My Comment: That is too much of religion in the country.The key word is “religion". To fix problems, one must first get his ducks in a row. If we don’t understand the problem, then we have no business trying to fix something we really don’t understand. Religion - the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. "Ideas about the relationship between science and religion" Religion is a cultural system of behaviors and practices, world views, sacred texts, holy places, ethics, and societal organization that relate humanity to what an anthropologist has called "an order of existence". The belief in a god or in a group of gods. : an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods. Above are three definitions of “religion" from the internet. Yet, there are estimated 350 million Buddhist in the world. They have no god or Supreme Being. So, one would have to say that we are not yet at the point of defining the term “religion". I would have to say we are really not at the point in our own understandings of religion to try and force changes on the religions in other parts of the world. In history, the Romans went for intellectual truth and in doing so reduced the number of deities. But they did not rid themselves of all deities. Resulting in a more powerful deity religion. Point being, at this time in mankind’s evolution, mankind needs religion. So, is there to much religion? Or just too much of the wrong type of religion? Bangladesh is 90% Islam. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia is 100% Islam. So, maybe it is too much religion in the government. Just look at Section 57 of Bangladesh’s Information and Communication Technology Act, 2006 — that allows the arrest without a warrant of any person who “deliberately publishes any material in electronic form that causes to deteriorate law and order, prejudice the image of the state or person or causes to hurt religious belief" Point being, the schools cannot be changed until government has been changed. This is what is known as a catch-22. I do not think mankind needs God-fearing religions for much good. It needs those religions mostly for dividing themselves and for maintaining the injustice, hatred and atrocities that are prescribed in them, along with the more innocent but false and foolish senses of security in life and afterlife. Of course, it is "Catch-22" in Bangladesh and in many other places in the world. I believe a people deserves the government it gets. Even when there is a dictator in power, I see the nation as mostly worthy of that. That is why I criticize 'humanists' who are soft on and tolerant of the barbarians of the world; I dislike 'feminists' who play political correctness with religions, cultures, traditions and governments that oppress women. I think it would be progress if people actually applied their natural human intelligence while reading the so-called holy books that they grew up thinking as theirs.
I agree religion has been overall a negative for humanity, but it’s so much a part of who we are, there’s not much point in making that argument. We’d find some other way to divide ourselves or other security blankets. I just can’t handle how you mix the criticism of “humanists" or “feminists" with actual problems like tolerating the intolerable or being PC about oppression. Those are not uniquely “humanist" or “feminist" traits. Conservatives are well known for partnering with barbaric regimes so they can get their resources. They have traded guns for hostages and democracy for oil.
Obviously, applying intelligence is the answer. The devil is in the details of what you mean by intelligence.
--------- I just can’t handle how you mix the criticism of “humanists" or “feminists" with actual problems like tolerating the intolerable or being PC about oppression. Those are not uniquely “humanist" or “feminist" traits. Conservatives are well known for partnering with barbaric regimes so they can get their resources. .......................I suppose, I am more bothered when I am disappointed with people that I expect to be my kind (humanists, including feminists), as opposed to the ones that are not my kind (conservatives).
--------- I just can’t handle how you mix the criticism of “humanists" or “feminists" with actual problems like tolerating the intolerable or being PC about oppression. Those are not uniquely “humanist" or “feminist" traits. Conservatives are well known for partnering with barbaric regimes so they can get their resources. .......................I suppose, I am more bothered when I am disappointed with people that I expect to be my kind (humanists, including feminists), as opposed to the ones that are not my kind (conservatives). That is an improvement.
--------- I just can’t handle how you mix the criticism of “humanists" or “feminists" with actual problems like tolerating the intolerable or being PC about oppression. Those are not uniquely “humanist" or “feminist" traits. Conservatives are well known for partnering with barbaric regimes so they can get their resources. .......................I suppose, I am more bothered when I am disappointed with people that I expect to be my kind (humanists, including feminists), as opposed to the ones that are not my kind (conservatives). That is an improvement. You have no idea, buddy! Let me kill another minute of my time for you. The naive and corrupt people who tolerate and accept injustice are almost as responsible for injustice in the world as the fools and criminals that perpetrate the acts of injustice.
--------- I just can’t handle how you mix the criticism of “humanists" or “feminists" with actual problems like tolerating the intolerable or being PC about oppression. Those are not uniquely “humanist" or “feminist" traits. Conservatives are well known for partnering with barbaric regimes so they can get their resources. .......................I suppose, I am more bothered when I am disappointed with people that I expect to be my kind (humanists, including feminists), as opposed to the ones that are not my kind (conservatives). That is an improvement. You have no idea, buddy! Let me kill another minute of my time for you. The naive and corrupt people who tolerate and accept injustice are almost as responsible for injustice in the world as the fools and criminals that perpetrate the acts of injustice. I meant it was an improvement for my understanding of how you think. I'm very aware of political correctness from liberals. I am a liberal who believes in a degree of military power and its use. I've listened to the Sam Harris & Majid Nawwaz discussion in their book "Future of Tolerance" a few times. I'm also aware that when Donald Trump calls out Obama for not saying "Islamic terrorists", he has a very different agenda.
Muslim Student Goes on a Rampage at Ohio State University
This guy had a problem. Here it is in his own words, as per this Washington Post report: “I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media." “I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be. If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don’t know what they’re going to think, what’s going to happen. … I was kind of scared right now."
So, he goes on a rampage trying to kill/hurt as many Americans as he could!
He was sacred, but nothing seriously bad actually happened to him in the USA. The isolated acts of hatred against Muslims that happen in the USA are nothing compared to what happens to non-Muslims in the countries where this guy’s family lived before, Somalia and Pakistan. In fact, Muslims in the USA have a lot more human rights compared to what the ordinary Muslims have in Somalia or Pakistan.
Muslim Student Goes on a Rampage at Ohio State University https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/11/28/ohio-state-university-warns-of-active-shooter-on-campus/?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_ohio-1115a:homepage/story This guy had a problem. Here it is in his own words, as per this Washington Post report: “I wanted to pray in the open, but I was kind of scared with everything going on in the media." “I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be. If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don’t know what they’re going to think, what’s going to happen. … I was kind of scared right now." So, he goes on a rampage trying to kill/hurt as many Americans as he could! He was sacred, but nothing seriously bad actually happened to him in the USA. The isolated acts of hatred against Muslims that happen in the USA are nothing compared to what happens to non-Muslims in the countries where this guy's family lived before, Somalia and Pakistan. In fact, Muslims in the USA have a lot more human rights compared to what the ordinary Muslims have in Somalia or Pakistan.And infinitely more than nonMuslims have in those countries. I doubt it was feelings of discrimination that drove him over the edge, but anger that he had to live among people who were not Muslims and who wouldn't convert. Lois
I doubt it was feelings of discrimination that drove him over the edge, but anger that he had to live among people who were not Muslims and who wouldn't convert. LoisPrecisely! This guy (Artan) lived in Pakistan from 2007 to 2014. So, he was supposed to know what kind of a hell Pakistan is for non-Muslims. Compared to that the USA is heaven for all kinds of minorities, including Muslims. Americans would be stupid if they are sympathetic to Muslims like this who complain about hatred against Muslims in America. The following article in the Washington Post shows undue sympathy for him: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/11/30/i-interviewed-the-ohio-state-attacker-on-the-first-day-of-school-it-felt-important-now-its-chilling/?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_gp-osu-1230pm:homepage/story&utm;_term=.1b9eb3456ed6#comments
Is anyone publicly rcognizing and rejecting the unjust, hateful and atrocious parts of the bible? If so, I haven't heard about it.The fact that Christianity has been reforming for centuries can be taken as acknowledging and rejecting the unjust and atrocious parts of the Bible. Two examples: 1) In the Christian-dominated parts of the world, women certainly get a lot more respect today than what is granted to them by the Bible; 2) Today, the Western world surely could not have had almost a fifth of their population as atheists/antagonists without the Christians looking at their religion with a good deal of logic, i.e., abandoning religious dogma. I agree with both Lausten and Stardusty Psyche. I also basically agree with deros; although the religious world is too powerful for the humanist world to be able to do that right now. Anything good that has happened over the milennia has happened in spite of the bible not because of it.
Is anyone publicly rcognizing and rejecting the unjust, hateful and atrocious parts of the bible? If so, I haven't heard about it.The fact that Christianity has been reforming for centuries can be taken as acknowledging and rejecting the unjust and atrocious parts of the Bible. Two examples: 1) In the Christian-dominated parts of the world, women certainly get a lot more respect today than what is granted to them by the Bible; 2) Today, the Western world surely could not have had almost a fifth of their population as atheists/agnostics without the Christians looking at their religion with a good deal of logic, i.e., abandoning religious dogma. I agree with both Lausten and Stardusty Psyche. I also basically agree with deros; although the religious world is too powerful for the humanist world to be able to do that right now. Anything good that has happened over the milennia has happened in spite of the bible not because of it. In other words, most of the good that has been done by people who call themselves Christians was done in spite of Christianity (Bible), not because of it. Similarly, most of the good that has been done by people who call themselves Muslims was done in spite of Islam (Koran), not because of it. Whether the excessively brainwashed religious morons realize it or not, all kinds of humans are humans first and foremost; most of them possess much of the goodness of humanity, and most of them are reasonably good people. However, unfortunately, today too much of religiosity in the Muslim communities practically all over the world has been providing breeding grounds for Islamic hate criminals and terrorists.
The latest attack in the West: 4 killed in Parliament carnage | CNN
A big problem with many of the media pundits and politicians in the West is that they talk about Islamic State connections. These kinds of attacks do not really need an organization like IS. All they need are some Muslims who are willing to die and kill for their religion, which are very much acts of glory to the believers of Islam in general.
Why do mountain goats persist in ramming each other silly?
Why do mountain goats persist in ramming each other silly?Probably for the same reason humans do it.
Why do mountain goats persist in ramming each other silly?Probably for the same reason humans do it. Pardon me, Lois, but I think humans, in spite of their otherwise superior intelligence, have proven to be much stupider than the mountain goats when it came to fighting with each other. The goats do it for food, sex, and territory; humans to it for the same kind of logical reasons as well as for their absurd imaginations of what they call God, gods and prophets.
Funny how there’s no talk of the estimated 4 million Iraqi’s that America killed (during two Bush regimes) in order to gain control of the 2nd largest oil field on the planet, in Iraq. Has it occurred to anyone that Muslim countries are sick and tired of being killed by “Christian” countries, and “dancing” to the tune of the almighty USD, the “god” to all Big Businesses? We’ve been interfering in their affairs for over 100 years, basically since Western society and military became mechanized, just prior to WWI.
Funny how there's no talk of the estimated 4 million Iraqi's that America killed (during two Bush regimes) in order to gain control of the 2nd largest oil field on the planet, in Iraq. Has it occurred to anyone that Muslim countries are sick and tired of being killed by "Christian" countries, and "dancing" to the tune of the almighty USD, the "god" to all Big Businesses? We've been interfering in their affairs for over 100 years, basically since Western society and military became mechanized, just prior to WWI.I am generally a bit reluctant to respond to people that use pseudonyms while posting comments. They are clearly not serious enough to put their reputation at stake for their comments. But let me respond to this one. Taking your first sentence on its face value, America kills people for a real purpose, to gain control of oil. Killing for that kind of a purpose is certainly a crime that is punishable by law in most countries, and is condemnable by all human standards. But Islamic fanaticism is qualitatively different from the crimes for real purposes. The Islamic fanatics even kill themselves for their wild imagination of Allah; there is absolutely no real purpose there. While most Muslims are not actually fanatic enough to do that because they are also humans, being a martyr for Allah is a glorious act to too many Muslims. In the world today, Muslims are the clear champions when it comes to committing serious crimes for protecting and promoting religion. In the world today, practically no other religious group has suicide bombers for killing people that they consider heretics, unbelievers or apostates.
Funny how there's no talk of the estimated 4 million Iraqi's that America killed (during two Bush regimes) in order to gain control of the 2nd largest oil field on the planet, in Iraq. Has it occurred to anyone that Muslim countries are sick and tired of being killed by "Christian" countries, and "dancing" to the tune of the almighty USD, the "god" to all Big Businesses? We've been interfering in their affairs for over 100 years, basically since Western society and military became mechanized, just prior to WWI.I am generally a bit reluctant to respond to people that use pseudonyms while posting comments. They are clearly not serious enough to put their reputation at stake for their comments. But let me respond to this one. Taking your first sentence on its face value, America kills people for a real purpose, to gain control of oil. Killing for that kind of a purpose is certainly a crime that is punishable by law in most countries, and is condemnable by all human standards. But Islamic fanaticism is qualitatively different from the crimes for real purposes. The Islamic fanatics even kill themselves for their wild imagination of Allah; there is absolutely no real purpose there. While most Muslims are not actually fanatic enough to do that because they are also humans, being a martyr for Allah is a glorious act to too many Muslims. In the world today, Muslims are the clear champions when it comes to committing serious crimes for protecting and promoting religion. In the world today, practically no other religious group has suicide bombers for killing people that they consider heretics, unbelievers or apostates. Good luck Cousin_Itt, whom I have no problem calling by that name. Suk is a pretty difficult case. Just on this page you can see how he understands that people are influenced by culture, but it when it comes to the fanatic version of the Muslim religion, he switches to saying that somehow is different. I won't try to paraphrase how he thinks it is different because I honestly can't make sense of it. And here, if I understand it right, he puts killing for oil somehow above killing for a moral belief determined by a religion. He kinda qualifies it, saying the killing for oil is condemnable, but I've never seen him post about a military strike that killed civilians, or about the massive amount of the US budget that is military. He only posts about Muslim terrorism, and rants about it, and gets pretty pissy when you question his logic. Here, he says the killing for oil is wrong by all human standards, but fails to note that it has been going on for a century, that it is essentially legal, that his taxes pay for it, that killing for oil is at least in some way responsible for the terrorism. I don't know if he doesn't think about that, or doesn't care.
Nice to meet you, Lausten. You nailed it! Thanks for making my argument on my behalf. It’s called “emotional/subjective reasoning”, in contrast to “critical thinking” or “objective reasoning”…a person responds to the emotional content of the material, ignoring many if not all of the salient facts. Invariably they are substantiating how they feel about a topic, not responding to the facts of the matter. (And many like to say that propaganda doesn’t work. Ha! It’s alive, well and not only living but thriving.)
I had a similar “discussion” with a physicist last year about ISIS and he was of course saying that they all must die, be annihilated and other such strong language, so I researched how many Americans had been killed by ISIS up until that time, and it was March last year. The total number of American deaths was 6, compared to how many Muslims we had directly and indirectly killed for oil…he thought 6 was a far more important number than hundreds of thousands or millions, depending on what figures for what theatre of slaughter you wanted to use. Now let’s face it, as a physicist he’s pretty good at Math, but such is the emotional impact of all the propaganda we have been fed for the last couple of decades, that emotions are stronger than mathematical reasoning, so 6 was a more important number. Thus, the majority of Western people support these wars, or are at least somewhat indifferent as it doesn’t directly affect them or theirs.