Angels & Demons
discussion
Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion?
Those commercials stating all the potential side effects ( partial blindness, frequent stuttering, you might notice your leg fall off...) are a result if our overly litigious society. You can sue for just about anything here in the good ol USA even your own stupidity can usually be someone else's fault.
Mary wrote: "I wonder at exactly what point in time in our history was our media unbiased?"
I'm guessing it's always been an issue, depending on the time period. There was a time when it was taken very seriously, seen as the only thing standing between the people and tyranny. Those journalists might have been a bit more unbiased. And, ultimately, I think there are some unbiased journalists today. Then, you have the advent of yellow journalism and what we have today.
I think the impact might be more of a concern today. Why? We have 24 hour news programs. More access to the news times a million. One has to acknowledge that as a serious issue.
Not sure how that stacks up against lack of news or slow news from times past.
Regarding Benghazi being a witch hunt, .... You know, I've heard Democratic analysts and politicians say the same exact thing on CNN, including the line about the 11 embassy attacks and deaths under Bush ... and the line about Hilary.
Here's what causes me concern....
When mentioning those points, no one mentions the four men who were slaughtered.
Are we a people of tit for tat? Is that all we are? Is that what defines us? Our team screwed up. Look the other way. Pretend it didn't happen. Smear the other team to deflect, deflect, deflect.
Gotta tell you, Mary, that rubs me the wrong way.
Bush did some horrid things. There's a list. At the top of my list is Iraq. I said it at the time and say it now.
Regarding Hillary, ... I supported her over Obama in '08.
Regarding the embassy bombings, .... How many occurred as part of the Iraq war? How many took place over seven hours? In how many were teams and planes told to stand down and not help? How many of those happened on 9/11? How many of those were blamed on a YouTube video? You know, they guy who made that video is still in jail. Isn't he? Wondering what the charges were? I mean, hey, I could go on and on.
Further, in a witch hunt, those being hunted are blameless. The facts don't show a blameless administration. Heck, .... Didn't they come out this weekend and say it's not so much that they were criminal as incompetent? That from the administration. Holy hell.
If all of that, even some of that, happened under Bush, shame on the Democrats and Republicans for not doing investigations and hearings. I'm guessing, if those incidents had legs, investigations and hearings would have been conducted. Seriously, ... I remember news agencies, with the exception of Fox, doing weekly reports of all of the service members who died ... names, pictures ... how many babies they had ... if they played baseball or had sick mothers ... not done under Obama, by the way. Bush was torn apart, often rightly so. So, I'm guessing if something was there ... Bush or his people watching realtime for six hours three men on a roof holding off 60 and being blown to bits int he sixth hour, we'd have heard about it.
But, even if you and the Democrats are on to something, ...
Is that any reason not to investigate this?
Men are dead. Families are destroyed. America plays a big game when it comes to ... "Leave no man behind." True or false. I'm not naive. I'm sure this crap has happened under every administration. Some people are deemed expendable.
But, here's the thing. If I were the wife or sister or daughter or mother of one of those men, I'd damned well want to know what happened. Further, I'd expect the press to do their jobs and the government to pony up with the facts. I wouldn't expect anyone, including the American people, to say ... 11 embassies were attacked under Bush and there were no investigation, so ... etc....
Is the takeaway message ... so we won't find the truth for these men and these families either?
I wonder.... People hear that statement and think ... rock on ... damned Republicans.
But, do they follow it through to the end result.
Does that mean, then, that we do nothing to get answers regarding what happened in Benghazi? Tit for tat versus what is right rules the day....
Put in those terms, I can't imagine people wouldn't really want the facts to be aired.
Further and finally, if one has nothing to hide, why put up such a fuss about investigations and hearings? The American people elected Obama due to being fed up with politics as usual. People, especially Obama, would do well to remember that. :(
I'm guessing it's always been an issue, depending on the time period. There was a time when it was taken very seriously, seen as the only thing standing between the people and tyranny. Those journalists might have been a bit more unbiased. And, ultimately, I think there are some unbiased journalists today. Then, you have the advent of yellow journalism and what we have today.
I think the impact might be more of a concern today. Why? We have 24 hour news programs. More access to the news times a million. One has to acknowledge that as a serious issue.
Not sure how that stacks up against lack of news or slow news from times past.
Regarding Benghazi being a witch hunt, .... You know, I've heard Democratic analysts and politicians say the same exact thing on CNN, including the line about the 11 embassy attacks and deaths under Bush ... and the line about Hilary.
Here's what causes me concern....
When mentioning those points, no one mentions the four men who were slaughtered.
Are we a people of tit for tat? Is that all we are? Is that what defines us? Our team screwed up. Look the other way. Pretend it didn't happen. Smear the other team to deflect, deflect, deflect.
Gotta tell you, Mary, that rubs me the wrong way.
Bush did some horrid things. There's a list. At the top of my list is Iraq. I said it at the time and say it now.
Regarding Hillary, ... I supported her over Obama in '08.
Regarding the embassy bombings, .... How many occurred as part of the Iraq war? How many took place over seven hours? In how many were teams and planes told to stand down and not help? How many of those happened on 9/11? How many of those were blamed on a YouTube video? You know, they guy who made that video is still in jail. Isn't he? Wondering what the charges were? I mean, hey, I could go on and on.
Further, in a witch hunt, those being hunted are blameless. The facts don't show a blameless administration. Heck, .... Didn't they come out this weekend and say it's not so much that they were criminal as incompetent? That from the administration. Holy hell.
If all of that, even some of that, happened under Bush, shame on the Democrats and Republicans for not doing investigations and hearings. I'm guessing, if those incidents had legs, investigations and hearings would have been conducted. Seriously, ... I remember news agencies, with the exception of Fox, doing weekly reports of all of the service members who died ... names, pictures ... how many babies they had ... if they played baseball or had sick mothers ... not done under Obama, by the way. Bush was torn apart, often rightly so. So, I'm guessing if something was there ... Bush or his people watching realtime for six hours three men on a roof holding off 60 and being blown to bits int he sixth hour, we'd have heard about it.
But, even if you and the Democrats are on to something, ...
Is that any reason not to investigate this?
Men are dead. Families are destroyed. America plays a big game when it comes to ... "Leave no man behind." True or false. I'm not naive. I'm sure this crap has happened under every administration. Some people are deemed expendable.
But, here's the thing. If I were the wife or sister or daughter or mother of one of those men, I'd damned well want to know what happened. Further, I'd expect the press to do their jobs and the government to pony up with the facts. I wouldn't expect anyone, including the American people, to say ... 11 embassies were attacked under Bush and there were no investigation, so ... etc....
Is the takeaway message ... so we won't find the truth for these men and these families either?
I wonder.... People hear that statement and think ... rock on ... damned Republicans.
But, do they follow it through to the end result.
Does that mean, then, that we do nothing to get answers regarding what happened in Benghazi? Tit for tat versus what is right rules the day....
Put in those terms, I can't imagine people wouldn't really want the facts to be aired.
Further and finally, if one has nothing to hide, why put up such a fuss about investigations and hearings? The American people elected Obama due to being fed up with politics as usual. People, especially Obama, would do well to remember that. :(
Shannon wrote: "Mary wrote: "I wonder at exactly what point in time in our history was our media unbiased?"I'm guessing it's always been an issue, depending on the time period. There was a time when it was take..."
Shannon,
Name a time period in our history and I can find a scandal or story of political corruption or even evidence of media bias.
You know why?
Because we are humans, that has not changed. I majored in history in college and beyond and I can tell you what we teach in high school is no where near "the truth." It's a watered down survey of events.
We as consumers need to take some of the blame for what goes on in our media. We do not demand better.
We are notoriously complacent and ignorant about what goes on in the world. We care more about what commercial shows at the Super Bowl than what goes on with our own soldiers. Most American, to this day, cannot locate Iran or Iraq on a map, much less Libya.. They couldn't tell the history of the last 10 years, or the world leaders involved.
So people just repeat, as fact,the talking points they hear on their news station of choice
Secondly, we demand immediate news. Well, guess what? I'd rather it takes a few hours or days to get the actual facts, than the constant speculation and ridiculous clamor for something to say to fill up the 24 hour a day news cycle these shows put out.
Please, please do not bring up men dying and families losing loved ones if you are not ready to address the loss of life we both caused and suffered in the Iraq War...You know, that war we were told we needed to wage because Hussain was responsible for 9/11,(a lie) no wait there were WMDs,(a lie) no wait, a tyrannical leader ( trrue, but a secular leader, we unleashed Al Queda in Iraq after we removed Hussain). The reason kept changing. Result? Going to war under false pretenses. Thousands of lives lost, young men maimed, scarred for life, families grieving and a heightened level of ill will towards Americans abroad.
I am under no illusion that ANY politician is inherently good. It is absolutely impossible to get elected in our country without money. To get the kind of money necessary you need to make deals with unsavory characters, promise favors and sell yourself. This last election proved that with Karl Rove's little multimillion dollar PAC. Our only hope is that what the politician does in office resembles something we want, and they still worry that people will elect someone else.
They will follow Benghazi to the end result. Which will be that it was a tragedy. Like the other 11 embassy attacks and 52 lives lost under Bush. We are still at war, although very, very few of us Americans even register Afghanistan in our daily thoughts. I'm sure it will be revealed that security should be increased in foreign consulates, but then that falls to Congress doesn't it?
How about we use all that money spent on congressional hearings to build some new roads, bridges, schools? How about hiring more social workers, mental health professionals and foster parents. How about putting our money where it does the most good and stop playing this never ending political game?
Mary wrote: "I wonder at exactly what point in time in our history was our media unbiased? Government scandal and payoffs have always existed. Anytime a business relies on commercials or viewers to make a profi..."What bugs me the most is not the Republican desperation, but the fact that they are justing picking boring 'conspiracies' or ignoring the actual parts that are serious or at least interesting in favor of their scandal of the week.
Or they are outraged...outraged, I say, over stuff that they were fine when it was a white republican doing it.
Benghazi: tragedy: yes, evil conspiracy: no.
IRS: worth looking into: yes, conspiracy as awful as anything NIxon ever did: no.
Though, if Obama was really running as many conspiracies as the right thinks he is, I'd still like the guy.
You have to be impressed with that level of multi-tasking.
Mary wrote: "address the loss of life we both caused and suffered in the Iraq War"
I did say that tops my list of wrongs done under Bush. Did I not? I know I wrote that.
How would you like me to address that? Other than say it. Would you like me to tell you I spoke out against going into Iraq at the time? I did. Would you like me to tell you I spoke out against Bush and got into some serious arguments with family members about him and about Iraq? I did. Would you like me to tell you I had a cousin who served there and hasn't been the same since? I did. Would you like me to tell you I dated a man who served there, talked marriage, and lost that relationship due to, in large part, what serving there did to him? I did.
Please don't bring up dead men in Benghazi unless I address Iraq under Bush... I did. I just did again. Iraq has caused me personal pain, Mary. Don't think for a moment that Bush and Iraq get a pass from me.
And, ... there are four dead men and destroyed families that I will talk about and ask that answers be found.
I did say that tops my list of wrongs done under Bush. Did I not? I know I wrote that.
How would you like me to address that? Other than say it. Would you like me to tell you I spoke out against going into Iraq at the time? I did. Would you like me to tell you I spoke out against Bush and got into some serious arguments with family members about him and about Iraq? I did. Would you like me to tell you I had a cousin who served there and hasn't been the same since? I did. Would you like me to tell you I dated a man who served there, talked marriage, and lost that relationship due to, in large part, what serving there did to him? I did.
Please don't bring up dead men in Benghazi unless I address Iraq under Bush... I did. I just did again. Iraq has caused me personal pain, Mary. Don't think for a moment that Bush and Iraq get a pass from me.
And, ... there are four dead men and destroyed families that I will talk about and ask that answers be found.
Wow. That's all I'm going to say.
Learn from the past, Shannon.
Just say ... wow ... go take more cough syrup, read two pages of the new Dan Brown book, and fall asleep.
Oops, did I just admit to reading the new Dan Brown book, after the horrid plot, etc... found within the pages of the last one?
Will leave it at ... wow.
Learn from the past, Shannon.
Just say ... wow ... go take more cough syrup, read two pages of the new Dan Brown book, and fall asleep.
Oops, did I just admit to reading the new Dan Brown book, after the horrid plot, etc... found within the pages of the last one?
Will leave it at ... wow.
I feel the outrage about Benghazi, at least for most politicians and public alike is driven by their hatred of the other party. I do not think any great cover up exists. I think serving abroad is a dangerous proposition.
I think our intel only goes so far and there is just no way to anticipate every potential threat.
I do not believe HilaryClinton or anyone else intentionally endangered the consulate in Libya. But,I also think the same people screaming for an investigation were silent during Bush' admin. This is a political power play disguised as righteous indignation.
We have all been touched by Iraq and Afghanistan. Members of my family served as well. I also remember how the media was pressured not to criticize the Bush admin decision to go to war. You were called unpatriotic, people lost jobs, received death threats etc if they criticized The Iraq War in the beginning. That's the difference here.
These same congressmen did not hold Bush' feet to the fire and demand answers the way they are now. That's the hypocrisy.
I do not think we want news so immediate that its wrong. The attack was chaos. Intial reports were wrong. Then any attempt to clear up the misconceptions looks like the lie. Every news outlet tries to outscoop the other for ratings, and facts are often lost.
We care about Benghazi because we're being told to care by the media. We didn't care about the other embassy attacks because we weren't told to. That's the way the American public works. Fox knows it, politicians know it.
while Science tells us where the universe come from and the origin of life , on the other hand , religion tells us how to treat your neighbor , and wich hole you suppose to "use" in marriage , sure I will choose a world with science and no religion .
Khaleel wrote: "while Science tells us where the universe come from and the origin of life , on the other hand , religion tells us how to treat your neighbor , and wich hole you suppose to "use" in marriage , sure..."So without religion you would not know how to treat your neighbour?
cerebus wrote: "Khaleel wrote: "while Science tells us where the universe come from and the origin of life , on the other hand , religion tells us how to treat your neighbor , and wich hole you suppose to "use" in..."no its not like that , dont take my words literally , I used this allegory to show that religion is really worthless :)
Khaleel wrote: "no its not like that , dont take my words literally , I used this allegory to show that religion is really worthless :)"Ah, my bad :)
cerebus wrote: "This would appear to be fairly pertinent :)"
Things change ... including people's thinking and understandings, even within religion. It rather makes sense to me.
Things change ... including people's thinking and understandings, even within religion. It rather makes sense to me.
cerebus wrote: "This would appear to be fairly pertinent :)"What do you mean? It didn't have anything to do with doughnuts.
It's funny how the word of god is flexible when it suits the religion.
Travis wrote: "It's funny how the word of god is flexible when it suits the religion. "
Maybe you should give the book Clay mentioned a shot. I've been reading it for what seems like 5,000 years, keep getting drawn off task by other books. But, it is interesting.
I'm not sure the "flexibility" comes in when it suits religion. For thousands of years, people didn't think they could truly knew "God" or understood "God" and the workings of .... The point, for many, was to explore and attempt to learn.
It seems the idea that "God" is static and the idea that the holy books are the literal word of "God" versus metaphor is a new concept. A concept promoted by many (not all) religions and many non-believers.
The idea doesn't work for some and never has worked or been the "truth" people have searched for.
A truth, by the way, that has little to do with explaining photosynthesis and/or evolution.
Maybe you should give the book Clay mentioned a shot. I've been reading it for what seems like 5,000 years, keep getting drawn off task by other books. But, it is interesting.
I'm not sure the "flexibility" comes in when it suits religion. For thousands of years, people didn't think they could truly knew "God" or understood "God" and the workings of .... The point, for many, was to explore and attempt to learn.
It seems the idea that "God" is static and the idea that the holy books are the literal word of "God" versus metaphor is a new concept. A concept promoted by many (not all) religions and many non-believers.
The idea doesn't work for some and never has worked or been the "truth" people have searched for.
A truth, by the way, that has little to do with explaining photosynthesis and/or evolution.
Would i prefer to live in a scientific or a religious way?---Well since the question itself poses a dilemma i can't provide for a very contented answer but still i would say that life build rationally and on basis of logic giving no place to superstitions and worthless or useless practices would be a blessing for it would be worth living..Religion as i have understood so far does not encourage such actions that may lead to people indulging in futile exercise that bring a great deal of downfall to culture.....It's people who go for the extensions of religious sayings to further and suit their interests...Extensive Science on other hand may provide for solutions to the queries but leaves a person without any human touch that religion provides....But still science is better path to choose Cuz rationality is what the world needs now........
We don't really need religion. I think we can without religion. But, our world needs spirituality. And there is no life without Science.
Aathira wrote: I think we can without religion. But, our world needs spirituality. And there is no life without Science. "
We can live without anything, including science.
We already are living without a lot of stuff. All the things yet to be discovered or invented; we are now living without.
I can even remember a world without mobile phones and big mac's.
.....if man did not develop beyond the stone age, we would not really need religion or science.
cHriS wrote: "Aathira wrote: I think we can without religion. But, our world needs spirituality. And there is no life without Science. "
We can live without anything, including science.
We already are living..."
Science is the basis for everything that's happening around us. Whether we know it or not. Starting from how we can walk on this earth (Action - reaction pair) or even how a small rain drop falls from the sky (The Gravitation)
And man did develop beyond the stone age.
Aathira wrote: Science is the basis for everything that's happening around us. Whether we know it or not. Starting from how we can walk on this earth (Action - reaction pair) or even how a small rain drop falls from the sky (The Gravitation)..."
No science is not. Your examples happen regardless of science, not because of it.
Aathira wrote:And man did develop beyond the stone age..
.....yes and the planet is a lot worse off because of it.
Science is such a general term, so I would have to say that I would rather live without religion.
cHriS wrote: No science is not. Your examples happen regardless of science, not because of it. "Well, science is the only way to explain all these things.
cHriS wrote: .....yes and the planet is a lot worse off because of it.
Evolution of the human species was a natural process. We were the fittest. Nature supported us. Nurtured us.
And if we are waging a war against our own mother, it will only end in our destruction.
It's high time we do something.
I'd rather live in a world without religion.
It depends on which religion are you talking about. The first instruction of my religion is "Read". Which has large meanings as : don't stay ignorant, look for the knowledge. More you study (any kind of science) more you get closer to God. Some challenges show up when discovring scientist facts in contradiction with interprations of God's book made by scholars. At that moement and unfortunately, the question to separate religion from science comes to mind instead of trying to understand divergences between both sides.So If I have to choose between religion or science in this context, it will be the same thing : each one will lead to the other.
Amal wrote: "It depends on which religion are you talking about. The first instruction of my religion is "Read". Which has large meanings as : don't stay ignorant, look for the knowledge. More you study (any ki..."read ?? lol what about Killing for 72 virgins ? also killing by reading lol ^_^ poor Islams
Aathira wrote: "Well, science is the only way to explain all these things.
Evolution of the human species was a natural process. "
I'm not the science person of the group, but .... I think there's a difference between natural processes and science. Natural processes are there and occur, regardless of humans; certain natural processes would occur even if we weren't here. Whereas, science is the study
of ... I think. The study of, for example, those natural processes.
Evolution of the human species was a natural process. "
I'm not the science person of the group, but .... I think there's a difference between natural processes and science. Natural processes are there and occur, regardless of humans; certain natural processes would occur even if we weren't here. Whereas, science is the study
of ... I think. The study of, for example, those natural processes.
Khaleel wrote: "read ?? lol what about Killing for 72 virgins ? also killing by reading lol ^_^ poor Islams "
Khaleel, ....
In America, we're told not all Muslims are radical. Not all Muslims read about and believe in killing for virgins. We're told the Muslim faith is one of peace and beauty that has been radicalized by the few.
Are you saying, by this statement, that all Muslims are radicals?
Khaleel, ....
In America, we're told not all Muslims are radical. Not all Muslims read about and believe in killing for virgins. We're told the Muslim faith is one of peace and beauty that has been radicalized by the few.
Are you saying, by this statement, that all Muslims are radicals?
Shannon wrote: "Khaleel wrote: "read ?? lol what about Killing for 72 virgins ? also killing by reading lol ^_^ poor Islams "Khaleel, ....
In America, we're told not all Muslims are radical. Not all Muslims re..." this what Qur`an said , not me , as an EX-Muslim I know every word had been written into it , and about radicals and not radicals , not all muslims are really muslims and taking the holly book as it says , exactly as in Christianity not all of them are Christians as you maye know some of them accept Evolution , if you want to take what Qur`an says seriously maybe you will do much than those radicals are doing , and if you reed history you will find out what Iam taking about :)
Khaleel wrote: "read ?? lol what about Killing for 72 virgins ? also killing by reading lol ^_^ poor Islams i>
I won't argue with you for two reasons :
1. It's not the right topic. Just a reminder here we're talking about science and religion.
2. Your message seeking provocation.
I wont choose any religion or choose science over any religion, but I would not give up on spirituality. Spirituality is above religion, its a science by itself and its a science that allows people to look beyond the trivial, to see beyond the obvious and understand that life is to cherish the existence, that life is about harmony and co-existence and understanding the meaning of your existence. If the world can embrace spirituality then we don't need to choose between angels and demons.
Very nicely stated Anupama.
Amal wrote: "Khaleel wrote: "read ?? lol what about Killing for 72 virgins ? also killing by reading lol ^_^ poor Islams i>
I won't argue with you for two reasons :
1. It's not the right topic. Just a remind..."
I am not here to argue with you , you`r Muslim and full stop , as u know the word Muslim came from the verb ( Sallama , yosallemo , Tasliman )and you have Abandoned your " Reason " the moment you said " La Ilah Ella Allah .
.
but what I hate about Muslims , that they are taking Christianity as a faked religion while Islam it self is faked more than any other doctrine in the whole world.
Enjoy your " Read " and have a nice day you Muslim :)
Khaleel wrote: "I am not here to argue nor with you , your Muslim full stop , and as u know Muslim care from the verb ( Sallama , yosallemo , Tasliman )and you have Abandoned your mind , the moment you said " La Ilah Ella Allah ."
You're not here to argue but you say Amal lost her mind when she said there is no god but Allah ... if Google gave me the right translation.
We have a saying in American.... Those are fighting words.
I'm not Muslim, but I'm guessing those words are pretty darned close to "fighting" words.
Regarding hate, ....
I'm guessing we're going to be a mess as long as we ...
Hate atheists for not believing ....
Hate Muslims for thinking Christianity is a "faked religion" ....
Hate Christians for stressing some parts of the Bible and "ignoring" others ....
Et cetera ....
Of course, we might also continue to be in a mess if people continue to be dishonest.
Something (your words) tell me you do want to provoke, to argue, and that you don't, actually, wish Amal a nice day. Though, tell me if I'm making a cultural mistake here.
In my country, we don't tend to say things like, "Have a nice day, you Muslim," or "Have a nice day, you atheist," or .... Most here would see that as disrespectful. Though, again, please feel free to tell me if that's a respectful form of address in your country.
You're not here to argue but you say Amal lost her mind when she said there is no god but Allah ... if Google gave me the right translation.
We have a saying in American.... Those are fighting words.
I'm not Muslim, but I'm guessing those words are pretty darned close to "fighting" words.
Regarding hate, ....
I'm guessing we're going to be a mess as long as we ...
Hate atheists for not believing ....
Hate Muslims for thinking Christianity is a "faked religion" ....
Hate Christians for stressing some parts of the Bible and "ignoring" others ....
Et cetera ....
Of course, we might also continue to be in a mess if people continue to be dishonest.
Something (your words) tell me you do want to provoke, to argue, and that you don't, actually, wish Amal a nice day. Though, tell me if I'm making a cultural mistake here.
In my country, we don't tend to say things like, "Have a nice day, you Muslim," or "Have a nice day, you atheist," or .... Most here would see that as disrespectful. Though, again, please feel free to tell me if that's a respectful form of address in your country.
about the translation its true . about fighting words no they are not , these words was the " Sign " that Muhammed used for people who are not Muslims to inter Islam , and it means there is not god but All ( as there was 1000000 god before Mhugammed came from " Above " ) .
your mixing between La Ilah Ella Allah , and Allho Akbar , ( Allaho Akbar ) is using these days as fighting words , as you see in Syria , A " Muslim " beheading another Muslim or whatever HUMAN and saying Allaho Akbar . ( it means Allah is Great ) -_-
about provoke , I really dont want to argue with her nor any other Muslim , form my point of view arguing is based on Knowledge firstly , secondly respect .
when it came to knowledge , Muslims read Quran , and Quran Only , if they read another book , it will be explaining Quran that mean another lies and another propaganda . ( despite ALLOWED Literature books )
.
about respect the second condition for arguing , how you argue with some one considering you as PIG or someone must be Killed for PEACE , as Quran said , Killing everybody have denied Quran verses.
.
when I said have a nice day you Muslim , yes Iam viewing disrespecting to that person when I say " you Muslim " but from Muslims point of view its honorable and Proudest I dnt know what proudest it what I have said above .
Khaleel wrote: "about the translation its true .
about fighting words no they are not , these words was the " Sign " that Muhammed used for people who are not Muslims to inter Islam , and it means there is not god but All ( as there was 1000000 god before Mhugammed came from " Above " ) .
your mixing between La Ilah Ella Allah , and Allho Akbar , ( Allaho Akbar ) is using these days as fighting words , as you see in Syria , A " Muslim " beheading another Muslim or whatever HUMAN and saying Allaho Akbar . ( it means Allah is Great ) -_-"
Ah, no....
When I said those seemed like fighting words, I didn't mean the Islamic words. I meant the words you wrote about the Islamic words and, perhaps, the belief.
To say, ... you lost your mind when you said ...
Those would be "fighting" words. Those would be words that would anger someone. Hurt them or anger them.
Given that is one of the major, if not the major, beliefs of Muslims, that there is no god but Allah, one would think your words would be meant to inflame. To tell someone they lost their mind when the said those words.
I can understand the confusion, though.
about fighting words no they are not , these words was the " Sign " that Muhammed used for people who are not Muslims to inter Islam , and it means there is not god but All ( as there was 1000000 god before Mhugammed came from " Above " ) .
your mixing between La Ilah Ella Allah , and Allho Akbar , ( Allaho Akbar ) is using these days as fighting words , as you see in Syria , A " Muslim " beheading another Muslim or whatever HUMAN and saying Allaho Akbar . ( it means Allah is Great ) -_-"
Ah, no....
When I said those seemed like fighting words, I didn't mean the Islamic words. I meant the words you wrote about the Islamic words and, perhaps, the belief.
To say, ... you lost your mind when you said ...
Those would be "fighting" words. Those would be words that would anger someone. Hurt them or anger them.
Given that is one of the major, if not the major, beliefs of Muslims, that there is no god but Allah, one would think your words would be meant to inflame. To tell someone they lost their mind when the said those words.
I can understand the confusion, though.
ah sorry ^_^I havent said " lost ur mind " as going crazy or some thing like that , I said " abandoned your reason " and I mean it , Reason as you know is the only " tool " we human have to distinguish right from wrong , true from false .
Muslim abandoning reason when they say La Ilah Ella Allah . as the Muslim doctrine demand to become a Muslim , and becoming a Muslim means that you deny everything Quran do NOT say , I dont see any contact between this doctrine and REASON , thats what I meant
for example
Quran had not said about Dinosaur , Muslims do not believe that they exist .
Quran said about Fairies , Muslim do believe that , under every human feet there is a feet of fairy -_-
Khaleel wrote: "going crazy or some thing like that , I said " abandoned your reason " and I mean it , Reason"
Okay. Got it. We tend to mean "crazy" when we say someone has lost their mind. Idioms!
Okay. Got it. We tend to mean "crazy" when we say someone has lost their mind. Idioms!
Khaleel wrote: "when it came to knowledge , Muslims read Quran , and Quran Only , if they read another book , it will be explaining Quran that mean another lies and another propaganda . ( despite ALLOWED Literature books )
.
about respect the second condition for arguing , how you argue with some one considering you as PIG or someone must be Killed for PEACE , as Quran said , Killing everybody have denied Quran verses."
I was thinking about this and wanted to come back to it.
You say Muslims only read the Quran. That is the only book they ever read, other than interpretations of the Quran.
Do you mean that is the only holy book that Muslims read? Or, do you mean it's the only book on the planet that Muslims read?
While I've heard of some Muslim schools that devote all study strictly to the Quran, I've not heard Muslims only read the Quran. Period. Would that include only the most conservative Muslims? I find it hard to believe that all Muslims read the Quran and no other book that has ever been published. For example, I'm aware that the current king of Jordan, who is a Muslim, was educated in the West. I imagine he is well read.
Are there truly no libraries in the Muslim world? Or, are their libraries only filled with the Quran and interpretations of the Quran?
In addition to this, ....
I know some people who dropped out of high school or only went to high school. Our high school in America educates students who are 14 to 18-years old, approximately. Further, these people hardly every read books.
I find some of those people to be quite bright. Smart. Frankly, I've found some to have more life experience and common sense than some educated individuals.
Do you really feel you can't have a discussion with someone who hasn't ... received the education you think they should have ... or hasn't read more books? It might be difficult to discuss some things with a layperson, for example. Difficult and/or technical things. However, I'd think one would still be able to discuss certain things and certain aspects of these difficult things.
Further, regarding respect ....
In my mind, it's important to stay true to myself. To be the person I want to be. I'm not always successful, but I try not to let the beliefs and actions of others dictate my choices. That's easier said than done. For sure.
If, for example, I felt someone just wanted to lash out at me and had no real desire to have an open and honest discussion, I'd likely disengage, not talk.
There are all sorts of levels of respect and disrespect, though. Should I not have a discussion or argue a point with a woman from South Carolina who doesn't respect Northerners? Should I not argue a point with a man who doesn't respect women? A religious person who doesn't respect me due to the fact that I don't go to church? A non-believer who doesn't respect the me given the fact that I believe in "God" and find truth in certain teachings but don't accept all teachings whole-cloth? The list could go on and on. I should think this sort of thing would rather limit our conversations.
Further, how are we ever going to move toward greater understanding and respect if we only have discussions or argue points with people who are like us? With people who read the same books and who share the same ideals?
.
about respect the second condition for arguing , how you argue with some one considering you as PIG or someone must be Killed for PEACE , as Quran said , Killing everybody have denied Quran verses."
I was thinking about this and wanted to come back to it.
You say Muslims only read the Quran. That is the only book they ever read, other than interpretations of the Quran.
Do you mean that is the only holy book that Muslims read? Or, do you mean it's the only book on the planet that Muslims read?
While I've heard of some Muslim schools that devote all study strictly to the Quran, I've not heard Muslims only read the Quran. Period. Would that include only the most conservative Muslims? I find it hard to believe that all Muslims read the Quran and no other book that has ever been published. For example, I'm aware that the current king of Jordan, who is a Muslim, was educated in the West. I imagine he is well read.
Are there truly no libraries in the Muslim world? Or, are their libraries only filled with the Quran and interpretations of the Quran?
In addition to this, ....
I know some people who dropped out of high school or only went to high school. Our high school in America educates students who are 14 to 18-years old, approximately. Further, these people hardly every read books.
I find some of those people to be quite bright. Smart. Frankly, I've found some to have more life experience and common sense than some educated individuals.
Do you really feel you can't have a discussion with someone who hasn't ... received the education you think they should have ... or hasn't read more books? It might be difficult to discuss some things with a layperson, for example. Difficult and/or technical things. However, I'd think one would still be able to discuss certain things and certain aspects of these difficult things.
Further, regarding respect ....
In my mind, it's important to stay true to myself. To be the person I want to be. I'm not always successful, but I try not to let the beliefs and actions of others dictate my choices. That's easier said than done. For sure.
If, for example, I felt someone just wanted to lash out at me and had no real desire to have an open and honest discussion, I'd likely disengage, not talk.
There are all sorts of levels of respect and disrespect, though. Should I not have a discussion or argue a point with a woman from South Carolina who doesn't respect Northerners? Should I not argue a point with a man who doesn't respect women? A religious person who doesn't respect me due to the fact that I don't go to church? A non-believer who doesn't respect the me given the fact that I believe in "God" and find truth in certain teachings but don't accept all teachings whole-cloth? The list could go on and on. I should think this sort of thing would rather limit our conversations.
Further, how are we ever going to move toward greater understanding and respect if we only have discussions or argue points with people who are like us? With people who read the same books and who share the same ideals?
you misunderstand me in both cases , reading the only book and point of respect and disrespect .well , I`ll talk about respect first , what I meant is this :
arguing and respect are correlative , you can argue with someone who strongly in contrast with you , but still respect you for one reason or another , as in political world fro example , all of political shades are like enemies to each other , but they still respect each other as I know , because what si really matter is the country they live in , not people them self , sport is another example , the also respect each other , because is just sport .
when it came to religion and specially Islam , the situation is turned upside down . and here is how
a Muslim person consider atheist people or whatever another religion as people out of Divine Guidance , or out of Providence , because they are not MUSLIMS , and God , or Allah or whatever there , had created the world for them as Quran said , the hole world is " geared " to them , and who is not Muslim should be convinced in Islam , if he do not agree with them should be killed , and people who exit Islam and Odium Allah should be killed too .
do you find any respect in what I have said ?? I dnt think so .
( to mention here , that when I say Islam I mean the book and doctrine not Muslims or people )
.
again to reading manner
as I said MUSLIM READ ONLY THE BOOK ( Quran ) AND NOTHING ELSE . heres how :
you mentioned king of Jordan as educated in the west , and our President Bashar Al-asad also educated in Britain , as alot of Muslims who reading " another book out of Quran .
but this is education , not real life , education for work and get money , and the Difference is wide .
as I aknow Britain educate Evolution in is school and consider it as a fact , and explain the origin of life as it really happened , so do you think that king of Jordan or Bashar Al-asad or whatever Muslim educated in the west accept Evolution ?? absolutely not . because Quan said , that Allah created the universe in six days , about 4000 years ago ( if Iam not wrong )
another Example
about the universe , Science and the whole educated systems talking about Big Bang , and describe the hole universe according to the Big Bang Theory , do u think that in the whole world there is a single Muslim accept the Big Bang Theory ?? absolutely not .
in other case I will show you how Muslim read only Quran .
in the world of science and updated technology , we came to new invention almost every year specially in medicine and health , when the Muslim world know about it , they say , Allah Said it in Quran before , and here where for example 10\201 the verse that say ( blah blah blah ) .
and you say how could it be ?? its a holy book for people of religion not a book of medicine and Physics and policy .. etc ..
this explanations and Interpretation that Muslim people get from books that are not Quran , or books who " Interpretation " Quran .
Imagine that a book of nearly 500 page hold the hole universe in all its science , policy , Ethics , Poetry and so on ..
hope I have succeed in delivering my Idea , specially that my language do not help me that much ^_^
and Just for joking , Imagine that Kind of Thinking in the Muslim world :
they think that the " West " have made the internet , and porn sites to make Muslim youth far from religion and Allah , alos the book that West write is aimed to decay muslim thought , and if you Checked Amal`s book , Iam Sure you will not Find a single book written by the " West " except novels or any another allowed book , and this is the case of hole muslim world :)
Khaleel wrote: "I have succeed in delivering my Idea , specially that my language do not help me that much ^_^ "
I think I understand a bit more. It is difficult to try to communicate when there is a language "barrier" ... but ... I think it's well worth the effort. Thank you for trying to explain.
Some of what you explain, .... If I'm reading it correctly, the part about Muslims feeling the world is for them and that people need to embrace Islam or be killed ....
People who say those things in America are thought to be and accused of being .... Backwoods hicks, meaning ... uneducated people who don't know what they're talking about. Mean and cruel. Hateful. They'd be accused of being closed-minded and discriminatory.
So, ... it's somewhat shocking. Either not all Muslims are so extremist or they are. Where does the truth lie?
Again, that's if I'm reading your thoughts correctly.
I think I understand a bit more. It is difficult to try to communicate when there is a language "barrier" ... but ... I think it's well worth the effort. Thank you for trying to explain.
Some of what you explain, .... If I'm reading it correctly, the part about Muslims feeling the world is for them and that people need to embrace Islam or be killed ....
People who say those things in America are thought to be and accused of being .... Backwoods hicks, meaning ... uneducated people who don't know what they're talking about. Mean and cruel. Hateful. They'd be accused of being closed-minded and discriminatory.
So, ... it's somewhat shocking. Either not all Muslims are so extremist or they are. Where does the truth lie?
Again, that's if I'm reading your thoughts correctly.
Jean wrote: "Have you ever noticed that even babies have distinct personalities? How is this explained scientifically? I ask this with no guile."Inheritance. Have you noticed how people often have a similar personality to one of their parents? Or that people of one nation/race have similar senses of humour, which is quite different to the senses of humour shown by other nations/races.
yes you are reading it correctly .here we came to the first point we argued about , not all Muslims are Muslims indeed , as you see Muslim command females to hide their faces , when you see a Muslim girl wearing Bikini on the beach you cant say shes applying Islam doctrine , even if she read quran every day and so on ..
on the other hand , there are Muslims ( radicals ) who are taking Quran as had been written 1500 years ago , as you may know , the native Isalm had been born in a desert , and had coined his doctrine according to this territory , before Islam women was wearing whats now called Hijab to prevent sand from entering their eyes , in the first place , then Quran came and said its a command from Allah you have to wear Hijab to prevent men from feeling sexual desire , and that for your " prudery " ..
in a late survey I had checked on internet , KSA was the first country world wild who visiting porn sites ,although these sites are blocked there , its a clear evidence that Islam failed as a moral system .
for not taking too much ..
Muslims who abandoned what seem incompatible with modern life , are not radical , such as Hijab , long beard , preaching for people who are not muslims to inter Isalm , Killing for peace , marry with 9 years old girl , drinking camel piss ( as muhammed was commanding , because its healthy ) .. and so on ..
on the other hand , Muslims who are doing all above , are radical and keep away from them , they are living in modern life with muhammed thought , and I dnt think you will accept what I have said about them .
here I will tell you a short story about my Gf who was Muslim ( not radical ) and became an Atheist after contacting with me .
a friend of her ( radical ) when she knew that her friend ( my gf ) becoming an Atheist , she was trying to stop here and telling her to leave me , not for her friend benefit , as she said , but to take handout in the after life , as she prevented a Muslim from leaving Islam ( for the radical girl benefit ) .
hope I could did something worthy in the end ^_^ .
it was nice to argue with you , thanx for your time :)
Khaleel,You are saying not every Muslim is a radical, correct?
I lived in KSA for 5 years and met many Muslims. I made friends with many Muslims. I have friends from Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi. Some attended mosque 5x a day, others never went. Some wore the nijab, others did not. Some we ate dinner with both men and women together, some we were separated.
I knew several European women married to Saudi men and one American woman married to a Saudi man. I have to say that each was very different in their adherence to Islam. It is the same with any religion.
Here in America you can find the orthodox in any religion as well as those who barely participate,
Of course, many people live a very strict code of Islam, but many do not.
Most Americans know very little about Islam and Muslims beyond what they see on TV. Many cannot point out Iraq on a map, or know that Iranians are not Arabs.
So let's be really clear that not all Muslims are radical.
I understand that you are no longer Muslim and want to tell others. But please be clear, as many Americans can not separate the religion from a nationality and assume every one who is Saudi, or Syrian, or Egyptian etc is also Muslim and therefore a radical.
Don’t you think it is odd that a group of people who do not believe in the existence of God should have a name for themselves that expresses their absence belief? Unless of course that absence of belief is not really an absence at all, but is a belief in it’s self.
Atheists love to compare God with a FSM, so why do we not have a name for those people who do not believe in FSMonsters?
Maybe it is just normal behaviour for an advances species to believe that they were created and look beyond what little knowledge science has in trying to refute this.
…. and maybe it is just that some of our species don’t have this ‘belief’ within them and so are not able to understand what the majority seen to comprehend. A quirk of nature.
Whether it's the FSM or god, the position one takes of not believing does not require a label or a name, anymore than not believing in Tinker Bell does not require a name.
cHriS wrote: "Don’t you think it is odd that a group of people who do not believe in the existence of God should have a name for themselves that expresses their absence belief? Unless of course that absence o..."
We are considering the evidence and saying that it's unlikely there is a god; if evidence surfaces to prove that there is one, our opinions will change. There are very few atheists who absolutely believe there is no god; most of us are somewhere in between.
It would be interesting to find out if it's normal for a species to believe in a divine creator, but unless we come across another advanced species (which is highly unlikely) we'll probably never know. I'd like to think it's a normal aspect of behavior sans scientific knowledge, since those who literally believe what holy books say have little to no understanding of science, hence why a new version of Cosmos hosted by Neil Degrasse Tyson is being broadcast on Fox.
cHriS wrote: "Don’t you think it is odd that a group of people who do not believe in the existence of God should have a name for themselves that expresses their absence belief? Unless of course that absence o..."
We invented god because we as a species developed enough to have free time.
Everything else is too busy gathering nuts and avoiding predators.
Has anyone on this thread read this:Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought
by Pascal Boyer
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Vector Calculus (other topics)The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Ray Kurzweil (other topics)Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
I don't think so, but we do have a right wing government so someone has voted for them.
Shannon wrote:....though listening to our commercials regarding what might happen if you take a certain drug are mildly horrifying. There was one of a woman planting flowers and frolicking in a field the other day. In the background, someone was saying the side effects could include blood clots, TB, and some types of lymphoma. Holy hell!
I know what you mean. I've watched US commercials like that. But apart from a cold remedy or headache pill we don't get those sort of commercials over here.