The worst thing about Atheists

Observer
Observer's picture
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-09-17
User is offlineOffline
The worst thing about Atheists

They will follow Muslims anywhere.

Quote from Newt Gingrich:

"I have two grandchildren: Maggie is 11; Robert is 9," Gingrich said at Cornerstone Church here. "I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

 

So, if Gingrich isn't elected, this will be a secular atheist country..........dominated by radical Islamists? huh?...

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/28/gingrich-fears-atheist-country-dominated-by-radical-islamists/?hpt=C2

 


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2399
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Newt is a nit.

 

 

 

                          Canada has a full blown federal election going on right now, did anyone notice?   No religion involved; our politicians don't talk about that sort of thing. It's probably why we are so boring.  Election day is schedualed for a few days after the next schedualed rapture so maybe it wont happen. nawh it'll happen,  the election that is. I'm hopeing Harper returns with a majority.   Does anyone outside of Canada even know what that means?

 

 

 

                         Remember to vote early and often.

 

 

                  edit];  Did anyone tell Newt Canada's economy is solid,  our banks are buying up failed American banks,   There is even a Toronto Dominion Bank, TD bank, in my scrawny little hometown in central Maine.   Has anyone else notice the green TD bank emblem in their American towns?   How about TD Ameritrade.  That's right Yanks, thanks to Dubyahs screwups, Canada is takeing over,  our doller is already worth more then yours.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4580
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:      

Jeffrick wrote:

 

                           Canada has a full blown federal election going on right now, did anyone notice?   No religion involved; our politicians don't talk about that sort of thing. It's probably why we are so boring.  Election day is schedualed for a few days after the next schedualed rapture so maybe it wont happen. nawh it'll happen,  the election that is. I'm hopeing Harper returns with a majority.   Does anyone outside of Canada even know what that means?

 

 

 

                         Remember to vote early and often.

 

 

                  edit];  Did anyone tell Newt Canada's economy is solid,  our banks are buying up failed American banks,   There is even a Toronto Dominion Bank, TD bank, in my scrawny little hometown in central Maine.   Has anyone else notice the green TD bank emblem in their American towns?   How about TD Ameritrade.  That's right Yanks, thanks to Dubyahs screwups, Canada is takeing over,  our doller is already worth more then yours.

I noticed but I doubt anyone who isn't as equally politically nerdy as I am has. But, even being the political nerd I am, I find it hard to care about Canadian elections. They are simply unlikely to affect my life in any major way- Canada has always had a fairly tame foreign policy and the few trade disputes we have had aren't that big of a deal. Canada is taking over solely because the US is so fucked up. The sad part is, that Canada might find itself becoming the main power in the Western Hemisphere if we don't get our act together.

Oh well, if the shit hits the fan, I can pass for Canadian, and I can think of worse places to live than BC.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 So that is what TD stands

 

So that is what TD stands for. Umm, I never knew or cared one way or the other.

 

As far as the value of the Canadian dollar, not according to a real time quote from xe.com. It is currently sitting at 0.97 USD.

 

Although one point in your favor is that with your CANDU reactors, you are about a month from being a nuclear weapons proliferation risk if you should choose to do so. Thank Jake that you are such a peaceful people.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5861
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
I have always felt we in

I have always felt we in Australia more akin to Canada than the US.

Our dollar is currently very close to the Canadian dollar, our population is much closer in size, and we are not much hung up about religion, we have a public health system, etc.

We also really seem to have avoided most of the effects of the GFC.

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

Gingrich is even nuttier than I had already thought.

 

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 What Bob? You did not

 

What Bob? You did not already know that all American politicians are nutters?

 

One of my favorites in the Reverend Jesse Jackson. I remember watching one of his speeches where he was talking about how his father fought bravely in WW2 Germany and came back on a troop ship “past the Statue of Liberty, into Pearl Harbor”.

 

I suppose that on a technicality, one has to pass the Statue of Liberty on the way to Pearl Harbor but I have to wonder how well the boat stayed afloat while passing through Arizona.

 

In other news, I know that you are old enough to remember the 70's novelty musician Ray Stevens (The Streak, Ahab the Arab). Did you know that he is pretty much the sound track for the whole tea party movement?

 

That being said, I have put some thought into showing up at the local tea party Saturday rally with my bass just to play the old Chad Mitchell song “The John Birch Society”. You know that none of them would get the joke and that is arguably more lulz that rickrolling Fred Phelps.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Oh! I was not expecting a

 

Oh! I was not expecting a shirtless Vlad Putin to be the thumbnail. That just goes to show that we do not have a lock on insanty.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Observer wrote:"I have two

Observer wrote:

"I have two grandchildren: Maggie is 11; Robert is 9," Gingrich said at Cornerstone Church here. "I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

Scare tactics galore.  Roll up everything they've been brainwashed to fear into one scenario even if those things are polar opposites.  

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Gawdzilla
atheist
Posts: 69
Joined: 2011-01-01
User is offlineOffline
That's it. I leaving the

That's it. I leaving the solar system. Extra seats on the next ship out available. Get 'em while they're still in  pre-order.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4580
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Gawdzilla wrote:That's it. I

Gawdzilla wrote:

That's it. I leaving the solar system. Extra seats on the next ship out available. Get 'em while they're still in  pre-order.

 

Good idea. Could you spare me some change? I'm a few tens of millions short.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Observer
Observer's picture
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I am just waiting for the

I am just waiting for the rationalresponders website to say this at top:

 

Home....Forums....My Account.....Videos......Would you like to know more about Allah?......link to us!


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5861
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
AIG, we do have a female

AIG, we do have a female politician, who was prominent a while back, but recently made some noises about trying to get back into politics.

She reminds in a number of ways of Sarah Palin...

She comes from a district within an hours drive from where I live.

We had a State Premier, sort of roughly equivalent to your state governors, who was a regarded almost universally, by people outside our state, as a nutcase of the first order, but he stayed in power due to a 'gerrymander' which strongly favoured his 'rural' fans ( our version of redneck hicks ).

Especially at that period, my state of Queensland, roughly the North-East corner of the continent, was regarded as the 'Deep North', by analogy with your 'Deep South'.

So, we are not without our nutters. 

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:I have

BobSpence1 wrote:

I have always felt we in Australia more akin to Canada than the US.

Our dollar is currently very close to the Canadian dollar, our population is much closer in size, and we are not much hung up about religion, we have a public health system, etc.

We also really seem to have avoided most of the effects of the GFC.

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

Gingrich is even nuttier than I had already thought.

Canada has one of the most legendary politicians, that is arguably without parallel.

The mayor of Mississauga. The 6th largest city in Canada.

During the runnings of the Presidential candidates for the current Presidency, a number of threads in political forums in America were nominating 'Hurricane Hazel', for 'Prez'.

 

Meet 'Hurricane Hazel'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY79KbCptTo

 

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

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


NoMoreCrazyPeople
atheistSuperfan
NoMoreCrazyPeople's picture
Posts: 969
Joined: 2009-10-14
User is offlineOffline
Observer wrote: So, if

Observer wrote:

 

So, if Gingrich isn't elected, this will be a secular atheist country..........dominated by radical Islamists? huh?... 

WTF???  So it will be a secular nation of people who pray 5 times to a god they don't believe in.  That makes sense.


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
NoMoreCrazyPeople

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:

Observer wrote:

 

So, if Gingrich isn't elected, this will be a secular atheist country..........dominated by radical Islamists? huh?... 

WTF???  So it will be a secular nation of people who pray 5 times to a god they don't believe in.  That makes sense.

 

ok Jon Stewart.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Yes.

 

BobSpence1 wrote:

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

 

We do...

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

BobSpence1 wrote:

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

 

We do...

I have seen a few atheists that have claimed that other atheists defend muslims (christina rad and pat condell as popular examples) I think when they make this claim they are not taking into consideration that the same people will defend the christians right to believe in whatever hocus pocus they want as well. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right here but I am as or perhaps even more anti-islam as anyone could be. Christianity takes more hits because it is here and dominant.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5861
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
robj101

robj101 wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

BobSpence1 wrote:

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

 

We do...

I have seen a few atheists that have claimed that other atheists defend muslims (christina rad and pat condell as popular examples) I think when they make this claim they are not taking into consideration that the same people will defend the christians right to believe in whatever hocus pocus they want as well. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right here but I am as or perhaps even more anti-islam as anyone could be. Christianity takes more hits because it is here and dominant.

When I use the term 'fanatic', I am thinking of people who come very close to, or actually do, advocate violence against the target group. Or really are hating the people, not just the beliefs.

I have little to no 'tolerance' of the belief, and I am a little impatient with those who say 'Christianity is just as bad'. I know what they mean, and maybe Christianity at its heart is just as mistaken, and capable of inspiring similar atrocities, but I see Islam as worse.

But does that make me a 'fanatic'?

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


NoMoreCrazyPeople
atheistSuperfan
NoMoreCrazyPeople's picture
Posts: 969
Joined: 2009-10-14
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin

Ciarin wrote:

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:

Observer wrote:

 

So, if Gingrich isn't elected, this will be a secular atheist country..........dominated by radical Islamists? huh?... 

WTF???  So it will be a secular nation of people who pray 5 times to a god they don't believe in.  That makes sense.

 

ok Jon Stewart.

I know right, I was trying to word it better but his way was the best,   bbbbusted!!!


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:robj101

BobSpence1 wrote:

robj101 wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

BobSpence1 wrote:

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

 

We do...

I have seen a few atheists that have claimed that other atheists defend muslims (christina rad and pat condell as popular examples) I think when they make this claim they are not taking into consideration that the same people will defend the christians right to believe in whatever hocus pocus they want as well. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right here but I am as or perhaps even more anti-islam as anyone could be. Christianity takes more hits because it is here and dominant.

When I use the term 'fanatic', I am thinking of people who come very close to, or actually do, advocate violence against the target group. Or really are hating the people, not just the beliefs.

I have little to no 'tolerance' of the belief, and I am a little impatient with those who say 'Christianity is just as bad'. I know what they mean, and maybe Christianity at its heart is just as mistaken, and capable of inspiring similar atrocities, but I see Islam as worse.

But does that make me a 'fanatic'?

Christianity at its heart is just as bad, it is Islam evolved.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I think we

BobSpence1 wrote:

robj101 wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

BobSpence1 wrote:

We do have some fanatic anti-Muslims.

 

We do...

I have seen a few atheists that have claimed that other atheists defend muslims (christina rad and pat condell as popular examples) I think when they make this claim they are not taking into consideration that the same people will defend the christians right to believe in whatever hocus pocus they want as well. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right here but I am as or perhaps even more anti-islam as anyone could be. Christianity takes more hits because it is here and dominant.

When I use the term 'fanatic', I am thinking of people who come very close to, or actually do, advocate violence against the target group. Or really are hating the people, not just the beliefs.

I have little to no 'tolerance' of the belief, and I am a little impatient with those who say 'Christianity is just as bad'. I know what they mean, and maybe Christianity at its heart is just as mistaken, and capable of inspiring similar atrocities, but I see Islam as worse.

But does that make me a 'fanatic'?

 

all probably qualify as islamophobes by the muslim definition - that being anyone who criticises the faith. I think I'm worse. I'd go so far as deny immigrant status to any religious person who refused to agree right there that the nation took precedence over their dogma. This would exclude most fundy muslims and christians. Tho' your muslims are encourage to lie to the infidel so perhaps the test would have to involve denying Mo' three times before the cock crew...

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3400
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Newt wrote:"I am convinced

Newt wrote:

"I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists..."

so the fuck what???  honestly, life goes on, and as bart simpson once said, "relax, you'll live longer."

i would have absolutely, positively no problem of going through the motions five times a day, spending a month fasting during the day and partying during the night (people generally gain weight during ramadan), and taking a trip to mecca (i'd love to see it), not only if it meant life or death, but even if it meant material advancement.  that's how seriously i take it.  i mean, wouldn't you gladly say you believe in santa claus if it meant a promotion?

and for those who shiver about fanatics taking over, guess what, the history of every religion, including islam, shows that "taking over" is the best way for any religion to get rid of its fanatics.  when islam was the official religion of enormous, wealthy empires (the abassids, the ottomans, the mamluks, the moghuls, etc.), it presided over the most liberal areas of the world.  jews, for example, actually preferred to live under muslims than christians.  islam has really only become so batshit crazy on such a huge level since the fall of the ottoman empire.  now islam is on the defensive, and the only places where it's dominant are utter shitholes.  so they're pissed off.

that's why when my european friends shiver about "encroaching islam," i just quote the who: "here comes the new boss, same as the old boss."  the only downside of "muslim" europe would be (mark my words) christian suicide bombers.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Islam will win out in the

Islam will win out in the end vs christianity. This entitlement problem that's going round coupled with potentially 72 virgins, wtf is peter going to give blows jobs at the pearly gates to compete?

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I think this simplifies the issue dangerously.

iwbiek wrote:

Newt wrote:

"I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists..."

so the fuck what???  honestly, life goes on, and as bart simpson once said, "relax, you'll live longer."

i would have absolutely, positively no problem of going through the motions five times a day, spending a month fasting during the day and partying during the night (people generally gain weight during ramadan), and taking a trip to mecca (i'd love to see it), not only if it meant life or death, but even if it meant material advancement.  that's how seriously i take it.  i mean, wouldn't you gladly say you believe in santa claus if it meant a promotion?

and for those who shiver about fanatics taking over, guess what, the history of every religion, including islam, shows that "taking over" is the best way for any religion to get rid of its fanatics.  when islam was the official religion of enormous, wealthy empires (the abassids, the ottomans, the mamluks, the moghuls, etc.), it presided over the most liberal areas of the world.  jews, for example, actually preferred to live under muslims than christians.  islam has really only become so batshit crazy on such a huge level since the fall of the ottoman empire.  now islam is on the defensive, and the only places where it's dominant are utter shitholes.  so they're pissed off.

that's why when my european friends shiver about "encroaching islam," i just quote the who: "here comes the new boss, same as the old boss."  the only downside of "muslim" europe would be (mark my words) christian suicide bombers.

 

The islamic doctrine allows no choice. Would you really subscribe to a faith that would kill you for leaving it? Would you be happy with state/church control of empirical information? A lack of naked ladies at the beach? No beer at the cricket?

Not me. There's not a muslim country on the planet I would happily live in. As you say, they are shit holes with their populations crushed by layers of state and cultural repression. Whether they can change their lot is the key thing. 

I'd like to think they can. The oppression in those nations is staggering. Look at Somalia. Sudan. Saudi Arabia. What nightmares those nations are.  

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3400
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote: The

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

The islamic doctrine allows no choice. Would you really subscribe to a faith that would kill you for leaving it? Would you be happy with state/church control of empirical information? A lack of naked ladies at the beach? No beer at the cricket?

Not me. There's not a muslim country on the planet I would happily live in. As you say, they are shit holes with their populations crushed by layers of state and cultural repression. Whether they can change their lot is the key thing. 

I'd like to think they can. The oppression in those nations is staggering. Look at Somalia. Sudan. Saudi Arabia. What nightmares those nations are.  

 

 

 

yeah, but my whole point is that if islam overruns europe and/or america, they will no longer be in charge only of shitholes, and the history of islam has already shown us that, like every other expansionist religion, once it achieves its goals and becomes wealthy, it becomes as fat and complacent as any other religion with considerable wealth.  i mean, islam in the former yugoslavia, for example, isn't even in the government, but it is respected and it does benefit from the nation's wealth, and it doesn't proscribe alcohol even for its own adherents.

a new muslim empire on the scale of the ottomans at their peak would stamp out its own fanatics.  i wager suleiman the magnificent would track down and slaughter bin laden a lot more efficiently than the american military--but, again, in such a situation, bin laden wouldn't even exist...at least, not as a muslim.

btw, in the vast majority of situations, there was a choice in the islamic empires.  nonmuslims only had to pay a tax, which was not typically burdensome. but even still, guess what?  lots of people chose to convert then.  and history shows us that there was no lack of flowing alcohol in these empires.  just read about the travels of ibn batutta, a sort of muslim marco polo.  he traveled from his native morocco all the way to china.  he passed through several different islamic empires: mamluk egypt and central asia, seljuk turkey, safavid persia, moghul india.  he was a devout religious scholar, and thus a  prude and a bit of a twat, and he constantly expressed horror at how hedonistic his fellow muslims were throughout the world, not only drinking but sleeping around.  did he blow up buildings in righteous fury?  no, he wrote a few pissy paragraphs.  why blow up buildings when you and every muslim around you is rolling in wealth?

and i can just hear someone now going, "oh, so you'd gladly be a dhimmi" (people love throwing that word around since it became common coin in 2001).  my answer: i'm already somebody's dhimmi.  so are you.  we all are.  who gives a fuck who pulls the strings?  when the fat cats of the world get in power (i mean those who control true global wealth, not some pissant country), they're all basically the same.

so do i think enriching muslims would stop terrorism?  no.  i think it would virtually eliminate islamic terrorism, but as long as there's a third world in misery, there will be terrorists.  people don't become terrorists by reading the quran.  they finnd justification for it in the quran, and they'll find justification for it in the bible, the vedas, or wherever they care to look.

here comes the new boss, same as the old boss.  and if it would mean a tax break and a cushy do-nothing job, you damn right i'd kneel to mecca, and only those who believe in a specific fairy would have a problem with that.  i'd keep my flask of whiskey under my prayer rug and, in a rich islamic europe, i guarantee you i wouldn't lose my head or even my job over it, as long as i was discreet.

and please don't throw quran verses at me.  the worst thing you can do to inform yourself of the history of world islam is to use the quran as your primary source, just as the bible would be a terrible primary source to inform you of the history of christendom.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
If this is your position on religious oppression, fine.

 

iwbiek wrote:

 

and i can just hear someone now going, "oh, so you'd gladly be a dhimmi" (people love throwing that word around since it became common coin in 2001).  my answer: i'm already somebody's dhimmi.  so are you.  we all are.  who gives a fuck who pulls the strings?  when the fat cats of the world get in power (i mean those who control true global wealth, not some pissant country), they're all basically the same.

so do i think enriching muslims would stop terrorism?  no.  i think it would virtually eliminate islamic terrorism, but as long as there's a third world in misery, there will be terrorists.  people don't become terrorists by reading the quran.  they finnd justification for it in the quran, and they'll find justification for it in the bible, the vedas, or wherever they care to look.

here comes the new boss, same as the old boss.  and if it would mean a tax break and a cushy do-nothing job, you damn right i'd kneel to mecca, and only those who believe in a specific fairy would have a problem with that.  i'd keep my flask of whiskey under my prayer rug and, in a rich islamic europe, i guarantee you i wouldn't lose my head or even my job over it, as long as i was discreet.

and please don't throw quran verses at me.  the worst thing you can do to inform yourself of the history of world islam is to use the quran as your primary source, just as the bible would be a terrible primary source to inform you of the history of christendom.

 

But personally, I'd be opposed to it. I'm not kneeling to mecca, the cross, the six armed blue elephant or any other weird-arse contrivance. As for being taken over by islam I tend to think that instead of high level integration instead every nation on earth will have its very own west bank to play with. What fun.  

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
There is a fun trend with

There is a fun trend with Islam, when they take over an entire area and there is no one left to fight they segregate themselves into different "types" of Islam and have a big hoe down with each other. It's history and it's now.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I take Iwb's point

 

that an islam that could dominate a European nation or an America would not be Saudi islam but there nevertheless seems to be a simplification of the issues here.

I understand the points about social inequalities, too. But the idea a rich muslim society would turn its back on wahabi or somehow actually deliver an egalitarian society seems doubtful to me, regardless of what may have taken place in the past. Look at Saudi Arabia. There's plenty of money there and in many middle eastern nations so they can hardly point the finger at the west for undermining their universal suffrage, education opportunities or broader infrastructure. The west is a convenient target for the two minutes hate required by societies that exist in a constant state of 'emergency'.

I don't overly want to argue bitterly with iwb about this. Simply, being in a society that demanded religious conformance, that oppressed knowledge, women, allowed the easy established of totalitarian hegemony and all the rest would be a problem for me. I tend to think the future will not involve some sort of religious takeover of anyone by anyone and I hope I am correct. 

The huge reversal of middle eastern immigration across the west will go some way to extending the integration process, in any case, and that sits just fine with me.   

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3400
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

that an islam that could dominate a European nation or an America would not be Saudi islam but there nevertheless seems to be a simplification of the issues here.

I understand the points about social inequalities, too. But the idea a rich muslim society would turn its back on wahabi or somehow actually deliver an egalitarian society seems doubtful to me, regardless of what may have taken place in the past. Look at Saudi Arabia. There's plenty of money there and in many middle eastern nations so they can hardly point the finger at the west for undermining their universal suffrage, education opportunities or broader infrastructure. The west is a convenient target for the two minutes hate required by societies that exist in a constant state of 'emergency'.

I don't overly want to argue bitterly with iwb about this. Simply, being in a society that demanded religious conformance, that oppressed knowledge, women, allowed the easy established of totalitarian hegemony and all the rest would be a problem for me. I tend to think the future will not involve some sort of religious takeover of anyone by anyone and I hope I am correct. 

The huge reversal of middle eastern immigration across the west will go some way to extending the integration process, in any case, and that sits just fine with me.   

who's being bitter?  i'm just constantly trying to point out that islam is not a monolithic thing.  there are millions of muslims in the world who drink, dance, and whose women wear whatever they want, but that never makes it on the news so few people know about it.  even "sharia" is nor just sharia.  there are four major sunni legal schools of varying degrees of austerity recognized by different muslims in different parts of the earth

you also mention wahhabism.  you should know that's only been around since the 18th century and that pretty much only the saudis recognize it.  most of the muslim world condemns wahhabism as heresy and innovation.

totalitarianism by definition (see hannah arendt, the origins of totalitarianism) cannot flourish without isolation and insulation from the outside world.  the more a society expands a stable rule over the wider world, the more tolerant it becomes--intolerance is very bad for revenue.  choose any "worldwide" multicultural empire from history, not just the islamic ones, and you definitely won't find "totalitarianism" (never mind that it's only a 20th century phenomenon), and even tyranny usually only occurs as isolated local incidents.  religion is never emphasized except as a class element and thus it automatically becomes conservative.  under the umayyads and abassids, for example, it was actually very difficult for a non-arab to convert to islam, and usually outright impossible.  why?  because conversion meant admittance to a higher class.

of course, none of us can say exactly what would happen in a new islamic world empire, but i think i have the weight of historical evidence, and not only from an islamic perspective, on my side when i contend that you would not be forced to pray facing mecca...but you might find yourself wanting to, when you consider the perks.

by the way, i'd like to point out, as i have many times before, that the oppression of women happens in a minority of muslim societies, and is a cultural rather than a religious element.  female circumcision and burqas predated islam in their respective societies.  honestly, having studied both books, i'd say the quran is less disdainful of women than the bible.

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
No one, obviously.

 

iwbiek wrote:

who's being bitter?

 

What I mean is I disagree with you but don't want to endlessly labour the point. No doubt all the variations in the faith you suggest exist, do exist. But there is assuredly a separate and fundamentalist islam in the world. I see it in parts of my own city. 

As for the difference between the bible and the koran, I dislike both and tend to the UN Charter of Human Rights for my direction on the treatment of others - this obviously includes the application of religious freedoms, even if they undermine the structure that delivers them. 

 

iwbiek wrote:

of course, none of us can say exactly what would happen in a new islamic world empire, but i think i have the weight of historical evidence, and not only from an islamic perspective, on my side when i contend that you would not be forced to pray facing mecca...but you might find yourself wanting to, when you consider the perks.

 

Sure, none could say what a muslim world empire would be like but I don't really want to live in it - that's the material point. I don't want there to be perks for believers and I revile variations in levels of respect for humanity - a tax on atheists? That's nice. 

This is the core of our disagreement and I'm happy to leave it here. You are OK with this projected future and I'm not.

Personally, and no doubt as a result of my upbringing, I have a dislike of fundy religion that is relentless and corrosive. Being forced or coerced into any form of religious worship would lead to certain...problems for me. We differ and that's fine. 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3400
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:a tax

Atheistextremist wrote:

a tax on atheists? That's nice. 

i respect your pov.  the only thing i want to emphasize about my point before i leave it is that many of the things you fear already exist to some degree in much of the "democratic" world.  here in slovakia, for example, a portion of our taxes automatically go to each officially recognized religion based on the number of members they have.  it's not optional.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen