Best laugh of the day!
Show that there is *religiously* motivated violence
- Thread starter wynn
- Start date
Best laugh of the day!
@wynn --
Yes, it suites my atheistic agenda to think that nobody is qualified enough to kill the entire human race(including themselves). Good call on that one...oh, wait....I think that was supposed to be the other way around. I got distracted by the wind from you taking a swing and missing the point harder than a forty year old virgin at a club. Sorry about that.
No that would be my big mouth and my utter lack of fear in telling people when they're wrong. Nice pot shot though.
But again, you missed the point. The point is that you should probably not get your psychology from the internet, and you should probably stay away from pop-psychology all together. It rots your brain.
Another swing and a miss with a faulty comparison.
If you're going the "knowledge of religion is the benchmark by which one is religious" then you're going to have a tough time explaining why the most religious people tend to be atheists. Atheists score higher on religious knowledge tests than any just about anyone else, certainly higher than other religious groups. And that is the only real qualifier one can get from your posts because there really is no other qualifier than their own belief. It certainly isn't knowledge of religion, and you don't exactly get quizzed on religion when you join a church. Perhaps some religions work that way, but the most popular religions in the world don't.
So yes, a person who says they are a christian is a christian. A person who says they believe in Allah is a muslim. A person who follows the laws of moses is a jew("Hebrew" and "jew" are not synonymous nor are they interchangeable, see if you were knowledgeable about religion you would know that, so I guess you're not very religious).
Now, on to the faulty comparison. The reason your comparison fails is that we do have specific, objective qualifications for who can be called a physicist and who can't be. We've even gone so far as to make many scientific professions protected terms(like how you can't officially call yourself a medical doctor if you don't have your M.D.). There are no such qualifications for who is and isn't religious because religion and science don't work on the same principle.
It was a nice, if old, try though.
Yes, it suites my atheistic agenda to think that nobody is qualified enough to kill the entire human race(including themselves). Good call on that one...oh, wait....I think that was supposed to be the other way around. I got distracted by the wind from you taking a swing and missing the point harder than a forty year old virgin at a club. Sorry about that.
No that would be my big mouth and my utter lack of fear in telling people when they're wrong. Nice pot shot though.
But again, you missed the point. The point is that you should probably not get your psychology from the internet, and you should probably stay away from pop-psychology all together. It rots your brain.
Another swing and a miss with a faulty comparison.
If you're going the "knowledge of religion is the benchmark by which one is religious" then you're going to have a tough time explaining why the most religious people tend to be atheists. Atheists score higher on religious knowledge tests than any just about anyone else, certainly higher than other religious groups. And that is the only real qualifier one can get from your posts because there really is no other qualifier than their own belief. It certainly isn't knowledge of religion, and you don't exactly get quizzed on religion when you join a church. Perhaps some religions work that way, but the most popular religions in the world don't.
So yes, a person who says they are a christian is a christian. A person who says they believe in Allah is a muslim. A person who follows the laws of moses is a jew("Hebrew" and "jew" are not synonymous nor are they interchangeable, see if you were knowledgeable about religion you would know that, so I guess you're not very religious).
Now, on to the faulty comparison. The reason your comparison fails is that we do have specific, objective qualifications for who can be called a physicist and who can't be. We've even gone so far as to make many scientific professions protected terms(like how you can't officially call yourself a medical doctor if you don't have your M.D.). There are no such qualifications for who is and isn't religious because religion and science don't work on the same principle.
It was a nice, if old, try though.
@lightgigantic --
LOL! It appears that you haven't read the koran or you'd know how idiotic this statement really is. According to the koran there are two houses, or worlds. The House of Islam, submission to Allah and his will(or laws), and the House of War, which is everything else. Tell me then, how does the religion make room for secular law when, by definition that would be in the House of War?
LOL! It appears that you haven't read the koran or you'd know how idiotic this statement really is. According to the koran there are two houses, or worlds. The House of Islam, submission to Allah and his will(or laws), and the House of War, which is everything else. Tell me then, how does the religion make room for secular law when, by definition that would be in the House of War?
I honestly think communism is a faith among its' remaining adherents, and may have always been so.
Religiously motivated harassment:
Last edited:
I don't see how the observation that there are many countries that sport a vast muslim majority with a secular style government is idiotic ... or are you trying to say that you make a better muslim than they do?
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
We live in an age where we have seen countless of massacres and mass suicides based solely on religious beliefs (Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God and Jonestown come to mind), where witchdoctors in some parts of Africa and even Europe are kidnapping and murdering children in sacrificial rituals and killings, or even groups like the LRA for example..
How about Christians who commit violence against abortion clinic staff members and the clinics themselves? Do you think James Kopp was not motivated by his religious beliefs when he gunned down Dr Slepian?
How about the Salem Witch Trials? Do you think they should qualify as 'religiously motivated violence'?
Exodus 22:18 You shall not allow a witch to live.
What's religious about the Bible? Is that a joke?
It's the basis for at least two major religions.
When people believe it, that's called religion.
Well, the enemies of normality - heretics, unbelievers, those contrary to the 'will of God' - often get executed or brutalized for their existence, beliefs, fitna, deviations or whatever word you care to use to describe it. Since one or another religions often encourage such actions, I would call them 'religious violence'. Do you suppose that there would be much impulse to slaughter people of such alternative religions, beliefs or behaviours if it weren't found in the books of still other religions?
I am saying that politics cause violence, hence what you designate as religious violence is merely political violence occurring on a religious back drop (ie politics amongst communities that are majority religious).
Don't forget that you are also an advocate or pure-line atheism in order to distinguish yourself from a few infamous notables (fighting the good war and all that, no?)
Kind of a no-brainer coming from someone not willing to concede that atheism is nothing other than some shit that someone made up
:shrug:
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
Ask the people who cite God's authority when they commit such crimes.
I personally do not find such actions religious, but the people who commit the crimes feel they are doing so with religious authority and they are religiously motivated to do so. That is the distinction which is lacking in this discussion. It is the killer's belief in his/her religion of choice which leads them to commit such acts.
Look at James Kopp as a prime example. His crime was motivated by his religious beliefs. The same would apply for any murder or violence against abortion clinics and their staff members. Their motivation is based solely on their religious beliefs, whether we agree that their actions were religious or not.
I don't deny that this is possible, but there are numerous incidents that do not fit, such as the persecution of Roman citizens for being Christians.
Not even sure what that means.Don't forget that you are also an advocate or pure-line atheism in order to distinguish yourself from a few infamous notables
Hey wow, you took what I said and said the opposite to me! I never saw that coming!
But you also successfully ignored an important point, which is that religious beliefs are defined by the individual, not by any religious authority. Anyone can claim to be a religious authority. Bin Laden can be considered religious because he claimed to be. You can't say he wasn't religious just because he didn't represent mainstream Islamic beliefs.
@lightgigantic --
But that is just the point, we're talking about the religion islam, not countries with a majority muslim population. There's a huge difference between the two and it's obvious that you have no idea what the koran or the hadith actually say do you?
@wynn --
The difference is that when I say that they're wrong I can almost always show why they're wrong. They say that the Earth and the universe are about six thousand years old, I can tell them exactly why they're idiots for thinking that. Just an example.
Oh, and if you would please address the rest of the post you quoted that from, that would be wonderful.
But that is just the point, we're talking about the religion islam, not countries with a majority muslim population. There's a huge difference between the two and it's obvious that you have no idea what the koran or the hadith actually say do you?
@wynn --
The difference is that when I say that they're wrong I can almost always show why they're wrong. They say that the Earth and the universe are about six thousand years old, I can tell them exactly why they're idiots for thinking that. Just an example.
Oh, and if you would please address the rest of the post you quoted that from, that would be wonderful.