Dozens of heretics killed of in Pakistan... yet, again.

[S.A.M.]

That said, please SAM, could you imagine being a Scientologist in Iran, Iraq, KSA? You'd be murdered outright. I wonder why?

Would the Iranians be better off accompanying German troops in Afghanistan?

For all their demonisation, the Iranians seem to be in a minority when it comes to actually killing people for having unpopular views on religion or politics. You can actually name the victims, there are so few of them. Can we say the same for the Germans? Americans? Even the French?

 

[Michael]

Would the Iranians be better off accompanying German troops in Afghanistan?

For all their demonisation, the Iranians seem to be in a minority when it comes to actually killing people for having unpopular views on religion or politics. You can actually name the victims, there are so few of them. Can we say the same for the Germans? Americans? Even the French?

and all it costs is their freedom. Do you think we'd be having this conversation in Iran? No way. Either I'd be dead or I'd know better. Some of your views would be Heretical in Iran, you'd either keep them to yourself - or worse yet, never dared to think them up in the first place. So, if we were to count victims in this way, it seems there's many to spread around.


I would like to note: Unlike Islam and the Qur'an, American culture and our US Constitution are far far far from Perfect, hence we improve and become better.

 

[S.A.M.]

and all it costs is their freedom.

Exactly. The freedom of those killed en masse for having unpopular religions or philosophies or political systems [or color/race/ethnicity]. Are the 6 million Jews killed by the Germans now free? The 60 million other people killed in the last world war? You're Australian, what do you think of the freedom enjoyed by Aboriginals in Australia? You used to be American? Whats your opinion of all the American adventures of the last 100 years? The 27 million Iraqis? The 20 million Afghans?

How do you compare that to the loss of freedom in Iran since 1953?

 

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

One God, One Book, One Prophet

I'll get to all this eventually but I just wanted to comment on this, why have you repeatedly said this over and over? Do you have some form of autism? You sound like Rain Man.

"One book, one God, one prophet, only tuesdays, yeah, one prophet on tuesday, Muslims are intolerant, yeah, intolerant, yeah, intolerant, I watch Wapner, can't miss it, gotta watch Wapner, Muslims are bad, yeah, definately bad, Muslims are bad, yeah, blow up the buildings, yeah, one book, one God, one prophet, yeahhh, definately bad, definately bad."

 

[spidergoat]

I think he's pointing out the kind of narrow minded arrogance that is the natural consequence of thinking that your's is the one true religion.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think he's pointing out the kind of narrow minded arrogance that is the natural consequence of thinking that your's is the one true religion.

Like this?

Orthodox Jews practice an intolerant religious yes. If I were extremely wealthy I would pay African Americans to try and join Orthodox synagogues in New York (or elsewhere in the USA) and sue any that tried to prevent them from joining. The idea that people are "born" a religion is a backwards idiotic mentality. I noticed Malaysian Muslims passed a law saying Muslims are born "Muslim" and therefor can not legally be able to convert out of being "Muslim".

Talk about idiotic superstitious wankers.

Religious Jews are superstitious yes. Actually anyone who is religious is superstitious and many who are not.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2288385&postcount=602

Whats "narrow minded" to one may be common sense to another.

 

[(Q)]

Islam doesn't interpret itself. The "Human Factor" can't be so easily set aside.

It shouldn't have to interpret itself, it should clear, concise and void of any possible misinterpretation. This is supposed to be the word of your all-powerful god, you would expect something of this nature from a god who allegedly created the universe. Are you saying he can't even write a book properly?

 

[spidergoat]

Like this?



http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2288385&postcount=602

Whats "narrow minded" to one may be common sense to another.

I have absolutely no objection to the characterization of orthodox Jews as religiously arrogant. Where did I ever make that exception?

 

[Michael]

I'll get to all this eventually but I just wanted to comment on this, why have you repeatedly said this over and over? Do you have some form of autism? You sound like Rain Man.

The reason why the "Heretics" were murdered in Pakistan AGAIN is because they broke one or more of the rules: One God, One Book, One Prophet. We don't need to have this paradigm. It's not necessary to meet the needs of the superstition as well as be a benefit to society. In my person opinion I find it a sad set of meme's to have oneself chained to. Much like your mother tongue, there's little nothing you can do about it. One God, One Book, One Prophet for you mate. Enjoy.

Just out of curiosity, can your know-everything do-anything God learn something new Ja'far? Laugh unexpectedly at the butt end of a joke. Like this one: know-all do-all.... LOL too funny

Whats "narrow minded" to one may be common sense to another.

The last I read Appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy.

 

[Michael]

Orthodox Jews practice an intolerant religious yes. If I were extremely wealthy I would pay African Americans to try and join Orthodox synagogues in New York (or elsewhere in the USA) and sue any that tried to prevent them from joining. The idea that people are "born" a religion is a backwards idiotic mentality. I noticed Malaysian Muslims passed a law saying Muslims are born "Muslim" and therefor can not legally be able to convert out of being "Muslim".

Talk about idiotic superstitious wankers.

Religious Jews are superstitious yes. Actually anyone who is religious is superstitious and many who are not.

Yes, I stand by this statement. I remember making it and I still think it's a good idea. For one, it's almost to bring something to the fore-brain of the American public and would require an extreme, legal, situation such as this to do so. While it's taken 200 years, the American public finally feels racism is not correct behavior. Secondly, it draws religious intolerance from within the shadows (where it lurks) out into the light for full public scrutiny. Then, it's up the public. :shrug: If people support religious intolerance, then that's where we end. If people have progressed a little, then maybe we change for the better. Either way, no singing girls have gotten their heads chopped off in the process. Some egos bruised? Tough titty.

 

[S.A.M.]

Yes, I stand by this statement. I remember making it and I still think it's a good idea. For one, it's almost to bring something to the fore-brain of the American public and would require an extreme, legal, situation such as this to do so. While it's taken 200 years, the American public finally feels racism is not correct behavior. Secondly, it draws religious intolerance from within the shadows (where it lurks) out into the light for full public scrutiny. Then, it's up the public. :shrug: If people support religious intolerance, then that's where we end. If people have progressed a little, then maybe we change for the better. Either way, no singing girls have gotten their heads chopped off in the process. Some egos bruised? Tough titty.

The last I read Appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy.

There you go. Now add one plus one. You just demonstrated why all theologies cannot be equally valid.

 

[Michael]

Not that they are valid, acknowledging the possibility exists they may be valid. That is, admitting to ones self that, even though I am an Atheist, you SAMington, and your intolerant God, may indeed be true and accurately explain reality as we know it. Or, maybe I am correct? Maybe we are both incorrect and Buddhism is correct.

It's about acknowledgment. It's admitting that our pet-theory may not be true. If there is an Allah, then there is. If there isn't, then there simply isn't. It doesn't matter what we feel or think; reality is what reality is.

This is what I mean by being equally valid. When you say: No, only my view of reality can be correct and I can't be wrong, you are being intolerant and this has (and does) lead to the violence we see in Pakistan. Didn't you see the Southpark episode: AAA (Allied Atheist Alliance), versus the UAA (United Atheist Alliance)???


There's no good evidence to suggest your superstition is any more of valid a belief system than any other, or lack there of. No matter how much you like it or it connects with you. It either represents reality or it does not. Agreed?

 

[S.A.M.]

There's no good evidence to suggest your superstition is any more of valid a belief system than any other, or lack there of.

So do you believe it is equally valid or not?

Can you pick which side you are arguing for? Either you believe in the validity of all "superstitions" as equal to your own beliefs or you don't

So is killing heretics = not killing heretics? racism = not racism ? Atheists burn in hell = Atheists don't burn in hell?

Are they all equally valid beliefs?

 

[Gustav]

Would the Iranians be better off accompanying German troops in Afghanistan?

For all their demonisation, the Iranians seem to be in a minority when it comes to actually killing people for having unpopular views on religion or politics. You can actually name the victims, there are so few of them. Can we say the same for the Germans? Americans? Even the French?

if the current regime in iran were the sole superpower............

/shudder

 

[S.A.M.]

if the current regime in iran were the sole superpower............

/shudder

What would they do? Could you use their history of the last 30 or so years and show how their policy would be replicated worldwide?

 

[Michael]

Can you pick which side you are arguing for? Either you believe in the validity of all "superstitions" as equal to your own beliefs or you don't

Maybe you're misinterpreting a few things here SAM. I didn't ask what you believe. I asked what you believe is possible. Two very VERY different ideas that I'm sure you can separate in your head. Here, let me show you:

I lack a belief in Allah.
I believe Allah's existence is possible.

See how I can hold both of these viewpoints simultaneously? It's pretty simple huh SAM?

--
It actually gets me to thinking what does it mean to say I'm a "Christian" or I believe in "Islam". Once you start thinking, who knows where you'll end up. Which is why your religion prevents that from occurring. A very successful strategy for a meme like yours. Clever little shits aren't they



---
OK, now I have two questions. I'll make them as clear and straightforward as is possible.

(1) Is it possible your belief is not correct SAM?

I'm not asking what you believe to be correct, but only to acknowledge it may not be correct. IOW can you rationally discuss your superstition SAM? Or is this a mental leap beyond your capabilities? Have the meme's won? And if so, can this be measured with an fMRI? Can the propensity for meme-infection be calculated with a gene array? We're almost to THAT stage SAM. Exciting stuff

(2)
Is it possible to teach the ideas: The good will be rewarded in the next life, the bad will be punished in the next life WITHOUT also teaching the following intolerant memes: is Only One God, there is Only One True BooK, there is Only One Last Prophet?




IMO Seems like it. I mean, the Shinto teach the Golden Rule. The Buddhist teach the Golden Rule. Polytheistic Greeks and Romans taught the Golden Rule. The Hindu teach the Golden Rule. The Native Americans teach the Golden Rule. Seems to be universal. :shrug: Now, this is interesting. If you can teach the same thing as Sura 108 and do so without the Intolerant baggage, why would you include baggage? The only reason why that I can think of is you'd want people to be intolerant. Why else?

 

[Gustav]

What would they do? Could you use their history of the last 30 or so years and show how their policy would be replicated worldwide?

who cares about a history dictated by powerlessness? how is that relevant to the hypothetical i am entertaining? i would have thought the current rhetoric and ideology would be a better indicator of the scenarios that would unfold

 

[Gustav]

Are they all equally valid beliefs?

hmm
i think mike offered up this...

It's a good place to start from, one where we acknowledge that it's possible any/all belief systems are equally as likely as any other to be valid/true. That goes for atheism (even though this is a complete lack of belief), Islam, Xianity, Scientology, Judaism, Buddhism, etc....

Beginning from this position we can think about and discuss the sophistication each system of belief has to offer.

..which sound both reasonable.... and generous

 

[S.A.M.]

hmm
i think mike offered up this...





..which sound both reasonable.... and generous

I agree ...in theory.

ergo...


"And do not argue with the followers of earlier revelation
Otherwise than in a most kindly manner -
Unless it be such of them as are bent on evildoing -
And say: "We believe in that which has been bestowed
From on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you:
For our God and your God is one and the same,
And it is unto Him that we surrender ourselves." - Quran 29: 46.


However, do I believe that all life is suffering and one needs to shed that suffering to attain enlightenment? Nope, thats just a dumb way to look at life.

who cares about a history dictated by powerlessness? how is that relevant to the hypothetical i am entertaining? i would have thought the current rhetoric and ideology would be a better indicator of the scenarios that would unfold

Ok why not apply the current rhetoric to their putative global policy? Feel free to use lots of quotations of that rhetoric, I'm really curious exactly what you oppose regarding what they have said.

Maybe you're misinterpreting a few things here SAM. I didn't ask what you believe. I asked what you believe is possible

In that case I believe its possible that I will never see all life as suffering, that I think its dumb to call a kid Jewish if his mother is Jewish but he is an atheist, and that that its irrational that Christ is a 3 in 1 information highway to heaven. So no, I do not think that its possible that these are equivalently valid beliefs to mine. I think life is a gift to be enjoyed not suffered, people pick their own religious beliefs depending on what they are exposed to and Christ is long dead and buried and couldn't care less how many people called his name in vain.

 

[Gustav]

fuck the rhetoric for now
lets do ideology
lets just imagine i am a fundy muslim wielding nukes
what would and should i do?

/plots

mmm
the pakistanis inspire
i'll kill the sufis for starters

/retires to plot some more