Atheism and political apathy

[CptBork]

Name one muslim country where I can yell out "Mohammed was a pedophile" in the street and not be arrested. I'm not saying that's what I believe, but name one muslim country where my right to say this is protected.

 

[spidergoat]

Know any educated Muslims like Hitchens who relish the thought of killing innocent civilians with cluster bombs because of their religious leanings?

You continue to be dishonest by selective quotation. This was an interview for Washington Prism, a persian language online publication:

They [Islamist radicals or, as Hitchens calls them, Islamo-fascists] gave us no peace and we shouldn’t give them any. We can't live on the same planet as them and I'm glad because I don’t want to. I don’t want to breathe the same air as these psychopaths and murders and rapists and torturers and child abusers. Its them or me. I'm very happy about this because I know it will be them. It’s a duty and a responsibility to defeat them. But it's also a pleasure. I don’t regard it as a grim task at all.​

 

[S.A.M.]

Name one muslim country where I can yell out "Mohammed was a pedophile" in the street and not be arrested. I'm not saying that's what I believe, but name one muslim country where my right to say this is protected.

Probably all of them. Why don't you try it? If you're white and American, its understood that being rude and offensive is part of your culture.

 

[S.A.M.]

You continue to be dishonest by selective quotation. This was an interview for Washington Prism, a persian language online publication:

They [Islamist radicals or, as Hitchens calls them, Islamo-fascists] gave us no peace and we shouldn’t give them any. We can't live on the same planet as them and I'm glad because I don’t want to. I don’t want to breathe the same air as these psychopaths and murders and rapists and torturers and child abusers. Its them or me. I'm very happy about this because I know it will be them. It’s a duty and a responsibility to defeat them. But it's also a pleasure. I don’t regard it as a grim task at all.​

Yeah, he was talking about Iraq.

http://www.washingtonprism.org/eng/showarticle.cfm?id=16

 

[CptBork]

Probably all of them? Laughable, even today, countries like Saudi Arabia are known to behead people for insulting Islam's prophet (and that beheading usually takes 2 or more chops!). Now what insult in a free society could possibly warrant such a punishment?

 

[CptBork]

Anyway, must get back to errands, got some visitors... :m:
Will be back in a bit.

 

[spidergoat]

Yeah, he was talking about Iraq.

Islamist radicals, not, as you dishonestly implied, innocent people.

 

[S.A.M.]

Islamist radicals, not, as you dishonestly implied, innocent people.

Not by American definition, no. Of course, everyone that Americans kill, incarcerate or torture, are by definition, "Islamist" radicals.

Probably all of them? Laughable, even today, countries like Saudi Arabia are known to behead people for insulting Islam's prophet (and that beheading usually takes 2 or more chops!). Now what insult in a free society could possibly warrant such a punishment?

I lived in Saudi Arabia for five years. Now all you have to do is give me evidence for your claim. Who was the last person beheaded for insulting the Prophet? And since I have seen a public beheading of five men, please also show evidence that it takes 2 or more chops.:bugeye:

I also decapitate rats, hundreds of them, and I've never used more than one "chop".

 

[iceaura]

But like all Christians, Muslims, Buddhists etc, they do have their ideology in common.

No, "they" don't.

They do not.

(Neither to the theists you listed. The Buddhist theists don't even have ideology in common with atheistic Buddhists on your criteria, let alone Muslims having some kind of unified ideology and Christians another on sensible criteria )

And when you get that through your head - you can start with the examples of contrasting and opposed ideologies among the self-identified atheists on this forum, if your social world has no examples - you can go back to this muddle you have created around Dawkins, "secular" vs "atheist" societies, and so forth.

For example, here's what you get when you confuse theism with religion, secular with atheist, and entire ideologies with features of spiritual belief:

There aren't any atheist societies, secular societies are all we have.
”
I beg to differ.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

]

Albania was declared an atheist state by Enver Hoxha,[8] and remained so from 1967 until 1991 .[9] The trend toward state atheism in Albania was taken to an extreme during the regime, when religions, identified as imports foreign to Albanian culture, were banned altogether. - - -
- - - - -
From year 1967 to the end of communist rule, religious practices were banned and the country was proclaimed officially Atheist, marking an event that happened for the first time in world history. Albanians born during the regime were never taught religion, so they grew up to become either Atheists or Agnostics.

Old non-institutional Pagan practices in rural areas, which were seen as identifying with the national culture, were left intact. As a result the current Albanian state has also brought pagan festivals to life, like the lunar Spring festival (Albanian: Dita e Verës) held yearly on March 14th in the city of Elbasan, which is a national holiday.

Apparently, some theist is unable to recognize Pagan rituals as religious.

And so the obvious central motive behind Hoxha's oppressions is lost in the prose.

And we note that the original assertion - we have no atheist societies, whatever that means, only secular ones - is true. Even that Albanian authoritarian misconception is gone.

I want any example of an athiest who has shown public commitment to a secular society rather than an atheist one.

One of these days, you might want to back up and actually find out what Dawkins, Dennett, Bateson, Russell, and so forth, actually wrote and said.

Meanwhile, we note that Hitchen's ideology appears to be quite different from Dawkins's, even in your limited acquaintanceship with the two, no?

 

[spidergoat]

Not by American definition, no. Of course, everyone that Americans kill, incarcerate or torture, are by definition, "Islamist" radicals.

You are doing little against the premise that theism makes you stupid.

 

[S.A.M.]

You are doing little against the premise that theism makes you stupid.

Any proven radicals executed in the hundreds of thousands executed, incarcerated or tortured in both Iraq and Afghanistan? Besides, not allowing people to practice their belief in their own country and bombing them into "democracy" itself is such a ridiculous notion, that there is no logical argument to support it.

 

[S.A.M.]

Apparently, some theist is unable to recognize Pagan rituals as religious.

Clearly

Albania was declared an atheist state by Enver Hoxha,[8] and remained so from 1967 until 1991 .[9] The trend toward state atheism in Albania was taken to an extreme during the regime, when religions, identified as imports foreign to Albanian culture, were banned altogether. - - -
- - - - -
From year 1967 to the end of communist rule, religious practices were banned and the country was proclaimed officially Atheist, marking an event that happened for the first time in world history. Albanians born during the regime were never taught religion, so they grew up to become either Atheists or Agnostics.

They self identify as atheists. Perhaps they too have their own definition of atheism, which differs from the dictionary definition? There are several on this forum who should support them.


As for athiest countries, again they self identify as atheists. Like Dawkins, they are against any brainwashing of children by parents and as he clearly supports in his petition, have converted all religious institutions into secular ones, while, as he clearly hopes for, have substituted "superstition" and myth and religious practices with "reason", to the extent of keeping out the religious from scientific disciplines, with the result that teh religious, like atheists of yore, either conceal their beliefs or move out.

The only difference is that he is a hypocrite. His signature on such petitions shows that he would support state action, but he pretends to believe in freedom of expression.

One of these days, you might want to back up and actually find out what Dawkins, Dennett, Bateson, Russell, and so forth, actually wrote and said.

I've heard Dawkins speak and discussed my opinion of his opinions. I see nothing good coming from his efforts.

Meanwhile, we note that Hitchen's ideology appears to be quite different from Dawkins's, even in your limited acquaintanceship with the two, no?

Regarding what? Both Hitchens and Dawkins have gone out of their way to portray Muslims as terrorists and Arabs as backward. They could be reading out of 17th century orientalist books.

And he believes that Jews run the world hehe, or at least, the United States:

When you think about how fantastically successful the Jewish lobby has been, though, in fact, they are less numerous I am told - religious Jews anyway - than atheists and [yet they] more or less monopolise American foreign policy as far as many people can see. So if atheists could achieve a small fraction of that influence, the world would be a better place.

And asked what he wanted the athiest bloc to achieve:

I would free children of being indoctrinated with the religion of their parents or their community.

Give the man some power and you'll see another Soviet Union.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/oct/01/deliverusfromdawkins

 

[mis-t-highs]

I beg to differ.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

lol, Have you noticed the edit boxes these are there for two reason, one to allow people to add there own opinion. and two because it is a work in progress, and is not totally factual. the title should be state anti-religion.
It's more like a personal blog.

 

[S.A.M.]

You can look up the facts. Know any Chinese people? I do. Ask them.

 

[mis-t-highs]

You can look up the facts. Know any Chinese people? I do. Ask them.

all these are taken for the debate regarding your link
"State atheism is the official rejection of religion in all forms by a government in favor of atheism.

What are we basing this definition on? What were the sources used to come up with this idea? Angry Christian (talk) 15:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)"

"I agree this is a problem with this article. I suspect there are plenty of people who do use "state atheism" in this way, but I also suspect it is a matter of POV - other people such as myself might say that the things described in this article are antitheism, and not atheism. The article also claims "State atheism should not be confused ... with state secularism" which also seems a matter of opinion - to me, a state rejecting theism is synonymous with state secularism, where as a state persecuting religious people is not state atheism. Mdwh (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)"

"The Soviet Union's aggression against religion is discussed in the article as it stands, but the note that Albania under Communist rule was the only explicitly atheist state is true, according to all sources I've read over the years. Have you any proof of the USSR explicitly being atheist? GeofFMorris 18:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)"

and the Albanias are yet to understand that paganism is religious.

There is no state atheism.

 

[S.A.M.]

They are self defined atheists. Like Saudis are self defined Muslims. Or the Irish are self defined Christians. If you disagree, take it up with them. I did not write and publish The Godless Militant in the Soviet Union. It is their contention, not mine, that they have an officially atheist state. No party member in China can practice any religion.

 

[spidergoat]

Any proven radicals executed in the hundreds of thousands executed, incarcerated or tortured in both Iraq and Afghanistan? Besides, not allowing people to practice their belief in their own country and bombing them into "democracy" itself is such a ridiculous notion, that there is no logical argument to support it.

No American official has ever tried to make anyone believe that only the guilty are killed in Iraq. In fact, there was a recent trial concerning a massacre by Blackwater of innocent people. It's common knowledge that the innocent are suffering too in Iraq.

Also no one has suggested, officially or otherwise, that Iraqis or Afghanis cannot practice Islam.

 

[S.A.M.]

No they merely call anyone they kill a Sunni/Shia insurgent or an Islamic terrorist. Or collateral damages. They are not fighting Iraqis, they are fighting Muslims. And they still don't do body counts. I can see the concern.

 

[spidergoat]

Thanks for correcting your false assertion that atheist Christopher Hitchens believes in killing innocent Muslims.

Not. You just change the subject in scatterbrained fashion that contributes nothing to the debate at hand.

 

[S.A.M.]

Thanks for correcting your false assertion that atheist Christopher Hitchens believes in killing innocent Muslims.

Not. You just change the subject in scatterbrained fashion that contributes nothing to the debate at hand.

What innocent Muslims? There are no innocent Muslims. The first quote from him? It was about the use of cluster bombs in Fallujah.

There are other gems about Fallujah:

Hitchens unequivocally endorsed the recent siege of Fallujah, saying at the podium “the death toll is not nearly high enough … too many [jihadists] have escaped.” He continued on this path for some time, later saying that his “hatred” of fundamentalists, whom he characterized as being the majority of anti-U.S./U.K. forces in Iraq, is “much more pure, much more rational, and much more enduring” than their hatred for him or the West.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach...+toll+is+not+nearly+high+enough&hl=en&strip=1


And the religious:

“If you get a person stupid or malleable enough to believe in the first delusion [God or an afterlife]” Hitchens said from the podium, “then that person will eventually believe whatever you need them to … they want death more than life, a lot of them, monotheists, want the apocalypse to happen tomorrow, are excited for it … a person like that really cannot be trusted.”