Totally. He's clearly intelligent. He writes well. He's not afraid to state that Western culture is better which of course, it is. It's better because it is capable of self-criticism and reformation over time. Sure it has ugly periods but through free speech, reflection, and debate it slowly gets things right. This is the exact opposite of what occurs in the Islamic world which tends to regress with each passing day. In a major speech just last week President Al-Sisi of Egypt called on the Islamic world to recognize and confront the extremists in it's midst. Unfortunately until people stop dodging this responsibility atrocities like those in Paris will continue.
Totally. He's clearly intelligent. He writes well. He's not afraid to state that Western culture is better which of course, it is. It's better because it is capable of self-criticism and reformation over time. Sure it has ugly periods but through free speech, reflection, and debate it slowly gets things right. This is the exact opposite of what occurs in the Islamic world which tends to regress with each passing day. In a major speech just last week President Al-Sisi of Egypt called on the Islamic world to recognize and confront the extremists in it's midst. Unfortunately until people stop dodging this responsibility atrocities like those in Paris will continue.
Excuse me, but how much do you know about the history of the Islam? Their has been many self- critical and self reflective- studies in the Islamic countries as well in the early as in later history. Surely over time their has been more of this kind of works in Islamic history than in western/ Christian civilization. History doesn't work in strait lines, not even close... Look at WW II for example, or the cold war, how much freedom of speech were allowed in these times? Much as long as you did confirmed you're Ideas as mainstream as possible. Freedom of speech, is a nice theoretical concept, but try to really have a different opinion, and tell me how free you can be... In Europe the last ten years freedom of speech has been slaved to the right to safety, in other words: Be with us or you are an enemy. If you don't agree with the majority you will be demonized. Freedom of speech is a farce.
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
A massive terrorist attack by Boko Haram in the city of Baga in northeastern Nigeria. 1500-2000 people killed, may be more but on the European news of 13.00 PM there was only information about Paris. The conclusion that can be drawn from this is simple. When you are poor, you are not worth much if you are poor and black then you're worth nothing. And this is not the first time that The news and all other media ignore major accidents and slaughters in Africa. The cause of the attack in Paris is the instability of too many countries. Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Ukraine and all the Sahara countries. An instability that we, the West have largely allowed and sometimes even caused in our endless greed. The result will be more terror attacks. It is impossible to verify. If the cracks get bigger, there will be more and more and bigger fish swim through. The only way to reverse this is a structural reform of capitalism. When we begin today terrorism will expand still for another 8 years, then it will stabilize for five years and then the decrease begins because the soil and reason disappears. I do not see this happening. I expect exactly the opposite, people will feel threatened and are simply not able to oversee the entire situation and are only able to think short-term. The result will be more support for right wing people. When those people get more influence then they already have the soil and reason will be bigger, the result will be more terror attacks. And more terror means more right wing people etc. etc. The end will be, cameras everywhere, the army and police everywhere and still no safety.
Start a thread with this as the OP. Paste links and get the info out here. We aren't CNN or fox, but it's a start.
http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/1.636240 By The Associated Press Published 17:30 09.01.15 The leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah group says Islamic extremists have insulted Islam and the Prophet Mohammed more than those who published satirical cartoons mocking the religion.
Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah did not directly mention the Paris attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead, but he said Islamic extremists who behead and slaughter people — a reference to the IS group's rampages in Iraq and Syria — have done more harm to Islam than anyone else in history.
Nasrallah spoke Friday via video link to supporters gathered in southern Beirut.
Nasrallah's Shiite group is fighting in Syria alongside President Bashar Assad.
His remarks are in stark contrast to those of Sunni militants from the IS group and Al-Qaida who have called for attacks on Western countries.
I can't say I'm surprised by how wrong most members on here got this issue. Where to begin. Firstly, these horrific and disgusting murders can only be understood within a wider but MODERN context. In other words, this is not "Islam is X" because this is all part of a recent phenomenon of "extremist" versions of Islam seeing "the West" as the enemy (though this should not undersell the fact that the overwhelming majority of victims, nearly all in fact, of these criminals are Muslims). And we can't separate it from many things: for instance, the legacy of colonialism which Westerners like to ignore because it was a nasty part of the triumph of secular rational liberalism resulting in genocides, mass transnational slavery movements, expropriation of land and resources, and so on.
One of the legacies of colonialism is being witnessed in the Middle East every day, but European countries like Britain and France, along with America, like to forget as though they ever had anything to do with it. Secondly, supporting autocratic regimes that came in the so-called post-colonial era and suppress their people there fuel this type of radical ideology. You all preach free speech in the West when it suits you (but if there were anti-Semitic cartoons, and this were 1933 I wonder what you'd all say - and if you think this is a bad comparison then tell that to the 1,000,000 dead Iraqis' families, or the 200,000 dead Syrians' families, or the thousands of families of dead Libyans, Pakistanis, Yemenis, Afghanis, Somalis, Palestinians, and other Muslims whose lives are ruined due to our policies and those of our client states of the Middle East - because to Muslims today, they do face an existential threat in many parts of the globe). And yet, when it comes to the Middle East, our client states like Egypt (whose President Sisi some genius poster above spoke about proudly, likely because he shares his Islamophobic, bigoted and tyrannical views) and Saudi Arabia completely suppress this freedom and leave little room for sensible opposition to grow.
Someone on here also talked about how the reason many Muslim preachers don't stand up to this ideology is for reasons related to power (?) or something like that -- I read so much nonsense on here it's hard to remember -- but there was a ridiculous comparison to the sex scandals related to the Catholic Church. It's something Westerners do all the time. You have a history when it comes to a Western religion, it sounds similar enough to Islam, so therefore the experience of Islam must be the same. This is simply not the case. Study Islamic history and see how tolerant Islamic empires actually were. Or read this incredibly relevant article: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/201291875937965762.html
But the reason it is difficult for Muslim institutions to stand up to this ideology is because of STATE control of these institutions, often by our very own client states like Saudi Arabia, which preach philosophies that are intolerant and fuel this type of behavior! And they have many of you eating out of the palm of their hands.
Likewise, let's not act as though freedom of speech is actually a real thing in the West. Satire is not satire when it targets the poor and the disenfranchised. Satire is meant to target the powerful. This is according to some of the most famous satirists (the quotes number many). But in France, Charlie Hebdo chose to target a poor community with vile and disgusting imagery. It's not something to be lauded. Of course, it should go without saying, their deaths are truly tragic and no one should die simply for being an intolerant and bigoted person. But no one should be celebrated for being such either. We don't have to endorse and publicly call for the sharing of these vapid images to "stand up to the terrorists". We should be joining hands with other Muslims, coming together and telling them, "Yes, we believe in the right of freedom of speech, but we also believe that with freedom comes responsibility and respect, and we respect you to not be bigoted towards you. Just because we can, does not mean we should." This is the type of behavior that would actually produce something positive, and result in a unity of principles with a respect for difference in certain beliefs, something which would surely disappoint those on both sides who seek to exploit these tragic moments for their own ideological benefit.
This includes many posters here, who cannot see the irony of trying to use this event to bolster their atheist propaganda. I'm sorry, but if you don't believe in God then that's your choice, but don't think you can be as condescending and polemic in your discourse as religious extremists and expect to be respected. Your ideological worldview is just as intolerant as theirs. The nonsense that human beings must forsake God to "progress" is bigoted and intolerant, and it adopts a strange, arrogant worldview that human beings are somehow getting better with time. I understand that because you can read this on your cell phone you think you're more brilliant than your forefathers who are buried in the ground right now, but come back to reality for a second and think of all that has been lost since that time. The environmental degradation, the exploitation of resources and of people, the development of more sophisticated ways to kill each other -- is this evidence of human progression? Just because human beings have found new ways to control people we've advanced? True human progression means being able to live with respect and tolerance, not only of one another and our varying (nonviolent and respectful) beliefs, but of our environment and planet as well.
Someone else on here also said that the reason they oppose Islam is because it (like Christianity and other religions, the poster alleges) takes the worldview that all nonbelievers are damned. I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. Your relationship to Christianity aside, Islam does not state this, and if you've done any real research -- hell, if you've just read the Quran, the one 600-page book which is the foundational text of the actual religion! -- you'd know this. The verse in the Quran where God says that "We have divided you into tribes and nations so that you may know one another" is but one example. In fact, the word used "to know" implies knowledge, implies learning, and it is through respecting the fact that God divided us FOR A REASON, a reason linked to using our intellect, that we should try to gain a greater understanding of how to deal with one another. All human beings are not meant to be Muslim, and people are not meant to be treated worse because they aren't Muslim. We could debate the intricacies of Islamic law all day -- and I'd win -- but suffice it to say that these issue is actually dealt with by Muslim philosophers, mystics, jurists, and scholars of all type in much more depth than you give it credit for.
To those who still want to go on an anti-God rant, you're free to do so. And criticism of religion is fair, and dialogue is productive, but only if it's done in a manner in which you respect the other and not condescend and disrespect their belief system. I think it's fine if you don't believe in God, and I can absolutely see why you might not. But you aren't better or smarter for doing so. Just as I'm not. Our actions speak for themselves, and these actions also consist of how we deal with one another. So far, the actions you've displayed here only seem to me to be increasing intolerance with one another, not allowing for a true pluralist worldview that does not rank those who know more based on their ideology. As for those who claim that religious belief hinders true moral action because you are only doing something "good" to supposedly prevent God's wrath, this argument is a complete fallacy -- based on Kantian philosophy of trying to rationalize morality and argue that we must doing something "good" for "goodness' sake". Everything we do is tied to self-interest. This is humanity. When you give someone a gift, you don't do it only because it makes them feel good, you do it because it makes you feel good too. But human beings are also complex, and we're all capable of understanding that. To argue that atheists are morally superior for this reason is not just arrogant, it attempts to rationalize bigotry and superiority (ironic products of the Enlightenment).
I'd like to end this insanely long post by going back to the beginning. These actions didn't happen in a vacuum. They didn't simply happen because of some cartoons. They happened because of a long history of colonialism and persecution at the hands not only of Western governments and imperialists, but Muslim rulers who were aided by them as well. The growth of radicalization can be explained through these factors. Muslims try to speak out, but we are often shouted down by "Kill the infidel Westerners!" on the one side (a much smaller side) and "Kill the terrorists!" on the other. But there are complications here. These two sides aid one another in their pursuit for power. Until we challenge this system, not only the one allowing these radical fringe gangs the ability to operate, but also the one in which Western powers exploit these countries through war and economic exploitation (along with supporting their puppet regimes that suppress the people), then this will be a natural result. We also need to condemn disgusting rhetoric (whether words or pictures) that degrade persecuted peoples. Would we be sharing a cartoon a "satirical magazine" made if it made fun of the murder of Michael Brown or any other victims of disenfranchisement? I don't think so. This rhetoric allows bigotry to spread, even subconsciously, which is also why our government's policies continue to take shape in the Muslim world. And around and around we go.
One can believe anything one wants and another has the right to say its BS. Should care less if it offends, that is on the one that feels offended, not the one that see's these beliefs as wrong. If one is so confident in ones beliefs they should be able to scoff off challenges. Picture of ones god offends, REALLY!?!? Fuck respect, makes no sense. I cannot "Respect" and I won't. Science and reason requires we change our coddling attitudes towards today's religions, all religions.
And yes humans have evolved from many gods and we will evolve from the current batch.
I don't mean to offend. I really don't but feel I have a right and feel duty to challenge status quo.
And yes all human society is responsible for what happened in France. The worlds armed forces kill for corporations under the guise of "Freedom". And world religious leaders have followers kill in name of "god".
I salute those that refuse to die for their countries/gods Boggles the mind that ones willing to give up they're existence for others. The propaganda is effective and the human mind accepting.
I do understand why especially to Muslims the image of the Prophet, is offensive, because in the Quran, all the imaging of any of gods creatures is an offensive dead unto Allah, which most Muslims honor.
Without mutual respect, it will be very difficult to come out off this stream of conflicts. Why would the Muslim community be the only one who has to respect the west, if the west doesn't have any respect for their world view? I think that is measuring with two standards, and that has never worked!
Post edited by Aafke on
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
It's an image. A freakin cartoon. We should question, strongly Just as all the crap in the Bible. Stop coddling. We need to stop being polite. We need to stand up to these fables and Dogma. Make it harder for adults to spread they're fears to the young. Break the cycle. And mutual respect between religions. Never. It's the non believers that have opportunity to actually make a difference.
Afake said; Without mutual respect, it will be very difficult to come out off this stream of conflicts. Why would the Muslim community be the only one who has to respect the west, if the west doesn't have any respect for their world view? I think that isa measuring with two standards, and that has never worked!
when a person comes to a new country it's not a good idea to protest or riot in order to change its laws or the opinions of local's customs and traditions...believe as you wish but don't force your beliefs on others or ask that they change to accomodate your beliefs, in some countries you may be beheaded for such things or just because you may not believe the same as them, they may kill you and your family.
Aafke said; Without mutual respect, it will be very difficult to come out off this stream of conflicts. Why would the Muslim community be the only one who has to respect the west, if the west doesn't have any respect for their world view? I think that is measuring with two standards, and that has never worked!
when a person comes to a new country it's not a good idea to protest or riot in order to change its laws or the opinions of local's customs and traditions...believe as you wish but don't force your beliefs on others or ask that they change to accomodate your beliefs, in some countries you may be beheaded for such things or just because you may not believe the same as them, they may kill you and your family.
Godfather.
Well this policy as worked for centuries for the West, didn't it? Even now the West does it. Look at all the wars started in the last century. The last war in Iraq started to defend the democracy, (Okay it did start for the oil, gut people where told it was for democracy). But when anyone treat the West the same way, the shit hits the fan. Measuring with two standards...
Post edited by Aafke on
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
Likewise, let's not act as though freedom of speech is actually a real thing in the West. Satire is not satire when it targets the poor and the disenfranchised. Satire is meant to target the powerful. This is according to some of the most famous satirists (the quotes number many). But in France, Charlie Hebdo chose to target a poor community with vile and disgusting imagery. It's not something to be lauded. Of course, it should go without saying, their deaths are truly tragic and no one should die simply for being an intolerant and bigoted person. But no one should be celebrated for being such either. We don't have to endorse and publicly call for the sharing of these vapid images to "stand up to the terrorists". We should be joining hands with other Muslims, coming together and telling them, "Yes, we believe in the right of freedom of speech, but we also believe that with freedom comes responsibility and respect, and we respect you to not be bigoted towards you. Just because we can, does not mean we should." This is the type of behavior that would actually produce something positive, and result in a unity of principles with a respect for difference in certain beliefs, something which would surely disappoint those on both sides who seek to exploit these tragic moments for their own ideological benefit.
This includes many posters here, who cannot see the irony of trying to use this event to bolster their atheist propaganda. I'm sorry, but if you don't believe in God then that's your choice, but don't think you can be as condescending and polemic in your discourse as religious extremists and expect to be respected. Your ideological worldview is just as intolerant as theirs. The nonsense that human beings must forsake God to "progress" is bigoted and intolerant, and it adopts a strange, arrogant worldview that human beings are somehow getting better with time. I understand that because you can read this on your cell phone you think you're more brilliant than your forefathers who are buried in the ground right now, but come back to reality for a second and think of all that has been lost since that time. The environmental degradation, the exploitation of resources and of people, the development of more sophisticated ways to kill each other -- is this evidence of human progression? Just because human beings have found new ways to control people we've advanced? True human progression means being able to live with respect and tolerance, not only of one another and our varying (nonviolent and respectful) beliefs, but of our environment and planet as well.
Someone else on here also said that the reason they oppose Islam is because it (like Christianity and other religions, the poster alleges) takes the worldview that all nonbelievers are damned. I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. Your relationship to Christianity aside, Islam does not state this, and if you've done any real research -- hell, if you've just read the Quran, the one 600-page book which is the foundational text of the actual religion! -- you'd know this. The verse in the Quran where God says that "We have divided you into tribes and nations so that you may know one another" is but one example. In fact, the word used "to know" implies knowledge, implies learning, and it is through respecting the fact that God divided us FOR A REASON, a reason linked to using our intellect, that we should try to gain a greater understanding of how to deal with one another. All human beings are not meant to be Muslim, and people are not meant to be treated worse because they aren't Muslim. We could debate the intricacies of Islamic law all day -- and I'd win -- but suffice it to say that these issue is actually dealt with by Muslim philosophers, mystics, jurists, and scholars of all type in much more depth than you give it credit for.
To those who still want to go on an anti-God rant, you're free to do so. And criticism of religion is fair, and dialogue is productive, but only if it's done in a manner in which you respect the other and not condescend and disrespect their belief system. I think it's fine if you don't believe in God, and I can absolutely see why you might not. But you aren't better or smarter for doing so. Just as I'm not. Our actions speak for themselves, and these actions also consist of how we deal with one another. So far, the actions you've displayed here only seem to me to be increasing intolerance with one another, not allowing for a true pluralist worldview that does not rank those who know more based on their ideology. As for those who claim that religious belief hinders true moral action because you are only doing something "good" to supposedly prevent God's wrath, this argument is a complete fallacy -- based on Kantian philosophy of trying to rationalize morality and argue that we must doing something "good" for "goodness' sake". Everything we do is tied to self-interest. This is humanity. When you give someone a gift, you don't do it only because it makes them feel good, you do it because it makes you feel good too. But human beings are also complex, and we're all capable of understanding that. To argue that atheists are morally superior for this reason is not just arrogant, it attempts to rationalize bigotry and superiority (ironic products of the Enlightenment).
I'd like to end this insanely long post by going back to the beginning. These actions didn't happen in a vacuum. They didn't simply happen because of some cartoons. They happened because of a long history of colonialism and persecution at the hands not only of Western governments and imperialists, but Muslim rulers who were aided by them as well. The growth of radicalization can be explained through these factors. Muslims try to speak out, but we are often shouted down by "Kill the infidel Westerners!" on the one side (a much smaller side) and "Kill the terrorists!" on the other. But there are complications here. These two sides aid one another in their pursuit for power. Until we challenge this system, not only the one allowing these radical fringe gangs the ability to operate, but also the one in which Western powers exploit these countries through war and economic exploitation (along with supporting their puppet regimes that suppress the people), then this will be a natural result. We also need to condemn disgusting rhetoric (whether words or pictures) that degrade persecuted peoples. Would we be sharing a cartoon a "satirical magazine" made if it made fun of the murder of Michael Brown or any other victims of disenfranchisement? I don't think so. This rhetoric allows bigotry to spread, even subconsciously, which is also why our government's policies continue to take shape in the Muslim world. And around and around we go.
Great post. I disagree with your thoughts on offensive satire and I am an atheist so there is also that. But a very well thought out and well written post and glad to have your opinion here on this thread.
1. We are getting smarter. It's nonsense to suggest we are not when the body of knowledge we have acquired grows every day. Our grandchildren will be smarter than us. Of course, periodically, our actions belie this fact.
2. I'm in opposition to your position on religion. I do believe in the freedom to practice one's religion. I'd also agree that intelligent quotients (you didn't quite frame it this way) are comparable between believing and non-believing factions; however, I hold the opinion that many devout religious followers are somewhat shackled through powerful imprinting. While this doesn't take anything away from their ability to work through a problem, I think it does restrict their ability to challenge the belief system they were taught.
* You also spoke to non-believers who spoke in condescending fashion to believers and while this is certainly the case... let me tell you that non-believers are subjected to strong points of view that tend to evoke an emotional response as well.
1. We are getting smarter. It's nonsense to suggest we are not when the body of knowledge we have acquired grows every day. Our grandchildren will be smarter than us. Of course, periodically, our actions belie this fact.
2. I'm in opposition to your position on religion. I do believe in the freedom to practice one's religion. I'd also agree that intelligent quotients (you didn't quite frame it this way) are comparable between believing and non-believing factions; however, I hold the opinion that many devout religious followers are somewhat shackled through powerful imprinting. While this doesn't take anything away from their ability to work through a problem, I think it does restrict their ability to challenge the belief system they were taught.
* You also spoke to non-believers who spoke in condescending fashion to believers and while this is certainly the case... let me tell you that non-believers are subjected to strong points of view that tend to evoke an emotional response as well.
To respond to your last statement Thirty Bills Unpaid, I don't believe that atheists are non- believers, they don't believe in a God, But that's also a believe, because we can't prove there is no God... This also dictates a certain perception of the world.
Post edited by Aafke on
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
1. We are getting smarter. It's nonsense to suggest we are not when the body of knowledge we have acquired grows every day. Our grandchildren will be smarter than us. Of course, periodically, our actions belie this fact.
2. I'm in opposition to your position on religion. I do believe in the freedom to practice one's religion. I'd also agree that intelligent quotients (you didn't quite frame it this way) are comparable between believing and non-believing factions; however, I hold the opinion that many devout religious followers are somewhat shackled through powerful imprinting. While this doesn't take anything away from their ability to work through a problem, I think it does restrict their ability to challenge the belief system they were taught.
* You also spoke to non-believers who spoke in condescending fashion to believers and while this is certainly the case... let me tell you that non-believers are subjected to strong points of view that tend to evoke an emotional response as well.
To respond to your last statement Thirty Bills Unpaid, I don't believe that atheists are non- believers, they don't believe in a God, But that's also a believe, because we can't prove there is no God... This also dictates a certain perception of the world.
Fuck, that was a good post and I agree with most of it but, damn, that may have been the most indignantly arrogant post I have seen on these boards. The tone suggested you think you hold a monopoly on truth, although I am sure you don't actually feel that way.
"Fuck:Someone else on here also said that the reason they oppose Islam is because it (like Christianity and other religions, the poster alleges) takes the worldview that all nonbelievers are damned. I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. Your relationship to Christianity aside, Islam does not state this, and if you've done any real research -- hell, if you've just read the Quran, the one 600-page book which is the foundational text of the actual religion! -- you'd know this."
I present exhibits A and B to counter this falsehood you presented (knowingly IMO)
"...Enough is Hell for a burning fire. Those who reject Our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire. As often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty. For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise" (4:55-56)." ...Those who deny (their Lord), for them will be cut out a garment of Fire. Over their heads will be poured out boiling water. With it will be scalded what is within their bodies, as well as (their) skins. In addition there will be maces of iron (to punish) them. Every time they wish to get away therefrom, from anguish, they will be forced back, and (it will be said), "Taste the Penalty of Burning!" (22:19-22)."
Blame can't be laid solely on one side. It is the West's fault for imperialism, and western citizens for our excessive consumerism and failure to hault government/corporate corruption which fuels the imperialism. It is also the Middle East/Middle Easterner's faults for their religious extremism and failure to hault government/church corruption.
Neither side has a valid reason to kill or die.
(Of course, lumping it all down into two sides is a major oversimplification, but y'all get what I'm gettin at)
Fuck, that was a good post and I agree with most of it but, damn, that may have been the most indignantly arrogant post I have seen on these boards. The tone suggested you think you hold a monopoly on truth, although I am sure you don't actually feel that way.
"Fuck:Someone else on here also said that the reason they oppose Islam is because it (like Christianity and other religions, the poster alleges) takes the worldview that all nonbelievers are damned. I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. Your relationship to Christianity aside, Islam does not state this, and if you've done any real research -- hell, if you've just read the Quran, the one 600-page book which is the foundational text of the actual religion! -- you'd know this."
I present exhibits A and B to counter this falsehood you presented (knowingly IMO)
"...Enough is Hell for a burning fire. Those who reject Our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire. As often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty. For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise" (4:55-56)."
...Those who deny (their Lord), for them will be cut out a garment of Fire. Over their heads will be poured out boiling water. With it will be scalded what is within their bodies, as well as (their) skins. In addition there will be maces of iron (to punish) them. Every time they wish to get away therefrom, from anguish, they will be forced back, and (it will be said), "Taste the Penalty of Burning!" (22:19-22)."
Wait a minute... you mean they're gonna pour a bunch of boiling water on my head while I wear a fire jacket?
fuck...I am the genius poster who mentioned Al-Sisi. He nor I are Islamophobic or bigoted although it might be fair to label him tyrannical. Al-Sisi is a muslim who recognizes the evil strain within Islam. You should do the same. Stop trying to dodge the problem's of the present with grievances from the past.
Satire, noun:
A way of using humor to show that someone or something is weak, foolish, or bad. Humor that shows the weaknesses or bad qualities of a person, government, or society.
Anyway, again, the over complication of the blame game here is out of control.
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
I strongly belief that almost every Religion has been used as an excuse for terrorists to act terribly. Now a day the Islam is the most heard excuse for terrorism, But let's not make the mistake to blame the Religion, just blame the people who choose to become terrorists...
By doing so, you'll give the terrorists exactly what they try to accomplice. You will play along in their defied and concur strategy. By blaming the religion, you create more fear, and more hatred for people believing this religion, and therefore alienate them from society. Isolate them even further. So when you do so, don't be surprised if even more young Muslims, will join those terrorists, when they get spit out by society for acts they had nothing do do with...
Post edited by Aafke on
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
Comments
Excuse me, but how much do you know about the history of the Islam? Their has been many self- critical and self reflective- studies in the Islamic countries as well in the early as in later history. Surely over time their has been more of this kind of works in Islamic history than in western/ Christian civilization. History doesn't work in strait lines, not even close... Look at WW II for example, or the cold war, how much freedom of speech were allowed in these times? Much as long as you did confirmed you're Ideas as mainstream as possible. Freedom of speech, is a nice theoretical concept, but try to really have a different opinion, and tell me how free you can be... In Europe the last ten years freedom of speech has been slaved to the right to safety, in other words: Be with us or you are an enemy. If you don't agree with the majority you will be demonized. Freedom of speech is a farce.
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
Sometimes I wonder if shit is made up or not.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/world/africa/suicide-bomber-hits-maiduguri-nigeria-market.html
pretty damn close. But much more diplomatic than I care to be.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Start a thread with this as the OP. Paste links and get the info out here. We aren't CNN or fox, but it's a start.
- Al Swearengen
http://www.cantstoptheserenity.com
http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/1.636240
By The Associated Press
Published 17:30 09.01.15
The leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah group says Islamic extremists have insulted Islam and the Prophet Mohammed more than those who published satirical cartoons mocking the religion.
Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah did not directly mention the Paris attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead, but he said Islamic extremists who behead and slaughter people — a reference to the IS group's rampages in Iraq and Syria — have done more harm to Islam than anyone else in history.
Nasrallah spoke Friday via video link to supporters gathered in southern Beirut.
Nasrallah's Shiite group is fighting in Syria alongside President Bashar Assad.
His remarks are in stark contrast to those of Sunni militants from the IS group and Al-Qaida who have called for attacks on Western countries.
One of the legacies of colonialism is being witnessed in the Middle East every day, but European countries like Britain and France, along with America, like to forget as though they ever had anything to do with it. Secondly, supporting autocratic regimes that came in the so-called post-colonial era and suppress their people there fuel this type of radical ideology. You all preach free speech in the West when it suits you (but if there were anti-Semitic cartoons, and this were 1933 I wonder what you'd all say - and if you think this is a bad comparison then tell that to the 1,000,000 dead Iraqis' families, or the 200,000 dead Syrians' families, or the thousands of families of dead Libyans, Pakistanis, Yemenis, Afghanis, Somalis, Palestinians, and other Muslims whose lives are ruined due to our policies and those of our client states of the Middle East - because to Muslims today, they do face an existential threat in many parts of the globe). And yet, when it comes to the Middle East, our client states like Egypt (whose President Sisi some genius poster above spoke about proudly, likely because he shares his Islamophobic, bigoted and tyrannical views) and Saudi Arabia completely suppress this freedom and leave little room for sensible opposition to grow.
Someone on here also talked about how the reason many Muslim preachers don't stand up to this ideology is for reasons related to power (?) or something like that -- I read so much nonsense on here it's hard to remember -- but there was a ridiculous comparison to the sex scandals related to the Catholic Church. It's something Westerners do all the time. You have a history when it comes to a Western religion, it sounds similar enough to Islam, so therefore the experience of Islam must be the same. This is simply not the case. Study Islamic history and see how tolerant Islamic empires actually were. Or read this incredibly relevant article: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/201291875937965762.html
But the reason it is difficult for Muslim institutions to stand up to this ideology is because of STATE control of these institutions, often by our very own client states like Saudi Arabia, which preach philosophies that are intolerant and fuel this type of behavior! And they have many of you eating out of the palm of their hands.
CONTINUED:
Likewise, let's not act as though freedom of speech is actually a real thing in the West. Satire is not satire when it targets the poor and the disenfranchised. Satire is meant to target the powerful. This is according to some of the most famous satirists (the quotes number many). But in France, Charlie Hebdo chose to target a poor community with vile and disgusting imagery. It's not something to be lauded. Of course, it should go without saying, their deaths are truly tragic and no one should die simply for being an intolerant and bigoted person. But no one should be celebrated for being such either. We don't have to endorse and publicly call for the sharing of these vapid images to "stand up to the terrorists". We should be joining hands with other Muslims, coming together and telling them, "Yes, we believe in the right of freedom of speech, but we also believe that with freedom comes responsibility and respect, and we respect you to not be bigoted towards you. Just because we can, does not mean we should." This is the type of behavior that would actually produce something positive, and result in a unity of principles with a respect for difference in certain beliefs, something which would surely disappoint those on both sides who seek to exploit these tragic moments for their own ideological benefit.
This includes many posters here, who cannot see the irony of trying to use this event to bolster their atheist propaganda. I'm sorry, but if you don't believe in God then that's your choice, but don't think you can be as condescending and polemic in your discourse as religious extremists and expect to be respected. Your ideological worldview is just as intolerant as theirs. The nonsense that human beings must forsake God to "progress" is bigoted and intolerant, and it adopts a strange, arrogant worldview that human beings are somehow getting better with time. I understand that because you can read this on your cell phone you think you're more brilliant than your forefathers who are buried in the ground right now, but come back to reality for a second and think of all that has been lost since that time. The environmental degradation, the exploitation of resources and of people, the development of more sophisticated ways to kill each other -- is this evidence of human progression? Just because human beings have found new ways to control people we've advanced? True human progression means being able to live with respect and tolerance, not only of one another and our varying (nonviolent and respectful) beliefs, but of our environment and planet as well.
Someone else on here also said that the reason they oppose Islam is because it (like Christianity and other religions, the poster alleges) takes the worldview that all nonbelievers are damned. I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. Your relationship to Christianity aside, Islam does not state this, and if you've done any real research -- hell, if you've just read the Quran, the one 600-page book which is the foundational text of the actual religion! -- you'd know this. The verse in the Quran where God says that "We have divided you into tribes and nations so that you may know one another" is but one example. In fact, the word used "to know" implies knowledge, implies learning, and it is through respecting the fact that God divided us FOR A REASON, a reason linked to using our intellect, that we should try to gain a greater understanding of how to deal with one another. All human beings are not meant to be Muslim, and people are not meant to be treated worse because they aren't Muslim. We could debate the intricacies of Islamic law all day -- and I'd win -- but suffice it to say that these issue is actually dealt with by Muslim philosophers, mystics, jurists, and scholars of all type in much more depth than you give it credit for.
To those who still want to go on an anti-God rant, you're free to do so. And criticism of religion is fair, and dialogue is productive, but only if it's done in a manner in which you respect the other and not condescend and disrespect their belief system. I think it's fine if you don't believe in God, and I can absolutely see why you might not. But you aren't better or smarter for doing so. Just as I'm not. Our actions speak for themselves, and these actions also consist of how we deal with one another. So far, the actions you've displayed here only seem to me to be increasing intolerance with one another, not allowing for a true pluralist worldview that does not rank those who know more based on their ideology. As for those who claim that religious belief hinders true moral action because you are only doing something "good" to supposedly prevent God's wrath, this argument is a complete fallacy -- based on Kantian philosophy of trying to rationalize morality and argue that we must doing something "good" for "goodness' sake". Everything we do is tied to self-interest. This is humanity. When you give someone a gift, you don't do it only because it makes them feel good, you do it because it makes you feel good too. But human beings are also complex, and we're all capable of understanding that. To argue that atheists are morally superior for this reason is not just arrogant, it attempts to rationalize bigotry and superiority (ironic products of the Enlightenment).
I'd like to end this insanely long post by going back to the beginning. These actions didn't happen in a vacuum. They didn't simply happen because of some cartoons. They happened because of a long history of colonialism and persecution at the hands not only of Western governments and imperialists, but Muslim rulers who were aided by them as well. The growth of radicalization can be explained through these factors. Muslims try to speak out, but we are often shouted down by "Kill the infidel Westerners!" on the one side (a much smaller side) and "Kill the terrorists!" on the other. But there are complications here. These two sides aid one another in their pursuit for power. Until we challenge this system, not only the one allowing these radical fringe gangs the ability to operate, but also the one in which Western powers exploit these countries through war and economic exploitation (along with supporting their puppet regimes that suppress the people), then this will be a natural result. We also need to condemn disgusting rhetoric (whether words or pictures) that degrade persecuted peoples. Would we be sharing a cartoon a "satirical magazine" made if it made fun of the murder of Michael Brown or any other victims of disenfranchisement? I don't think so. This rhetoric allows bigotry to spread, even subconsciously, which is also why our government's policies continue to take shape in the Muslim world. And around and around we go.
And yes humans have evolved from many gods and we will evolve from the current batch.
I don't mean to offend. I really don't but feel I have a right and feel duty to challenge status quo.
Without mutual respect, it will be very difficult to come out off this stream of conflicts. Why would the Muslim community be the only one who has to respect the west, if the west doesn't have any respect for their world view? I think that is measuring with two standards, and that has never worked!
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
And mutual respect between religions. Never. It's the non believers that have opportunity to actually make a difference.
when a person comes to a new country it's not a good idea to protest or riot in order to change its laws or the opinions of local's customs and traditions...believe as you wish but don't force your beliefs on others or ask that they change to accomodate your beliefs, in some countries you may be beheaded for such things or just because you may not believe the same as them, they may kill you and your family.
Godfather.
We sure as heck didn't take up the Native American ways.
The Callen.
Well this policy as worked for centuries for the West, didn't it? Even now the West does it. Look at all the wars started in the last century. The last war in Iraq started to defend the democracy, (Okay it did start for the oil, gut people where told it was for democracy). But when anyone treat the West the same way, the shit hits the fan. Measuring with two standards...
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
Great post. I disagree with your thoughts on offensive satire and I am an atheist so there is also that. But a very well thought out and well written post and glad to have your opinion here on this thread.
Another excellent post.
I'd respectfully disagree with you on two points:
1. We are getting smarter. It's nonsense to suggest we are not when the body of knowledge we have acquired grows every day. Our grandchildren will be smarter than us. Of course, periodically, our actions belie this fact.
2. I'm in opposition to your position on religion. I do believe in the freedom to practice one's religion. I'd also agree that intelligent quotients (you didn't quite frame it this way) are comparable between believing and non-believing factions; however, I hold the opinion that many devout religious followers are somewhat shackled through powerful imprinting. While this doesn't take anything away from their ability to work through a problem, I think it does restrict their ability to challenge the belief system they were taught.
* You also spoke to non-believers who spoke in condescending fashion to believers and while this is certainly the case... let me tell you that non-believers are subjected to strong points of view that tend to evoke an emotional response as well.
To respond to your last statement Thirty Bills Unpaid, I don't believe that atheists are non- believers, they don't believe in a God, But that's also a believe, because we can't prove there is no God... This also dictates a certain perception of the world.
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
The evidence is pretty damning.
"Fuck:Someone else on here also said that the reason they oppose Islam is because it (like Christianity and other religions, the poster alleges) takes the worldview that all nonbelievers are damned. I'm sorry, but this is simply not true. Your relationship to Christianity aside, Islam does not state this, and if you've done any real research -- hell, if you've just read the Quran, the one 600-page book which is the foundational text of the actual religion! -- you'd know this."
I present exhibits A and B to counter this falsehood you presented (knowingly IMO)
"...Enough is Hell for a burning fire. Those who reject Our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire. As often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty. For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise" (4:55-56)."
...Those who deny (their Lord), for them will be cut out a garment of Fire. Over their heads will be poured out boiling water. With it will be scalded what is within their bodies, as well as (their) skins. In addition there will be maces of iron (to punish) them. Every time they wish to get away therefrom, from anguish, they will be forced back, and (it will be said), "Taste the Penalty of Burning!" (22:19-22)."
Neither side has a valid reason to kill or die.
(Of course, lumping it all down into two sides is a major oversimplification, but y'all get what I'm gettin at)
Wait a minute... you mean they're gonna pour a bunch of boiling water on my head while I wear a fire jacket?
Change my mind: I believe.
A way of using humor to show that someone or something is weak, foolish, or bad. Humor that shows the weaknesses or bad qualities of a person, government, or society.
Anyway, again, the over complication of the blame game here is out of control.
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee
By doing so, you'll give the terrorists exactly what they try to accomplice. You will play along in their defied and concur strategy. By blaming the religion, you create more fear, and more hatred for people believing this religion, and therefore alienate them from society. Isolate them even further. So when you do so, don't be surprised if even more young Muslims, will join those terrorists, when they get spit out by society for acts they had nothing do do with...
"The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed".- Carl Jung.
"Art does not reproduce what we see; rather, it makes us see."- Paul Klee