View Thread

Atheists Today » Religion » Islam
 Print Thread
Barbaric
Bob of QF
JDHURF wrote:
[quote]Bob of QF wrote: Buncha words. Let's see some ACTUAL BEHAVIOR besides mamby-pamby "criticism" and "denouncement" of these acts of violence.


First it
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
JDHURF
Cynic wrote:
A third theory you might consider is that I'm able to read the intent of someone's words, rather than merely the letter of them.


Care to explain the intent behind this quote?:

derF wrote:
One could argue that the Muslims are continuing their struggle to rule the world but are just using a far more subtle tactic.

[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
Bob of QF
JDHURF wrote:
Bob of QF:

Your latest post outright ignores the evidence that I have posted that clearly refutes your general theses. You are simply regurgitating Sam Harris.


What "evidence"?

That these so-called "moderates" spew forth mere words "denouncing" the extremists?

So fuckin' what! Words.

...

They believe in the same book.

They call themselves "Muslim".

The have the exact same core beliefs.

That they are unwilling and/or unable to control their violent brothers-in-belief?

It makes them responsible for the behaviors of those selfsame brothers-in-belief.

It really IS that simple.

They can denounce all day long. Until they actually DO something, like, say "ex-communicate" (or the Muslim equivalent) them.... no, that's just weak.

They use the same book, to justify their actions. If the moderates don't want the extremists using that book, it's up to them to go do something about it.

They want their book to be put forth as a "fount of wisdom". It's up to them to police people who misuse* that book.


* if you can honestly call it "misuse". The violent groups are only following what the Koran tells them to, after all. It clearly states that to kill infidels is a Holy Act.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
JDHURF
Bob:

You grant too much to the fanatics. Many religious people don
[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
JDHURF
Bob of QF wrote:
JDHURF wrote:
Bob of QF:

Your latest post outright ignores the evidence that I have posted that clearly refutes your general theses. You are simply regurgitating Sam Harris.


What "evidence"?

That these so-called "moderates" spew forth mere words "denouncing" the extremists?

So fuckin' what! Words.


You are absolutely out of control. What are the religious moderates supposed to do? Take up arms and fight the terrorists? Get real. Again, just because I'm a socialist that doesn't mean I'm responsible for FARC or that I should be required to go fight them.
[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
Bob of QF
JDHURF wrote:
Bob of QF:

Your latest post outright ignores the evidence that I have posted that clearly refutes your general theses. You are simply regurgitating Sam Harris.


[url]http://www.mediamonitors.net/riadabdelkarim3.html[/url]

Read it carefully.

Words, ONLY.

Zero actual USEFUL actions that might possibly prevent the violent muslims from acting again.

Zero information on what these "moderates" might do to stop the funding of their violent brothers-in-belief.

Zero information on how these Muslim Americans will be marshaling forces to curb the violence of their brothers-in-belief.

Boatloads of "we're so sorry". Shiploads of "we feel your pain". Boxcars of "we sympathize." Nice. That and $1.50 buys you a cuppa.

Where is the actions to fit the pretty words?

Were are the Anti-Violence Muslim Action Groups, who's stated cause is the elimination of all violence in the name of Muslims?

I couldn't find any....

Just as I cannot find any similar Christian groups, who's aim is to stop the Christian-sponsored hate.


....

It's the same book, that they each believe in.

This makes them brothers-in-belief, even if they don't like the actions of those brothers much.

One group or the other needs to change their book and their name, if they want to really distance themselves, and remove their indirect responsibility.

I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
Cynic
Isn't the quote like weeks old? Hardly applies to the current snafu. Regardless, taking "the Muslims" to mean "all Muslims" is very literal-minded, more in-line with direct English translation and not what people mean when they say things like that. Sure, more precise language is useful, but around most people, that suffices.
 
Bob of QF
JDHURF wrote:
Bob of QF wrote:
JDHURF wrote:
Bob of QF:

Your latest post outright ignores the evidence that I have posted that clearly refutes your general theses. You are simply regurgitating Sam Harris.


What "evidence"?

That these so-called "moderates" spew forth mere words "denouncing" the extremists?

So fuckin' what! Words.


You are absolutely out of control. What are the religious moderates supposed to do? Take up arms and fight the terrorists? Get real. Again, just because I'm a socialist that doesn't mean I'm responsible for FARC or that I should be required to go fight them.


How the hell should _I_ know? Maybe they should, if they want to keep their book.

It's their damn book, that both groups believe in.

As long as they continue to press their idiotic violent book forward as a "font of wisdom", then they are responsible for the consequences of it's wide, uncensored distribution.

This applies to the bible as well as the koran; both encourage hate and violence to anyone viewed as different.

It is the exact same thing as this:

If I decide to write a book of simple kitchen-tool bomb-making, and distribute it world-wide, and people read the book, make bombs and lots of people are killed?

Am I responsible? Of course I am! I'm distributing and supporting the book, and the information it contains.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
RayvenAlandria
Well, this is going to certainly piss JDHURF off, but I'm going to say it anyway.

IMO, there are NO moderate muslims.

They pretend to be moderate and peaceful, but when you get behind the outer shell, the faces they show for public consumption, they all share the same beliefs the terrorists do.

Why do I say this?

Because I almost married one. The *sweet* muslims I thought I knew all turned out to be full of racist hatred once I was accepted into the inner circle.

Okay, so maybe I didn't meet every single muslim on the planet but what I saw and heard during the years I was with Shabbir changed my mind about "moderate" muslims. I no longer believe there is such a thing. The religion is based, at it's very core, on racism and hatred. Anyone who follows this religion has to agree with those core values or they would be forced by their sense of decency to walk away from the religion.
 
Bob of QF
JDHURF wrote:
Cynic wrote:
A third theory you might consider is that I'm able to read the intent of someone's words, rather than merely the letter of them.


Care to explain the intent behind this quote?:

derF wrote:
One could argue that the Muslims are continuing their struggle to rule the world but are just using a far more subtle tactic.


I don't know what derF meant, but according to their book, it IS their Holy Duty to do so.

Just as with the Christians, and their book.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
Bob of QF
RayvenAlandria wrote:
Well, this is going to certainly piss JDHURF off, but I'm going to say it anyway.

IMO, there are NO moderate muslims.

They pretend to be moderate and peaceful, but when you get behind the outer shell, the faces they show for public consumption, they all share the same beliefs the terrorists do.

Why do I say this?

Because I almost married one. The *sweet* muslims I thought I knew all turned out to be full of racist hatred once I was accepted into the inner circle.

Okay, so maybe I didn't meet every single muslim on the planet but what I saw and heard during the years I was with Shabbir changed my mind about "moderate" muslims. I no longer believe there is such a thing. The religion is based, at it's very core, on racism and hatred. Anyone who follows this religion has to agree with those core values or they would be forced by their sense of decency to walk away from the religion.


Kudos, Rayven.

And, I, for one, am seriously happy you dodged that particular bullet. Grin
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
JDHURF
They both view that same book very differently Bob, that's obvious. The problem is how the book is viewed and it is odd that you agree with the religious fanatics in their interpretation.

I've got a question for you as well:

When atheists were caught burning down churches...were you then "indirectly" guilty of this? Is it our job to make sure atheists don't burn down churches?

Get real.
[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
JDHURF
RayvenAlandria:

I really got a kick out of your evidence: anecdotal heresay.

I will therefore dismiss it out of hand.
[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
Skeeve
JDHURF wrote:
[quote]Skeeve wrote: I'd prefer the pejorative, since it's my opinion, based on how I see the world around me.


It
"The world is my country, and do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine
 
Bob of QF
JDHURF wrote:
They both view that same book very differently Bob, that's obvious. The problem is how the book is viewed and it is odd that you agree with the religious fanatics in their interpretation.


Does not matter. They believe the exact same book is the "word of god".

As long as they both believe this, it makes them both the same group, regardless of their "interpretation" of that book.

It really is as simple as that.

Each group pushes forth, the same book, to support and justify their actions and beliefs.

It's the exact same book.

JDHURF wrote:
I've got a question for you as well:

When atheists were caught burning down churches...were you then "indirectly" guilty of this? Is it our job to make sure atheists don't burn down churches?

Get real.


Agreed: get real.

There is not "atheist book". There is no "atheist manifesto". There is no "atheist bible" that ALL atheists subscribe to, now IS there?

No, there is not.

Your analogy fails on that single point alone.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
Bob of QF
Skeeve wrote:
[quote]JDHURF wrote:
[quote]Skeeve wrote: I'd prefer the pejorative, since it's my opinion, based on how I see the world around me.


It
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
JDHURF
Skeeve:

The political issues do not get their force from Islam. This is precisely the ignorance I was speaking of. There was for a time a very strong secular Arab nationalist movement in the ME
Edited by JDHURF on 11/28/2008 20:43
[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
RayvenAlandria
JDHURF wrote:
They both view that same book very differently Bob, that's obvious. The problem is how the book is viewed and it is odd that you agree with the religious fanatics in their interpretation.

I've got a question for you as well:

When atheists were caught burning down churches...were you then "indirectly" guilty of this? Is it our job to make sure atheists don't burn down churches?

Get real.


You mean like did I feel it was my duty to take on the NYCA and the TAM when they did shitty things that made Atheists look like scumbags?

Ummm yeah.

If I expect religious people to stand up to their assholes, I must do the same with assholes who happen to share my *belief* system.

The difference is though, there is no actual belief system of Atheists, therefor your argument is moot.

We have no commandments, we have no rules, we have no bible etc...Atheism does not teach a philosophy.

In reality I am no more responsible for another Atheist than I am for another brown haired person, green eyed person, woman, person with EDS, cat lover, whateverer.

I do take on Atheists who act like crooks or criminals but in reality, it's not my duty.

It IS the duty of religious people to take on those who use their religion to do harm. They share a belief system, a doctrine, a holy book, laws, and rules. They need to excommunicate (or whatever) anyone doing harm in that religion's name and stop turning a blind eye.
 
Cynic
That isn't true of Christianity, so I don't know why it would be true of anyone else. The difference is the extent of the seriousness that book is taken.
 
JDHURF
Bob of QF wrote: There is not "atheist book". There is no "atheist manifesto". There is no "atheist bible" that ALL atheists subscribe to, now IS there?

No, there is not.

Your analogy fails on that single point alone.


And there is no single text Christians all agree on either (which is why there is the apocrapha in the first place). The Christian extremists argue that only the synoptic gospels are of any worth and that they were dictated infallibly by god and so on, but that
[img]http://www.atheists.org/images/headerLogo.png[/img]
 
Jump to Forum: