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.So, it is the 'cousin' of Lausten, who thinks Islamic fanaticism is a creation of the West! Well, Ms./Mr. Cousin, could you explain the following fact, “In 2012, 50 Buddhist homes and 12 Buddhist temples were burned by Muslim mobs in Bangladesh just because one Buddhist youth’s Facebook page was tagged by someone with a picture of the Koran with a shoe on it."? This fact and many other facts can be found in the following thread. http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/18843/ And, of course, the present thread also has a lot of facts. You sounded too presumptuous here, Ms./Mr. cousin, when you talked about some physicist. I have seen too many physicists, chemists, doctors and engineers who are too stupid when it comes to what they have grown up thinking as their religion; and most of those call themselves Muslims. Let me tell you my positions on some of the issues discussed in this thread. I am against practically all wars. I never supported the Western military actions in Iraq or Libya. I do not even wish the ISIS terrorists to be killed; I wish them to get civilized. I wish all religious idiots to use their human intelligence and stop following the edicts of injustice, hatred and atrocity, even when they are found in what they think is their religious holy book.
Why would you need an explanation of that? Why are asking that.
Mourning with Manchester - an article in the Humanist
I like the readers’ comments more than the article.
No, you won't find anyone publically rejecting the "bad" parts of any religious texts and never will unless we all get past the superstitious nonsense of belief in a god. So it would be best for humanity to reject religion period, the good, the bad, and even the in-between parts is any such parts exists.Obviously you are not paying the slightest attention to the Christian world. Not that you have to, but even apologetics sometimes cordons off the smiting as only pertaining to those historical moments. United Methodists are split 50/50 worldwide on the gay issue, they will probably split Lutherans recently split over that Many Christians participate in anti-war protests Even Muslims, the last Caliph of the Ottoman empire declared the cutting off of hands for thievery to no longer apply Stoning remains, though. As does keeping women in purdah and males as the enforcers.
‘They shouted ‘this is for Allah’, as they stabbed indiscriminately’ - How the London terror attack unfolded
While the intelligence agencies and the police look out for this kind of incidents, the intelligentsia must discourage Islamic moronic thoughts and lifestyles, and the governments must take preventive actions against spread of Islamic fanaticism.
Suk; You need to respond to this from the other thread about what the cause is before I will take you seriously.
I am no apologist for the atrocities that the West has committed anywhere.Then what is this:
All wars have collateral unintended civilian casualties; that is why I do not think of war as a civilized thing. However, I have no doubt that the US airstrike was not intended for killing the civilians.Sounds like, "well, it's okay because they didn't mean to do it."
I do not know who this Imam Tawhidi is; and I probably do not care to. The problem needs to be solved by people who would not play games involving Islam or Islamic fanaticism. Theresa May seems to be getting closer to getting it when she says, “enough is enough”.
“Enough is enough” PM May says after London attackers kill seven
I don’t know what to make of Tawhidi, this is just a funny example of an imam saying the Koran does in fact “teach murder”, and a western liberal is in denial of that.
As for May’s comments - we’ll see. I wouldn’t expect too much.
Murder of an innocent child in the name of Allah IS MURDER MOST FOUL!
Saving an innocent child in the name of Allah and losing your life doing it IS TRUE MARTYRDOM!
Murder of an innocent child in the name of Allah IS MURDER MOST FOUL! Saving an innocent child in the name of Allah and losing your life doing it IS TRUE MARTYRDOM!How about murdering an innocent adult such as an atheist, an agnostic or an apostate in the name of Allah? In any case, taking some 1400 years old preaching for a 'complete code of life' forever is utterly foolish, to say the least. A serious problem with too many moderate Muslims is that they are unwilling to acknowledge that the so-called holy books of Islam have plenty of injustice, hatred and atrocities. If they acknowledged that those books actually have verses/edicts that should not be followed, they would not have been the breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists. It is naïve of some non-Muslim intellectuals to think that terrorists grow with no supporting environment.
Murder of an innocent child in the name of Allah IS MURDER MOST FOUL! Saving an innocent child in the name of Allah and losing your life doing it IS TRUE MARTYRDOM!How about murdering an innocent adult such as an atheist, an agnostic or an apostate in the name of Allah? In any case, taking some 1400 years old preaching for a 'complete code of life' forever is utterly foolish, to say the least. A serious problem with too many moderate Muslims is that they are unwilling to acknowledge that the so-called holy books of Islam have plenty of injustice, hatred and atrocities. If they acknowledged that those books actually have verses/edicts that should not be followed, they would not have been the breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists. It is naïve of some non-Muslim intellectuals to think that terrorists grow with no supporting environment. As an atheist, I agree completely. Do you agree with my condensed comparison ?
Murder of an innocent child in the name of Allah IS MURDER MOST FOUL! Saving an innocent child in the name of Allah and losing your life doing it IS TRUE MARTYRDOM!How about murdering an innocent adult such as an atheist, an agnostic or an apostate in the name of Allah? In any case, taking some 1400 years old preaching for a 'complete code of life' forever is utterly foolish, to say the least. A serious problem with too many moderate Muslims is that they are unwilling to acknowledge that the so-called holy books of Islam have plenty of injustice, hatred and atrocities. If they acknowledged that those books actually have verses/edicts that should not be followed, they would not have been the breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists. It is naïve of some non-Muslim intellectuals to think that terrorists grow with no supporting environment. As an atheist, I agree completely. Do you agree with my condensed comparison ? I am not clear about what comparison you made, or if your comments in post 69 were sarcastic or serious. But I do not support murder of any kind; and I prefer talks and laws over martyrdom to stop murders. And, of course, I do not support doing anything in the name of Allah or any other kind of imaginary species.
Murder of an innocent child in the name of Allah IS MURDER MOST FOUL! Saving an innocent child in the name of Allah and losing your life doing it IS TRUE MARTYRDOM!How about murdering an innocent adult such as an atheist, an agnostic or an apostate in the name of Allah? In any case, taking some 1400 years old preaching for a 'complete code of life' forever is utterly foolish, to say the least. A serious problem with too many moderate Muslims is that they are unwilling to acknowledge that the so-called holy books of Islam have plenty of injustice, hatred and atrocities. If they acknowledged that those books actually have verses/edicts that should not be followed, they would not have been the breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists. It is naïve of some non-Muslim intellectuals to think that terrorists grow with no supporting environment. As an atheist, I agree completely. Do you agree with my condensed comparison ? I am not clear about what comparison you made, or if your comments in post 69 were sarcastic or serious. But I do not support murder of any kind; and I prefer talks and laws over martyrdom to stop murders. And, of course, I do not support doing anything in the name of Allah or any other kind of imaginary species. Read the post again, more carefully. What I am saying, that regardless of motive, giving your life in the act of Murdering someone is still Murder, and will be despised by all OTOH; giving your life in the act of Saving someone is Heroic, and will be praised by all.
What I am saying, that regardless of motive, giving your life in the act of Murdering someone is still Murder, and will be despised by all OTOH; giving your life in the act of Saving someone is Heroic, and will be praised by all.Amen to that.
Two families of suicide bombers in the ‘moderate’ Muslim-majority nation of Indonesia!
The world needs to realize that ‘moderate Muslims’ has to mean Muslims who have actually rejected quite a bit of the Islamic edicts. Today’s so-called moderate Muslims are actually too religious and do not criticize or reject any Islamic edict; just fraudulently talk about misinterpretation or incomplete knowledge of Islam. By their treatment of Islam as infallible, they actually breed Islamic criminals and terrorists, who commit their crimes according to their knowledge and understanding of Islam. The West has been giving up Christianity to the point of almost a quarter of their population being atheists and agnostics today; it would be only sensible for them to discourage excessive religiosity among its Muslim population (new immigrants or citizens).