September 18th, 2012, 01:26 AM
Peace and mercy....
you have seen What happened In the Muslim world ... and it is not good !!
So.. I want to know you Why did this happen After Film production Mohammed Peace be upon him ...
Who is Muhammad ؟؟
Just visit this site and you will know why Muslims die for Mohammed !! Thank you ...
Muslim World League The Prophet of Mercy : Global Commission For Introducing the Messenger |
@"One of the humans", this is a science discussion forum. We specifically prohibit preaching of any belief. Posting a link to a general website about Islam seems to fall into that category. Please summarise in your next post why you think Muslims are willing to die for Mohammed. Also please explain how you think such willingness has any relationship at all to the ridiculous film of a pathetic fool who happens to live in the USA. Thank you.
Since i am certain the OP will not be replying i will give this a shot.
As for the first question: There is no reason why they should be willing to die. The islamic doctrine prohibits suicide or the attack of non-armed people (there is a whole chapter called "the spoils of war" that aims to make certain that during wartime people respect the opposing force, a few rules are:
1. treat prisoners of war with respect and dignity.
2. do not harm unarmed or non-combat (medical staff, suppliers, administration, etc.).
3. never harm woman / children / disabled / animals.
4. never attack from the rear.
5. don't disturb distribution of food, medicine.
6. when orders are clearly suicidal, they are not to be followed.
These are but a few, and it is a shame that groups of people that are stating to defend a religion are they themselves in fact in friction with its core beliefs. Now anyone here can come in and defend that there are several instances in the koran that endorse violence. Keep in mind that like everything else in life, the Koran itself is highly contextual.
So everytime a battle or killing is named in the Koran it is always in context pointing to some battle in the past or some event and SPECIFICALLY talking about the people involved then and there.
As for the second question:
Absolutely Nothing! the US has absolutely nothing to do with the idiotic notion that some idiot got a laptop and found that there's editing software on it and thought it would be a good idea to do a home movie. The US or any other country has nothing to do with this, it is the same argument as we muslims (yes i am a muslim myself) defend against when we are targeted as a group for actions of others that we don't agree with.
To answer these two questions, we should not be looking at the religion itself nor her followers, but rather at the fact that these people would have done this given any other reason. These are the same people that would plunder during a natural disaster. It is inherent to their personality and circumstance, given the means and opportunity to riot.
It is a shame that these groups of people are given more credit of being muslims then they deserve, it actually feeds their reasoning, when in fact they should be educated that these actions will get your religion membership card revoked no matter what religion issued it.
It is not my intention to provoke an unproductive argument of your thoughtful post, but there many Islamic passages that can be interpreted to actually reward suicide attacks. The hadith 2522 found in Sunan Abî Dâwûd in the Book of Jihâd:Originally Posted by Teb
Now this may be interpreted as those that die defending Islam in battle will help seventy members of their family in heaven (Jannah).“The martyr can intercede for seventy members of his family.”
Al-Tirmidhi HadithHadith 3834 Narrated byAl-Miqdam ibn Ma'dikarib:
I have to accept at face value that many of these suicide attackers held a belief that they would receive some type of reward in a afterlife for themselves and their families for defending Islam in battle.Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said, "The martyr receives six good things from Allah: he is forgiven at the first shedding of his blood; he is shown his abode in Paradise; he is preserved from the punishment in the grave; he is kept safe from the greatest terror; he has placed on his head the crown of honour, a ruby of which is better than the world and what it contains; he is married to seventy-two wives of the maidens with large dark eyes; and is made intercessor for seventy of his relatives."
First of all, it is not the scope of this forum to discuss in depth the interpretation of Koran and Hadith, so i will keep this short.
As for the mentioned hadith, first of all a martyr is not always someone who dies in battle, keep in mind that fireman, policemen, soldiers, sailors etc are also martyrs.
Second the word jihad in the koran and hadith has a different meaning then the one we know and use today. There are two kinds of jihad:
1. The smal jihad: the strugle to be in line with the koran (give to the poor, fast, pray etc).
2. The greater jihad: the strugle against ones inner weakness (resisting temptation, overcoming addiction).
Second of all keep in mind that hadith (even the sahih level ones) are only secondary sources. There are no maidens in the koran only a very important verse stating:
He who takes a life, is considered to have taken the life of all humanity.
In your defense you do state that the attackers held a belief, as in that it does not have to be in line with the essence of the message. Allas belief is found easily, a religion in a region where religion has a strong foothold, is just an easier tool to mold this belief.
Communisme is not neccesarily evil, committing horible acts to enforce it or keep it in place is. Yet this does not change the fact that in and of itself the economic system is not necceraly evil.
Didn't you leave out one kind of jihad? Jihad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An accurate interpretation of the concept of Jihad is provided by the BBC about how Muslims describe three different types of struggles:[7]
- A believer's internal struggle to live out the Muslim faith as well as possible
- The struggle to build a good Muslim society
- Holy war: the struggle to defend Islam, with force if necessary
Communism always needs horrible acts to enforce it.Second of all keep in mind that hadith (even the sahih level ones) are only secondary sources. There are no maidens in the koran only a very important verse stating:
He who takes a life, is considered to have taken the life of all humanity.
In your defense you do state that the attackers held a belief, as in that it does not have to be in line with the essence of the message. Allas belief is found easily, a religion in a region where religion has a strong foothold, is just an easier tool to mold this belief.
Communisme is not neccesarily evil, committing horible acts to enforce it or keep it in place is. Yet this does not change the fact that in and of itself the economic system is not necceraly evil.
No, contrary to what is stated on wikipedia there are only two kinds of jihad mentioned in the Koran. The third meaning of the word was added only recently (last 3 decades).
And no communism doesnt always needs horrible acts to enforce it, i wasn't talking about the implimentation of communism in today's society, that was actualy my point. I was stating that the idea of communism doesn't include the horrible acts that it is accompanied with in society.
Are you saying there were no holy wars until the last 3 decades, or that they called holy war something else besides jihad?
Communism involves massive confiscation of wealth from one group of people for the benefit of another group. To me, that in itself is a horrible act.And no communism doesnt always needs horrible acts to enforce it, i wasn't talking about the implimentation of communism in today's society, that was actualy my point. I was stating that the idea of communism doesn't include the horrible acts that it is accompanied with in society.
Never said that, im saying that Islam never mentions holy wars (a war is never holy), only the holy war inside ourselves or against temptation.
The people that defend these horribel crimes, use this word to justify their actions.Again this discussion is not about the Koran but about these groups of people, in these circumstances. But if you want to know: The Koran sees, christians, jews, etc as "children of scriptures" and they are to be treated with respect.
As for communisme, what if a majority of people in a country chooses this? Then it is their free choice that doesn't make the system bad or evil, and people would distribute rather then gouvernements confiscate. Again not the topic at hand just an example.
Last edited by Teb; September 20th, 2012 at 01:27 AM. Reason: was written on iphone, changed layout
Prophet mohammed (pbuh) is the last and final messenger of God in Muslim belief. Among the other messengers were Moses and Jesus.
It's a little unfair to suggest that the movie fell like an apple in the soup for the American comunity. The movie voiced out what was on the lips of many people in America and many enjoyed watching it, although many did not.
What are Muslims afraid of here? There must be something motivating their violent behavior other than a movie, I think it may be a fear of something, God perhaps?
Are you crazy?? why did you say that like they are some kind of alien species? stuff that made you angry also make them angry and they rebel for same reason anyone else would rebel .
For one, you must understand that this place like Afghanistan, Irag, Iran, Israel, Palestin, Lebanon, Egypt has been at a REAL war (ie: tank/air/infantry combat) during the "cold war" and are extremely volatile till this day. This people don't just suddenly appear... they have been there like ages unnotices.
It isn't the religion, its the war...
It isn't the religion, its the war...
and poverty
and exploitation by Western governments or business often working in tandem with their own corrupt leaderships
and inability to be heard, to vote, or change anything unless and until it was by massed violence
and Nativity about the world or even their own nation's events due to lack of technology until recently, control of the airways and suppression of free press
all of which makes them extremely vulnerable to propaganda that channels all that pent up frustration
If you have two neighbors and they both decide to steal your property, is that all right? They have you outvoted, 2 to 1.
What he meant is, if the Muslims would make a movie about how Jesus Christ was a pedophile...ok bad example, muslims believe in Jesus, well, if Muslims made a movie about the Bible being a masturbation manual, Americans wouldn't give a shit, but if Americans make movie about Mohammed, violence breaks out throughout the world. It is more than clear here that something is wrong. Very wrong.
These people already hate western ideals (even before any offensive movies or cartoon). What they want is for western society to make any of those ridiculous movies or cartoon so they can justify western stupidity. -It is good for getting a political support.
That's why its soo easy for them to make a riot. (its not individual, its a political idealism: "west is evil/idiot like so. We will protect our children from this western *stuff* and uphold our values and religion")
Wait a minute....You are saying Muslims hate western ideals because they're stupid, plus Muslims justify western stupidity by ridiculous movies and cartoons(yet Muslims want this you say).
Why are the ideals stupid? Why are the movies and cartoons ridiculous? Your answers are critical to your argument. If you can, do not mention anything war or religion related in your response.
Can we stop generalizing?
Muslims don't hate the US. Extremists and terrorists in the middle east who happen to twist the teaching of Islam to their dark ideals hate the United States. Lets also not be so naive as to suggest the United States is a doe-eyed puppy who didn't know pooping on the carpet was going to upset someone.
One aspect is that the Internet and other technologies, in effect, make all people your next door neighbor. This is okay to someone who practices neighborly tolerance, but is extremely offensive to Muslims who lack such tolerance.
Another aspect is that Muslims really do seem to worship Muhammad. In this thread, we see Muslims writing "peace be upon him" (alternately written as "PBUH") when they mention Muhammad, yet I don't see this type of reverence from Muslims toward God or Allah. Years ago, some Westerners called Muslims "Mohammedans", which Muslims found offensive, so they ended the practice. Now people use "Muslim". For anyone here who doesn't know, the word "Muslim" means one who follows Islam, the prefix "mu" means a person and attaches to the S-L-M root (present in "Islam" and in the Arabic "salaam" and the Hebrew "shalom", as well as names such as Solomon and Selma).
And yet another aspect is that Islam seems to be highly susceptible to being "hijacked" to promote fanaticism and violence. Part of the Hajj pilgrimage is the Stoning of the Devil, and almost as many people who were killed in the 9-11 attacks have been killed by fellow Muslims during the holy time of Hajj who, in their rush to get to the place where they can throw their stones, trample and asphyxiate fellow Muslims to death. Following such rampant disregard for Muslim life, it does not surprise me that so many Muslims want to kill infidel westerners wholesale and for little reason. Another international act of utter disrespect and violence involved the desecration of the body of Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini at his funeral by his worshipers who fell into some sort of fanatical mass frenzy (again, another case of Muslims worshiping a fellow human instead of their Allah). The rest of the world also fails to accept or understand or tolerate Islamic honor killings or female genital mutilation.
Have you read the Quran brother? It leaves no place for such things as...the US, or freedom of beliefs. Allah sais in the Quran that mankind is his greatest creation because, unlike other animals, a man can either choose to obey Allah or disobey him. So a man who obeys Allah is said to be greater than the Angels, because the Angels have no free will. Angels have no choice but to obey Allah, but men have a choice. They can either obey or disobey. So when you are given this choice, you chose to obey, you are greater than the angels and go to Heaven and if you choose to disobey Allah, you go to Hell.
Regarding homosexuality, when 2 men are caught in the act, kill the one doing, as well as the one whom it is being done to. Regarding marriage, a man should marry more than 2 wives because women are greater in number than men in all countried except India, so allowing a man to marry more than one wife prevents the wives which are left unmatched from becoming public property. Want me to go on? It is mentioned in the Song Of Solomon chapter number 5 verse number 16 of the oncoming of prohpet Mohammed (pbuh) I'm quoting in Hebrew:
"Hiku mamtakim, vikulli Mohammadim, zedudi vei zeiri banak Ierusalim"
He is all together lovely oh daughters of Jerusalem. They claim the Bible verse points to Mohammed (pbuh) and not the holy spirit, so the daughters are warned of the oncoming of the prophet that will deliver them from prostitution and a libertin lifestyle.
Do you see the US fitting in this picture?
Not according to the United Nations. The UN says the sex ratio for the entire world is 101 males per 100 females, and some of the highest ratios (males/100 females) can be found in Muslim countries: Qatar 189, UAE 174, Bahrain 133, Saudi Arabia 124, Oman 113, China 112, etc, with India at 106. The lowest sex ratios are in mostly the countries of the former Soviet Union, where Latvia ranks lowest with 83 males per females, meaning that 1 in 5 men could marry a second wife. For the other countries with the lowest sex ratio: Ukraine 1 in 7, Cape Verde 1 in 7, Russia 1 in 7, Belarus, Estonia, and Lithuania all 1 in 8, and Georgia, Hungary and Moldova all 1 in 11.
You translate the Hebrew word mahmadim as "Muhammad". However from its root hamad (desire, covet), the Hebrews translate as "delightful", and the Christians similarly translate it as "desirable" or "lovely" etc which is completely in the context of graphically describing the bride's groom. Muhammad suddenly popping up in a book about love while describing the groom is a non sequitor.
In 2010, the global sex ratio was 986 males per 1,000 females and trended to reduce to 984 in 2011.Not according to the United Nations. The UN says the sex ratio for the entire world is 101 males per 100 females, and some of the highest ratios (males/100 females) can be found in Muslim countries: Qatar 189, UAE 174, Bahrain 133, Saudi Arabia 124, Oman 113, China 112, etc, with India at 106. The lowest sex ratios are in mostly the countries of the former Soviet Union, where Latvia ranks lowest with 83 males per females, meaning that 1 in 5 men could marry a second wife. For the other countries with the lowest sex ratio: Ukraine 1 in 7, Cape Verde 1 in 7, Russia 1 in 7, Belarus, Estonia, and Lithuania all 1 in 8, and Georgia, Hungary and Moldova all 1 in 11.
You translate the Hebrew word mahmadim as "Muhammad". However from its root hamad (desire, covet), the Hebrews translate as "delightful", and the Christians similarly translate it as "desirable" or "lovely" etc which is completely in the context of graphically describing the bride's groom. Muhammad suddenly popping up in a book about love while describing the groom is a non sequitor.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...for-male-child
In china, india there was infanticide, meaning the mother gives girth and when she sees its a girl she grabs the baby by her ankles and smashes its brains against the walls, like our friend said earlier, for sustenance. But that's not natural. Allah sais in the Quran, do not kill your children for the sake of sustenance because Allah will provide sustenance. So if you quote an idol worshipper country which does not follow the teachings of the Quran, many abominations like these will be seen but that does not disproove Quran now does it?
I'm not a muslim btw, just saying.
Western ideals is more fun. For example: premarital sex looks fun. I guess if people can have random sex like in movies it sounds more fun?
The problem is that this thing cause problem. For example look at drug use in the ghetto. Of course drug is fun and could be legalized but its not good.
Well, what is "not good"? ("not good" because you think it is so?) You need certainty with this stuff and only religion can be sure that stuff like alcohol and random sex is 100% wrong. What you need is religion as political force and stuff like this can be effectively banned.
---
Without religion you can't push away this fun values just because you see some bad trait in it. With religion you can be 100% sure. That's where religion played a role in all of this.
---
P/S: of course western society also has stuff to hate about changes in todays generation... but can't do stuff about it because unlike eastern society: you can blame the west and you can't resort to religion to gain political change... so, no change...
Last edited by msafwan; October 1st, 2012 at 07:33 AM.
Inaccurate and offensive. Disrespect to neighbours conflicts with Islamic practices.
Gross ignorance and bigotry on your part. For instance, how do you account for Allāhu Akbar, Allah is greater, being the opening of prayer.
More gross and offesnive bigotry. I take it you view the loss of life at Hillsboro represented a disregard for human life by Liverpool supporters.And yet another aspect is that Islam seems to be highly susceptible to being "hijacked" to promote fanaticism and violence. Part of the Hajj pilgrimage is the Stoning of the Devil, and almost as many people who were killed in the 9-11 attacks have been killed by fellow Muslims during the holy time of Hajj who, in their rush to get to the place where they can throw their stones, trample and asphyxiate fellow Muslims to death.
jrmunroe, your posts are normally, thoughtfull, accurate and interesting. You've lost my respect with the foregoing jumble of bigoted misinformation.
Even using your figures of 986 and 984, it means that there's enough women for 1 in every 60 or 70 men to have a second wife. This reminds me of the controversy of the elite 1% (versus the 99%) in America.
It is a well-known fact:Thus, nature provides a 100:100 ratio for procreation, which almost every society then institutionalizes as monogamous relationships.
- that women conceive many more males than females (about 125 to 150 males per 100 females),
- that males suffer more spontaneous abortions than females,
- that results in a ratio at birth of about 105,
- that through natural causes drops to essentially 100 by the age of procreation.
It would most likely require many men killed in warfare to cause the ratio to drop to where there would be twice as many women as men. This means killing off half of the men in warfare. This again indicates the Muslim assumption of violence.
What do you mean by "sustenance"?
You mentioned female infanticide in China and India; however, the article you quoted gives the sex ratio for those countries as 926 and 940, respectively, meaning that there's more women than men and that 13 to 16% of men (about 1 in 7) could have 2 wives. In any event, no country (not even Muslim countries) come close to a sex ratio of, say, 500, which would allow 2 wives for every man, or 333, which would allow 3 wives for every man.
- one's means of livelihood; maintenance; support or
- that which sustains life; nourishment; food
Disprove the Qur'an? Not my goal here.
In those coutries female babies are killed for sustenance, meaning that the female body is too weak to do hard labor and contribute to agriculture but require similar food to eat, so these families believe they are unable to feed more females.
Nowhere Quran says that every man should have 2 wifes or 3 wifes. Quran says that, occasionally, a woman should share her husband with another woman in order to prevent her from becoming public property. It's settle for something bad to prevent something even worst from happening. Quran sais that a woman without a husband is a wasted human being, a tramp, a prostitute, public property. So in order for all women to have a husband, some women must accept the compromise because if they don't, they ago against the scriptures. It's not a Playboy contense, who has more women. It's allowing a woman to have a life.
Not inaccurate or offensive. Why then don't Muslims practice what the Qur'an preaches? More accurately, some/many Muslims want the world to bow to their beliefs (not necessarily Islam). I own a Qur'an, but in a Muslim country, I would respect their custom and not burn in in the middle of Main St. (Of course, I would not burn it anyway, and I would even respect their five daily worship times and probably pray myself.) In my own country, I could burn it as I please. And that is what some/many Muslims become fanatical and violent about. What I am saying is this — They, over there, cannot dictate what I, over here, can or cannot do (even though they may see me doing it on YouTube). And, speaking of neighborly tolerance, America isn't even a "neighboring" country. We're on the other side of the world separated by 1,000s of miles of ocean.Inaccurate and offensive. Disrespect to neighbours conflicts with Islamic practices.
Again, no ignorance or bigotry. I would translate it as "Allah is the greatest" or "Allah is infinite greatness". If you speak with a Muslim, he or she should be able to confirm that Allah's attributes cannot be compared with similar human attributes. John, when have you ever heard about any Muslim, near or far, getting angry or rioting because someone insulted Allah? Can you find me even one news article about such a thing? I don't think so. And Muslims consider others as prophets, yet they don't show them the same respect. As I said, Muslims really do seem to worship Muhammad. And there's nothing ignorant or bigoted about this statement.Gross ignorance and bigotry on your part. For instance, how do you account for Allāhu Akbar, Allah is greater, being the opening of prayer.
Once more, no bigotry here. Ah … the 1989 Hillsborough disaster was a human crush and a panic which occurred during the FA Cup semi-final match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest football clubs on 15 April 1989 at the Hillsborough Stadium in Sheffield, England, which resulted in the deaths of 96 people and injuries to 766 others. (source) There was certainly several factors involved, but I would say that those sports fans certainly showed a disregard for human life by trampling other fans to death ... and for what ... to watch a football/soccer game? Ultimately, when you put your foot down on top of someone else, you are responsible. John, if you did that, would you claim it wasn't any fault of your own? Zero? Nada? Zilch? You wouldn't lose one second of sleep over it? You would gladly find yourself in the same situation as existed before the crush? Remember, the word "fan" is a contraction of the word "fanatic", which ultimately comes from the Latin fanum, meaning "temple". Those fans exhibited a fanatical religious fervor and a disregard for human life. Need I say more.
What a lovely thing to say.
In Egypt, Islam is the official religion. Shari'a is the primary source of legislation. Muslims are not allowed to convert to another religion. Bahais are excluded from protection under religious tolerance laws. Law 263 of 1960, still in force, bans Baha'i institutions and community activities and strips Baha'is of legal recognition.Inaccurate and offensive. Disrespect to neighbours conflicts with Islamic practices.
The Government appoints and pays the salaries of the imams who lead prayers in mosques and monitors their sermons. Church repairs or construction are subject to government approval. Only three religions are recognized in the application of family law. Non-Muslim males must convert to Islam to marry Muslim women. Christian widows of Muslims have no automatic inheritance rights. The Government banned Jehovah's Witnesses in 1960.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an Islamic theocratic monarchy in which Islam is the official religion. The Ministry pays the salaries of imams (prayer leaders) and others who work in the mosques. Children born to Muslim fathers are by law deemed Muslim, and conversion from Islam to another religion is considered apostasy and punishable by death. The public practice of non-Muslim religions is prohibited. The spreading of Muslim teachings not in conformance with the officially accepted interpretation of Islam is prohibited. Under Saudi law conversion by a Muslim to another religion is considered apostasy, a crime punishable by death.
Iran is an Islamic republic —the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran mandates that the official religion of Iran is Islam. By law and practice, religious minorities are not allowed to be elected to a representative body or to hold senior government or military positions, with the exception that 5 of a total 270 seats in the majlis are reserved for religious minorities. Apostasy by a Muslim is punishable by death. According to law, Baha'i blood or anyones' who marries or helps a Bahai or gets involved with them is considered Mobah, meaning it can be spilled with impunity. Non-Muslim owners of grocery shops are required to indicate their religious affiliation on the fronts of their shops University applicants are required to pass an examination in Islamic theology, which limits the access of most religious minorities to higher education, although all public school students, including non-Muslims, must study Shia Islam. Applicants for public sector employment similarly are screened for their knowledge of Islam.[
Religion in Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Freedom of religion in Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is not my idea of religious tolerance. These are the laws in Islamic countries, and represent mainstream Islam, not the extremists who often appear in the news. Disrespectful to other religions? Yes, I'd say so.
You do realize that any decision to accept a religion is up to the individual. The right or wrong of that decision is entirely without certainty. A religion can advertise itself as the one most certain but ultimately you decide whether it is. You make this decision because you think it is so.
Because you think it so is the basic tenet for a belief, which Islam is. No belief is a certainty. No religion associated with a belief is a certainty. You can't eliminate the uncertainty no matter how hard you try, whether you're extremist or moderate. However you can try to eliminate those uncertain of your religion.... is that rational thinking for a believer?
Last edited by zinjanthropos; October 2nd, 2012 at 07:18 AM.
To John Galt and everyone,
I apologize for my insensitive, inaccurate and impossible attempt to describe Muslims collectively. I will redouble my efforts to police my posts to prevent such needless and harmful errors before I upload them.
No two people in any demographic group are exactly alike, which leaves one to describe a group collectively using only a self-identity (for example, Muslims are Muslims) or a definition (for example, Muslims are people who adhere to Islam). Neither satisfies any purpose here. On the other hand, Harold gives accurate, documented and exemplary descriptions worthy of reflection, discussion and imitation.
I look forward to thoughtful and meaningful discussions here.
jrmonroe
Thank you jr for your retraction. It was honourable and welcome.
Harold, not for the first time, conflates the actions of governments with the nature of religion. I guess I should blame any and all improper acts by the UK on Christianity, since it is not only a Christian country, but the Head of State is also the head of the official religion.
People who is happy within Islam's community will then trust Islam more. So if (for example) a pork is outlawed by Islam, then outlawing pork became a certainty for them (100% certain that pork is wrong). -The point is... why do they need to challenge the established norm when stuff work perfectly for them?You do realize that any decision to accept a religion is up to the individual. The right or wrong of that decision is entirely without certainty. A religion can advertise itself as the one most certain but ultimately you decide whether it is. You make this decision because you think it is so.
Because you think it so is the basic tenet for a belief, which Islam is. No belief is a certainty. No religion associated with a belief is a certainty. You can't eliminate the uncertainty no matter how hard you try, whether you're extremist or moderate. However you can try to eliminate those uncertain of your religion.... is that rational thinking for a believer?
Its not "because they think it is so", but because of preference and they prefer it that way.
Last edited by msafwan; October 5th, 2012 at 03:30 AM.
Color or disguise it any way you want, a preference is a choice you make because you think it so.
This is one reason I laugh at every religion. More so Islam because it hasn't made the adjustments yet to the 21st century.... er... maybe even the 20th or earlier. However they will when circumstances allow. It's inevitable. Change won't come cheap or easy. People will die but we're just hoping the Muslims keep it amongst themselves.
Anyway I digress, you decide what's right/wrong because you think it so. People generally critique theists because they can't decide for themselves but that's simply not true, the ultimate decision is theirs.
Last edited by zinjanthropos; October 5th, 2012 at 03:56 PM.
In a theocracy, the actions of the government are the actions of religion. The king of England has no real political power so you don't have a point on that score.
You could blame the faults of England on Christians, though I think they are a minority there now. But, religious intolerance is not one of those faults, particularly. Not in the way that religious intolerance is such a part of Muslim societies, anyway.
| « The nature of existence | Philosophical paradox, please help me understand. » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
9Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
