March 1, 2007 by heyrabbit

[Moonlight_Graham]

Taht's exactly why I bug the moderates, because you'd think that they the ones who could be changed and they are the ones who must be changed.although, I do somethimes doubt it.

Edited March 1, 2007 by Moonlight_Graham

[HoboFactory]

yes, but I am arguing about the truth and being an authority on a subject does not make a person's opinion any more or less valid. there's a general fallacy that says that the more you read the bible, the more truth you discover. so to treat someone as though they their opinion holds more weight, because they;ve memorized more scripture, is really to concede to this religious fallacy.

 

it's obviously helpful to know the literature you're arguing about, but it's not imperative that you memorize every detail in order to philosophize about it. religious claims are philosophical stand points and anyone can argue them with or without scripture present.indeed, many people have memorized the bible. and as we know, the bible is open to so much interpretation that simply knowing it does not make you an authority on the context of it. and if you let a person fall back on scripture in a debate, it gives the illusion of a fair and equal argument, much like debates in this message board. the bible is really too easy to discredit. people claim that it's the word of god but how can that be so if I can improve it in 5 seconds? I can improve the bible and the koran in 5 seconds!

 

 

 

Taht's exactly why I bug the moderates, because you'd think that they the ones who could be changed and they are the ones who must be changed.although, I do somethimes doubt it. if every violent fundamentalist "converted" to atheism, it still would not solve the problem. if ever moderate converted atheism, then I'd hope that we'd have a society which would weed out terrorists instead of supporting and apologizing for them as is the case right now.

Now you say that a society is subject to a catch-22. that way of thinking assumes a couple of things. first it assumes that all people are religious, and that's obbiously not true. secondly, it assumes that people aren't capable of coming to new realizations on their own... that's a bit of a scary thought. now I know that I;m a minority, so I view it as my job to do so. now that's a bit hypocritical, but there's a difference between save someone from hell,and saving someone from being blown up. we don't know what happens in the next life but we do know what happens in this one.

 

for the people who act like religious faith will last forever, they should realize that's not only not impossible to get rid of it, it could very easily go all but extinct in one generation. all that's required to end faith is that people not lie to their children when they ask questions. that's why it disgusts me that it does exist.

It's not a matter of knowing more scripture, or memorizing more verses, but it doesn't seem prudent to attack something if you don't know a great deal about it. Otherwise it's a lot like one of those fellows on that "Fundies Say the Darndest Things" site that said, something along the lines of, "I don't need to know much about Darwin or evolution to know that they're wrong."

 

There's also a difference between "bugging" moderates, or debating/discussing with them and just plain attacking them and their standpoints. Sure, people get passionate when they argue about something, but if you go around saying "you're all dangerous idiots that shouldn't exist" then they think you're just a douche and not worth listening to. A hardcore fundamentalist probably won't listen to facts or reason, nor will they back down if attacked. With moderates, there's a lot more room for discussion and debate, but again, outright attack will get absolutely nowhere. The air of superiority, sort of like Moonlight mentioned, this need to "convert people to a superior belief (or ubelief)" is also counterproductive. You may hold what you think to be superior, but religious people also hold their beliefs to be superior, so when each "side" just bickers and rages back and forth with their "I'm better than you" attitude, nothing will ever get done.

 

I never meant that everyone is religious, but societies are subject to thinking in a religious sense. This doesn't mean they incline towards a belief in gods or supernatural beings but that can develop a mass religious-like devotion. For isntance i,n the USSR, they tried to do away with pretty much all religion. They imprisoned Christians, deported/relocated Jews, supressed many of the native Siberian tribes, eliminated their beliefs and forced them to learn and speak Russian, and so on. But at the same time, the communist regime itself became something a lot like a religion, even if it didn't involve fanciful miracles. It's just as possible for there to be a religion that's also atheist.

 

I also agree with Moonlight on the whole "lying to children" thing. I'm sure it's definitely not some devious plot that parents have that, where they just deliberately lie. Since the parents themselves believe their faith to be true, they teach it to their kids. When these kids grow up and become adults that are capable of thinking for themselves, then they simply re-assess and adjust their beliefs accordingly. Think about how many former religious people are now atheists or agnostics, and coversely how many former atheists and agnostics are now religious.

[heyrabbit]

Holy shit there u go again.  Why are u trying to change people's beliefs?  You think 90% of the world is under a giant dillusion & they need to be saved?  You have the right answer, and all other beliefs are wrong, illogical, and plain stupid?  Please Mr. white-man, steer your boat upon our shores & covert us heathens & pagans to your superior beliefs. 

 

You are no different than if u think homosexuality is unnatural & u you are trying to convince all others to convert to this thinking.  Its ok to think such a thing, but its quite another to be intolerant of a disagreeing viewpoint.

 

Also, I don't understand this thinking of fundies vs. moderates.  How would moderates going atheist weed out terrorists vs converting fundamentalists & them not solving the problem, and are u saying moderates support & apologize for terrorists?  Please clarify. 

 

as I've said before, it's my opinion that religious peoples are intrinsically dangerous. And I actually do think that much of the world is delusional about god, and in a sense I do think humanity needs to save itself. That's quite an impertinent thing to say but let's keep it in perspective. I'm not the one claiming to know something that you don't know. it's the other way around. I want people to lose their beliefs. I'm not asking them to gain any new ones. there's a huge difference there.

 

it seems as though you're still under the impression that fundamentalists are the only problem relating to religion. I've written quite a bit recently in trying to expel this fallacy and I don't think you responded to any of it, so I won't get into much detail right now. I might go back and quote myself if you'd like. but yes, I do think that moderates support and apologize for terrorists. the obvious example would be those in afhanistan, iraq, and pakistan who've aided in hiding osama bin laden and the taliban. not every person who witnessed or helped osama was an extremist.

 

our society apologizes for terrorists by ignoring and making excuses for what causes their actions. When terrorists go on and say "I'm decapitating this man because of our jihad and in the name of allah" we have a tendency to ignore what they're telling us. why? because most of us are religious ourselves so we're obviously not going to want to blame the problem on religion, when it's the obvious answer.

 

 

if the desire to have sex with children were considered a virtuous quality, but actually doing it were not, then it's really not hard to understand how this hypothetical society would have problems with pedophiles.

 

Your job is the same as everyone else's: to live your life however you want as long as it doesn't hurt other people. Beliefs/thoughts don't hurt people, only actions do. If someone believes in heaven, that doesn't hurt anyone else so its really nobody else's business. If they believe all gays should be stoned & takes steps to see that happen, that affects others because they turn into negative actions & people have a right to rebel against those actions.

 

Your job isn't to knock on people's doors & preach how your beliefs are superior to theirs, and that they should convert to your beliefs. Why don't you leave the beliefs alone, and fight against the actions instead? Abortion, gay rights, suicide bombs, stem cells, whatever. Freedom of thought is probably the last freedom anyone can take away from us. I reserve the right to hate (in my own thoughts) people who wear green sweaters, but luckily society will stop me from shooting everyone who wears a green sweater.

 

I guess you ignored all the posts I've made trying to explain the connection between belief and action. Beliefs do hurt people. and I'm not preaching a belief, I'm denouncing beliefs. for the 6 billionth time, atheism is not a belief.

 

 

 

But people aren't lying to their children. Tooth Fairy & Santa is lying, religious belief isn't. Parents are simply teaching their children what they themselves believe is the truth. You only call it a lie because YOU YOURSELF don't believe these things to be true.

 

You need to take a long hard look in the mirror because in many ways you are becoming much like what you are fighting against, & i find that so ironic & humourous. This is a strong word & i hesitiate to use it, but i think it may apply to you:

 

hobofactory said something to

- American Heritage Dictionary

big

Edited March 3, 2007 by heyrabbit

[Moonlight_Graham]

just to clarify, i haven't read most of your posts to hobo (or his responses) etc. because its just too much reading.

 

I'm not the one claiming to know something that you don't know. it's the other way around. I want people to lose their beliefs. I'm not asking them to gain any new ones. there's a huge difference there.

I guess you ignored all the posts I've made trying to explain the connection between belief and action. Beliefs do hurt people. and I'm not preaching a belief, I'm denouncing beliefs. for the 6 billionth time, atheism is not a belief.

 

We can call atheism whatever we want. Does the "ism" suffix make atheism a belief? Doesn't matter right now. Whatever atheism is, you want people to change how they think. You believe your thinking is the truth, and their thinking is false. Now there's nothing wrong with thinking people are wrong & forming arguments against it. Thats healthy debate. But my point is that when you go to the point of saying things like "you should be forced to take a skill testing question before being allowed to give birth. "do you believe in god?". ", that is simply being intolerant.

 

it seems as though you're still under the impression that fundamentalists are the only problem relating to religion. I've written quite a bit recently in trying to expel this fallacy and I don't think you responded to any of it, so I won't get into much detail right now. I might go back and quote myself if you'd like. but yes, I do think that moderates support and apologize for terrorists. the obvious example would be those in afhanistan, iraq, and pakistan who've aided in hiding osama bin laden and the taliban. not every person who witnessed or helped osama was an extremist.

 

No not at all do i think fundamentalists are the only problem. Far from it!! Religion has caused many conflicts, wars, etc. throughout history. Moderates, fundamentalists, everything in-between. all i wanted to know before is why moderates are to blame & fundies not? They are both.

 

it's not only lying, it's child abuse! there is nothing objective about religious belief, it's completely subjective. there's a difference between teaching math and teaching god. Since it's what you believe, you should teach it in that way. the problem is that that's not the way it's approached. Kids are told that these claims are the truth, when there's not a shred of evidence that it is true, and they're too young to know the difference! When kids ask questions in sunday school I can assure you that they never get asnwers answers like, "there's no evidence to suggest that my god is any more real than zeus or thor, but it's my personal belief and you should investigate for yourself".

I'm a libertarian and if I ever have a child, I wouldn't label him/her a libertarian, nor would I send them to a school every sunday to indoctrinate them by teaching subjective belief as objective truth! it's a gross misuse of authority and a disgusting exploitation of a child's malleable mind.

 

hobofactory said that when children grow up they can "simply re-assess and adjust their beliefs". You said it all right there. kids shouldn't have any beliefs of that sort to begin with for the same reasons that a child shouldn't be in favor of communism. you can't indoctrinate a child during the most formative years of its development and then just expect that to account for nothing in the future. kids aren't just predisposed to faith in general, they are predisposed to accept the specific faith which they grow with. Children are genetically programmed to believe whatever their parents tell them, and when everyone they know tells them god is true for their whole lives, you expect that influence to disappear at some point in the future? It doesn't work that way. their minds have been molded to think a certain way. most people seem to go their whole lives without breaking free from the delusion their parents inflicted upon them.

 

This i pretty much agree with. I have a big problem with the way churches themselves do things. I was raised Roman Catholic, and the last sacrament is Confirmation, which we do in grade 6. Thats ridiculas. How can a child confirm his faith when he isn't of the age where he usually begins to question things his parents say. There should be a sacrament in the church when you are like 35 or something, when you are an adult & have gone through most of the phases of questioning your beliefs. Its so convienient that parents/church locks you into catholicism right before entering Jr. High School.

 

And yeah i agree mostly with the whole "parent brain wash thing". But i think it goes hand-in-hand with everything else parents teach kids. Parents pass all their beliefs & lessons to their children, its hard for religious beliefs (being so powerful) not to be included, but its still no excuse. Why not teach them about all other beliefs & let them decide. I still stand by what i said, that parents aren't LYING to their kids.

 

For me, i have thought about what school system i'd send my kids (if i have them). I went through the Roman Catholic school system & had very fun positive experience, and the religion really served me well growing up. But on the other hand, i reject much of what the church preaches & stands for now, so i'm hesitant to put my kid into that system.

 

call me whatever you like. you're just making it look as though ad hominem attacks are your only line of defense to my argument.

i hesitantly said that you might be, under definition, a bigot.

 

I'm not a diplomat and I never once claimed to be, but don't accuse me of attacking people. you know that I've maintained an open and respectful open dialog, but at the same time I'm the type of person to pretend things. I think believing in god is absolutely absurd. if that makes me appear arrogant then that's fine because that's really not something that should offend anyone.

You inferred that anyone who believes in God shouldn't be allowed to have babies. You called moderates "dangerous idiots". ad hominem.

 

After your above quote, you continue to say:

I think believing in god is absolutely absurd.QUOTE]

 

There, that statement is the type you should be making. But you've consistently been attacking the people who believe in God instead of just debating the belief itself.

 

Anyways, i'm done with this all. I'll read if you respond to this, but after that i won't reply because i think we've said our peace.