Buriram Expats
Buriram Province - General Category => International News clippings => Topic started by: TBWG on February 01, 2011, 09:28:19 PM
-
A GERMAN'S VIEW OF ISLAM.... icon_must
This is by far the best explanation of the Muslim terrorist situation I have ever read. The references to past history are accurate and clear. Not long, easy to understand, and well worth the read. The author of this Dr. Emanuel Tanya, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist.
A German's View on Islam
A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. 'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'
We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectre of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.
The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.
The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous.
Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.
And who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:
Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts--the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious , is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, before it's too late.
TBWG sawadi
-
I will jump on this opportunity and give my 2 cents.. moneysmile
In the middle east like in the middle east, rules and philosophy of the middle east does not apply and irrelevant to Europe geographic and demographic structure for so many reasons the forum maybe shouldn't be the place to discuss about it (or maybe yes).
Anyway, some people might think that just because they watched BBC or AL GAZEERA they know it all and got it all right. mhihi
icon_latest YOU DONT.
Ignorance, lack of knowledge and stereotypes are your biggest enemy.
-
So what's your take on the Middle east and the March Of A Million In Cairo,Admin ,please inform us mhihi
-
So what's your take on the Middle east and the March Of A Million In Cairo,Admin ,please inform us mhihi
I didn't talked about Egypt but the whole Middle East region.
As for Egypt, time will tell. If Mubarak is a smart leader he will do the right thing to maintain his leadership and get his people trust again in a belief he will do some serious reforms in the country and economy because life there is just too hard for so many people.
Too many poor people and as we all know that is the source of most problems in the world, make people happy(money) and they will live in peace, if they have to fight every day for their bread you get very frustrated people and violence built up very quickly in this region and not only!
I am happy to see the Egyptians are fighting for their freedom and hope they will get it as it is their basic rights as human being and citizens.
sawadi
-
Just a thought!
Most Muslims are not terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim.
-
Just a thought!
Most Muslims are not terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim.
That would depend on your definition of a terrorist.
One man's terrorist is another man freedom fighter (or in this case defender of the faith)
For example, we had this discussion before re: Jerry Adams
-
One point I think should be made on the original post, is that one half of the historical examples Germany, China, Japan, Russia, etc., all relate to a political fanatism, that gained power in that country abandoned democracy to ensure they stayed in charge and then abused power.
The other half of the historic examples such as Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia and even Northern Ireland were all subdued ethnic conflicts that bubbled to the surface when one faction exerted power over the other, then the conflicts exploded.
The issue of the conflict between Islamic fundamentalists and Western society is different to any of the above examples, In that even if you can't criticise a philosphy Like Nazism or communism from within the country. Other Western countries could and did criticise those regimes and stand up to them from outside.
The ethic troubles could at least be contained (UN, etc.) by outside forces.
So my point is that the 'Targets' of the Muslim fanatic's aggression are Western countries. But these Western countries have maintained policies of not criticising any religion (especially Islam). So the fanatics can hide behind these policies that are only there to protect ordinary practicing Muslims.
So .... How do you stand up to Muslim Fanatics, without standing up against Islam and then insulting all the other muslims ?
and since no one is seen as Neutral in this conflict, there are no mutually accepted peacekeepers and anyway no clear boundaries, this is world wide. The Original post suggests to me that the ordinary people should have stopped their fanatics from within their own ranks (germans stop the rise of the Nazi, etc). So how do you make Muslims stop their own fanatics ? The only way would be to take away the reasons that ordinary muslims turn to or support fanatics. And while Western contries are meddling in the affairs of Muslim countries (backing preferred leaders (Pakistan/Egypt,etc.), or countries (Israel), invading to protect oil, etc.) then young muslims will still look skyward for guidance only to see older verions of themselves spreading hate from alters and offering revenge and a route to control some part of their own destiny.
End of Sermon.
-
Just a thought!
Most Muslims are not terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim.
Before going off and spouting such ignorant statements, one needs to understand how the world really works and real history.
-
Paddyram...fully agree with your comments thumbup
-
Paddyram...fully agree with your comments thumbup
Thanks sawadi
-
Paddyram...fully agree with your comments thumbup
Might be a smidgen suspicious as to his heavy Eurocentric model. Real historiography examinations might take you elsewhere.... tired1
-
Paddyram...fully agree with your comments thumbup
Might be a smidgen suspicious as to his heavy Eurocentric model. Real historiography examinations might take you elsewhere.... tired1
Eurocentric ? ... fair point, but you write about what you know, don't ya.
But what exactly would make you suspicious ?
There is no point in commenting on 'Real History' and then Nodding off tired1 when someone discusses real history. But please give me the non-eurocentric view-point. I'm always eager to see new points of view.
Just a thought!
Most Muslims are not terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim.
Before going off and spouting such ignorant statements, one needs to understand how the world really works and real history.
You threw the word 'ignorant' out there pretty quickly, in fairness he did say 'just a thought'. Perhaps you might help one understand ?
-
Take no notice, Paddyram. "Historiography examinations" gives him away (what are they, anyway?).
-
giggle
-
Blindness is a virtue.... mhihi whistle
-
Blindness is a virtue.... mhihi whistle
It is very easy to put someone down by trying to sound all high-brow intellectual and aloof, when you don't bother explaining yourself.
Just like a stock answer used by those religious fanatics we were discussing, when they can't make a reasonable argument .. the old reliable: 'you just don't get it, you can't possibly understand'.
-
If you don't see Islam is a totall regime I have to agree to Redrover, you're blind. screwy
-
Islam as a religion has many different sects and sub-cultures. It is only that the hardline element are more vocal and contraversial and thats why they get on the TV. Most of us, don't get to see the moderate muslims that go about their lives in countries the world over. Turkey for example is a moderate muslim country and it is an example of a more progressive route muslim countries could take. Not every muslim country enforces Sharia law. Many leaders in Muslim coutries such as Iran cherry pick the strictist texts from the Koran and then use Islam as tool to enforce their view of how a coutry should run. But that is more to do with the leaders than the religion. And there is no one head of the muslim faith, so I don't think ALL of Islam as a whole can be neatly labelled as a regime.
But then since I am an atheist, I think all religions are redundant and cause more throuble than good.
But i'm not saying that the world is all rosey and we have nothing to worry about. We should all be worried about the extremist in all religions, far right-wing Christians included.
-
Too right paddy,most people should be more worried about the right wing nutters in the US of A's southern Bible belt ( they're a weird old mob )than the average moderate Islam countries. I too am a Atheist too but I also believe in freedom for people to choose how they want to run their lives as longs as their beliefs don't become extreme and affect those around them !!
-
Yeah you're right Boloa, I should worry more about hillbillies shooting bullits in the air than religous people flying planes in to a building, thanx for the advice. And I don't trust Atheist eighter, they say they have the wisdom of knowing God doesn't exist, is just as bad as people that say he does, I always say I just don't know and better, I don't care. party16
-
Yeah you're right Boloa, I should worry more about hillbillies shooting bullits in the air than religous people flying planes in to a building, thanx for the advice. And I don't trust Atheist eighter, they say they have the wisdom of knowing God doesn't exist, is just as bad as people that say he does, I always say I just don't know and better, I don't care. party16
Truer words have never been repeated.
-
Yeah you're right Boloa, I should worry more about hillbillies shooting bullits in the air than religous people flying planes in to a building, thanx for the advice. And I don't trust Atheist eighter, they say they have the wisdom of knowing God doesn't exist, is just as bad as people that say he does, I always say I just don't know and better, I don't care. party16
Truer words have never been repeated.
How do you know it was Muslims that crashed those plain into those buildings ,there are lots of 9/11 Conspiracy theories out there .
Download this one night and watch it and we will talk again :-)
Loose Change 2nd Edition (Full) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yx9NRX37SM#)
-
A few more to watch while you at it Den Buut..:-)
Reflections And Warnings - An Interview With Aaron Russo {Full Film} (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGAaPjqdbgQ#)
America:Freedom to Fascism(Full) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NpTVXitOQk#)
EndGame HQ full length version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho#ws)
-
Yeah you're right Boloa, I should worry more about hillbillies shooting bullits in the air than religious people flying planes in to a building, thanx for the advice. And I don't trust Atheist eighter, they say they have the wisdom of knowing God doesn't exist, is just as bad as people that say he does, I always say I just don't know and better, I don't care. party16
Truer words have never been repeated.
How do you know it was Muslims that crashed those plain into those buildings ,there are lots of 9/11 Conspiracy theories out there .
Download this one night and watch it and we will talk again :-)
Loose Change 2nd Edition (Full) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yx9NRX37SM#)
Come on. Don't start with these stupid conspiracy theories.
All of these above were made by extremely bored people with too much spare time. loco
-
Come on. Don't start with these stupid conspiracy theories.
All of these above were made by extremely bored people with too much spare time. loco
Aaron Russo had blader cancer when he was making on some of those, yes sure he had better thing to do but I guess he felt he owed it the world that they should know who he felt about these things!!!!
-
The remark about the conspiracy makes this discussion come to an end, like to discuss with serious people, not paranoia ones. nono
-
The remark about the conspiracy makes this discussion come to an end, like to discuss with serious people, not paranoia ones. nono
Not paranoia,I have an open mind.You was the one that brought up Muslims flying into builds ,I was just pointing out there are other options and views.Also I wasn't talking about a few hill-billies ,I was talking about mass brainwashing ,were kids are taught the world was made in 7 days and dinosaurs are just a mass hoax.These Christian extremist are as dangerous as any Muslim ones :wacko: loco
-
Other options and views looks like paranoia to me and I don't see these dangerous Cristians flying into buildings and blow up busses in London or metros in Madrid, only celebrating muslims in the Netherlands when it happened. But you're an Atheist so you got the wisdom of knowing.
-
...remembering that the greatest genocidal periods in mankind's history were spurred on by Occidental makings and "civilisation. whistle
-
Genocide was always spurred by total regimes, like Islam is today. Turkey by the way isn't a good example, Erdogan says his religion is the weapon ton the West.
You have an open mind you say, do you know what sign is hanging above the mainroad to Mekka?
Try to find that out too and you know how openminded Islam is.
-
...remembering that the greatest genocidal periods in mankind's history were spurred on by Occidental makings and "civilisation. whistle
The holocost, The Crusades, South America, yep there are loads of examples. We sure have come a long way from Monkeys, ain't civilisation grand.
-
Genocide was always spurred by total regimes, like Islam is today. Turkey by the way isn't a good example, Erdogan says his religion is the weapon ton the West.
You have an open mind you say, do you know what sign is hanging above the mainroad to Mekka?
Try to find that out too and you know how openminded Islam is.
I brought up Turkey as an example of a moderate muslim country that allows many more freedoms than other muslim dominated nations. No sharia law, it has women involved in business, in politics, education, etc. that sort of thing. If you go back too far in any nations history you will find graves. In Turkeys case it would be thousands of slaughtered Albanians. I was using Turkey as an example of progress showing that Muslim countries can move towards a secular state no matter what the dominant religion is.
But again we end up discussing the extremist Muslims, not the moderates. Islam isn't open minded, neither is Christianity, in fact no religion can be called openminded it would be self-defeating if it was, It is down to people to be open-minded, organised religions can't be open by their very nature. And atheism would be the same. Any faith, even if it is the faith that there is no faith (atheists) is closed-minded. Perhaps that definition of atheist doesnt suit me personally, lets just say i am open minded and open to persuasion if anyone can make a good enough argument.
-
Just checking .. Would you all agree that extremist in any faith are dangerous ?
-
Just checking .. Would you all agree that extremist in any faith are dangerous ?
One could even extend such dangerous extremities to political ideology. Systems of establishment are one and the same.
-
Just checking .. Would you all agree that extremist in any faith are dangerous ?
Generalisations are always dangerous, and nearly always untrue (except this one, of course). Islamic extremists are more dangerous than the Bible belt nutters for two basic reasons: (1) they have connections on a worldwide basis, whereas the nutters are localised, and (2) they go for random targets, aiming to kill apparently almost for the sake of killing, whereas the nutters are usually more dangerous to themselves (e.g. Jonestown).
The only political system, if you can call it a system, which went in for random killing was Anarchy (I believe it was an anarchist who killed the Archduke in Sarajevo, sparking off World War I).
-
These {Christian} heartland nutters/extremist that you speak of are really not that isolated nor a cliquey mentality. Such a testament of this thought process is widely accept throughout the halls of government - all branches. Been like that for a good century. Wonder why the American government, in one covert/overt form or another has chosen to mingle in affairs worldwide where it doesn't belong. Rest assured gents, continued the American intervention into every affair is quite comparatively akin to any such invented {and growing} and fabricated Islamic "threat". Think, gentlemen. The repeated story has been played for you over and again - most can't see it. Very simple and logical propaganda and social engineering techniques are in display here - very Eurocentric/culturally-centric techniques. We seem to have been misguided and misdirected as to whom the "real" boogieman might be through contemporary history.
-
I thought the discussion was about extremism?
American intervention (hardly Eurocentric) is certainly not extremism; it may be power politics, but that's not quite the same thing. It is also not terrorism, where the discussion started.
Keep to the point if you can, Redrover.
-
Just checking .. Would you all agree that extremist in any faith are dangerous ?
One could even extend such dangerous extremities to political ideology. Systems of establishment are one and the same.
True, I'll agree with that.
-
Would this (apparent) consensus among us that extremism is dangerous then lead us to a conclusion that to progress civilisation should move towards more moderate liberal centre-based ideologies. But wouldn't that lead to stagnation and then again foster an atmosphere ripe for a new extremism to evolve. Maybe the rise of extremism (the current rise of violent fundamentalist islam included) is inevitable and recurrent, and in a few decades our children will be having these same arguments about some other 'great evil' rising somewhere in the world. Depressing isn't it ?
-
Just checking .. Would you all agree that extremist in any faith are dangerous ?
I would agree, Furthermore since all faiths have the possibility of turning extremist, better to do without in the first place!
Similarities exist with smoking, drinking and drugs!
-
Just checking .. Would you all agree that extremist in any faith are dangerous ?
I would agree, Furthermore since all faiths have the possibility of turning extremist, better to do without in the first place!
Similarities exist with smoking, drinking and drugs!
Yes, true of course, but then wouldn't life be dull. Or maybe it was supposed to be so .. ? There is always the argument that all those things: drink, drugs, etc, are all easy diversions from the more difficult of task using the most amazing thing on the planet the human brain, which also relates to the fact that I think we secretly all long to join a herd metality (leading in extreme circumstances to extremism). Don't get me wrong I enjoy nothing better after a tuff weeks work than a bottle of wine and very occasionally a few jays to 'turn-off' and shut down for a while.
I wouldn't claim to have the answers but I think honestly debating the questions is a good start.
As regards 'faiths' in general, my own humble opinion would be from the days of primative peoples staring at the stars, we needed an explanation of the bigger picture and the big questions, mainly the afterlife and what happens to you after you're dead. At the moment I am taking great solice in the Buddhist belief that we (our energy/soul/spirit/whatever) comes back again in some form, devoid of our past hang-ups/ego in an effort to aim at progression of some sort. I don't claim to understand it but I think it best fits my overactive cynical mind at the moment.
So I would summarise by saying extremism is attractive to the unengaged mind of a supressed/resentful/persecuted person. And unfortunately there is no shortage of them in the world.
It is fundamental Islam now, it was communism before, facism before that and it will be something else next time ...
-
You're fully wrong there, with smoking, drinking and drugs you have freedom of choice, in religious countries you haven't.
Not only the extremists in religious are dangerous, religion itself is dangerous as it's used to control people, not let them think for themselfs.
-
Don't get me wrong I enjoy nothing better after a tuff weeks work than a bottle of wine and very occasionally a few jays to 'turn-off' and shut down for a while..............................At the moment I am taking great solice in the Buddhist belief that we (our energy/soul/spirit/whatever) comes back again in some form, devoid of our past hang-ups/ego in an effort to aim at progression of some sort.
Do you ever fell our universe could be a speck of dirt under a giants fingernail ............man thumbup
-
Can we end this discussion?
I think we had enough of it until the next decade.
sawadi
-
Can we end this discussion?
I think we had enough of it until the next decade.
sawadi
Its all in good fun, and there is no possibility of anyone of us getting it right anyway
-
You're fully wrong there, with smoking, drinking and drugs you have freedom of choice, in religious countries you haven't.
Not only the extremists in religious are dangerous, religion itself is dangerous as it's used to control people, not let them think for themselfs.
I actualy agree with that comment
-
Can we end this discussion?
I think we had enough of it until the next decade.
sawadi
Its all in good fun, and there is no possibility of anyone of us getting it right anyway
You're confident towards the assumption that but a few might get it right?
-
Can we end this discussion?
I think we had enough of it until the next decade.
sawadi
You're the boss but why spoil a good discussion? Some of us believe,some not, some have faiths automatically given to us at birth, others decide to acquire or rid themselves of religious beliefs.
Please keep the thread going ADMIN, at least whilst it remains friendly and tolerant.
Best subscribed thread since the katoey air hostesses.. And I don't believe we have had any input from Nookie yet!!!
Close it and we will all be back posting on other forums!
-
ok ok.. if thats how you like it Prakhonchai Nick. hahaha
sawadi
-
Can we end this discussion?
I think we had enough of it until the next decade.
sawadi
You're the boss but why spoil a good discussion? Some of us believe,some not, some have faiths automatically given to us at birth, others decide to acquire or rid themselves of religious beliefs.
Please keep the thread going ADMIN, at least whilst it remains friendly and tolerant.
Best subscribed thread since the katoey air hostesses.. And I don't believe we have had any input from Nookie yet!!!
Close it and we will all be back posting on other forums!
Nice bit of blackmail, Nick!
But yes, I agree with you "so long as it remains friendly and tolerant".
-
Think the discussion is nice and friendly, let it go on.One question,is she muslim? kamoybeer
-
Think the discussion is nice and friendly, let it go on.One question,is she muslim? kamoybeer
"Is she Muslim?" Hmmm. Have I missed something? Who? Perhaps all will become clear in the morning.
-
Can we end this discussion?
I think we had enough of it until the next decade.
sawadi
Its all in good fun, and there is no possibility of anyone of us getting it right anyway
You're confident towards the assumption that but a few might get it right?
No, I wouldn't be that elitist. I just think none of us can get it right. I think very few people in history have ever got it right, people make them profits or follow their words as an ideology and then extremist follow it by the letter to the extreme. it almost like some people evolve to a better/higher level of understanding of the human condition but when they do the rest of us are some are so far behind we struggle to grasp the idea and focus on the literal meaning of the words (reproduced, mistranslated AND moulded words). Jesus and Buddha would be good examples of that, I don't think they ever wanted statues of themselves being worshipped.
-
Whilst I haven't contributed to this thread, I just wanted to add my support to the decision to keep it going. It is a subject worthy of debate as long as everything can be kept civil.
There have been issues of censorship on other forums and I see no need for a heavy hand here - a watchful eye, perhaps :)
-
I was just suggesting it.
After all, as always guys, Its YOUR choice! wildman
I also think its a very important but personal issue some may relate it to education or habits or even logics, as we all know any religion have its own logic to prove it is the right way.
I think god is inside each person of us and I like to see it in a conceptional spiritual way but not practically following the rules of the religion because I think it got too many translations and transformations which changed it to a totally different thing from what it was at first, I think any belief should make reformations to match with today's world and the extremists you are talking about are refusing to accept this simple truth and are losing many people along the way....
sawadi
-
There are also those who do not believe in ANYTHING.
That may be a life-long view or, a result of their faith being challenged/destroyed by a particular event.
-
There are also those who do not believe in ANYTHING.
That may be a life-long view or, a result of their faith being challenged/destroyed by a particular event.
And they deserve to be treated as equals amongst the believers. There is no proof of anything, so nobody can say who is right and who is wrong.
-
There are also those who do not believe in ANYTHING.
That may be a life-long view or, a result of their faith being challenged/destroyed by a particular event.
And they deserve to be treated as equals amongst the believers. There is no proof of anything, so nobody can say who is right and who is wrong.
Too True
-
Whilst I haven't contributed to this thread, I just wanted to add my support to the decision to keep it going. It is a subject worthy of debate as long as everything can be kept civil.
There have been issues of censorship on other forums and I see no need for a heavy hand here - a watchful eye, perhaps :)
Same Same Here CC,,,,But I feel even THIS Forum is overly censored on certain issues!!
-
There are also those who do not believe in ANYTHING.
That may be a life-long view or, a result of their faith being challenged/destroyed by a particular event.
And they deserve to be treated as equals amongst the believers. There is no proof of anything, so nobody can say who is right and who is wrong.
Taht's what I ment when I said I don't trust Atheists neihter, they say elievers are by defenition wrong, they don't have proof There are also those who do not believe in ANYTHING.
That may be a life-long view or, a result of their faith being challenged/destroyed by a particular event.
And they deserve to be treated as equals amongst the believers. There is no proof of anything, so nobody can say who is right and who is wrong.
That's what I ment when I said Atheism is dangerous too, they say they know but they don't, just like believers.
-
Something went wrong there.
-
That's what I meant when I said Atheism is dangerous too, they say they know but they don't, just like believers.
You never heard of Atheist terrorists or insurgents ........or do we ???
While Stalin, Mao, and company were certainly among the most of insideous of historical figures, those who claim they killed because of their atheism failed to show any connection between their atheism and the massacres. The historical truth is that they killed to eliminate political opposition. Moreover, they forbade religion so they could, in essence, establish themselves as God-like leaders, as many Chinese who suffered Mao's tyranny will tell you. Kim Jung Il continues this strategy in North Korea.
Regardless of how evil these men were/are, they did not kill in the name of atheism. They were merely atheists who killed. This is a huge logical difference-- not that religious people are generally persuaded by logic. For example, in the Bible, which Christians say is the perfect word of a perfect God, God says "Thou shalt not kill" in the same section in which he says that people who work on the sabbath should be killed. Would a perfect God contradict himself like that? Jesus also commanded his followers to slaughter anyone who does not accept him as the son of God. (Luke 19:27--"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.")
Just look at the loving history of Christianity. What better way to represent a loving God than with Inquisitions and burnings at the stake?
History is replete with examples of religious people using violence to force their beliefs on others. Humanists don't strap bombs to themselves and blow up innocent people in public places in the name of their skepticism, nor do they crash planes into buildings, nor start wars against people in other countries because the people there don't share their nonbelief.
Scientists, who overwhelmingly tend not to be religious, are responsible for nearly all of human progress. That's because they utilize reason rather than the silly superstitions on which most people rely. It’s religion, not science, that threatens people with violence, torture, death, and even eternal damnation if you don’t agree with its ideas. Physicists never bullied people into believing Einstein’s Relativity Theory, and did you ever hear of Catholics falling victim to a Galilean inquisition? When was the last time a war was fought over some scientific dispute? When you think about it, wars are much more likely to be fought over stupid religious differences, not over who's the most logical.
Definitions of "superstition" from www.dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com):
su·per·sti·tion
1. a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like.
2. a system or collection of such beliefs.
3. a custom or act based on such a belief.
4. any blindly accepted belief or notion.
Religion will no longer cause such harm only when it's widely scorned and ridiculed as the abject superstition that it is. The Bible, Quran, and other fairy-tales do not prove the existence of God any more than Japanese monster movies prove the existence of Godzilla.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071015202431AA5HlAM (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071015202431AA5HlAM)
-
I'll try to explane, the danger is in the fact that they are bonding, now you see several Atheists ans Atheist groups bonding together, it will be a matter of time before deversion rises and then we have the same problem again. The danger is in the bonding, bonding means leaders and control.
-
One doesn't need to attach an "ism" to their character profile to be perceived as evil or pure. Seemingly, a political invention.
-
The only object of Terrorism is to terrorise!
Rational discussion of spirituality is to be applauded.
Cheers,
John
-
The only object of Terrorism is to terrorise!
...as there isn't a true defining standard as to what "terrorism" might be. Except for the easily acceptable socially engineered variety. whistle
-
The people that trained me to perforate things at long distance taught me that the definition I gave was the only one that was correct!.......My subsequent experiences supported their position!
Cest la Guerre
John
I don't intend to comment further.
-
The people that trained me to perforate things at long distance taught me that the definition I gave was the only one that was correct!.......My subsequent experiences supported their position!
Cest la Guerre
John
I don't intend to comment further.
Perhaps your "trainers" are amongst the circle of controllers that make it their business to manipulate and socially engineer without regard.
-
The people that trained me to perforate things at long distance taught me that the definition I gave was the only one that was correct!.......My subsequent experiences supported their position!
Cest la Guerre
John
I don't intend to comment further.
Just to let you know there is another thread on the forum going on about Gun Culture is the US' that might interest you.
BTW, I assume from your comments and your avatar photo that you are retired from some armed forces somewhere, but do you still shoot/own a gun now ?
-
You read my mind Paddyram.
-
Militarism indoctrination and psyche. tired1
-
If you don't know history your doomed to repeat it.
ooooppsssssss. wrong thread. jumping10
-
If you don't know history your doomed to repeat it.
ooooppsssssss. wrong thread. jumping10
Most are terribly ignorant and misguided as to "real" history knowledge. Memories are manipulated, because ethics and morality have nothing whatsoever to do with the promotion of real history. Power, control, and suppression. Knowledgeable or not - things will always cycle around, as we dream along.
-
just a quick note and I am not wishing to join into the debates of fundamentalism. I worked in the Middle East for 5 years, besides Arabs, Africans, Philipinos. Americans, Canadians, British and many Europeans, All have good and bad, though Americanism is a strange one!
All I wish to comment on is an excerpt someone listed from the Bible. Now I am tending towards totemism and Animism. But just a thought
\Someone quote :- (Luke 19:27--"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.") ---- now this made me think what if the meaning of the word "slay" has changed in recent times compared to when the bible was supposed to be written. i.e. if the word GAY is mention most if not, all of you would instantly just at the meaning of someone whom likes a person of the same sex and not happy?
gay
adjective, -er, -est, noun, adverb
–adjective
1. having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music.
2. bright or showy: gay colors; gay ornaments.
3. given to or abounding in social or other pleasures: a gay social season.
4. licentious; dissipated; wanton: The baron is a gay old rogue with an eye for the ladies.
5. homosexual.
6. of, indicating, or supporting homosexual interests or issues: a gay organization.
so where we have a different meaning emerging that maybe 100 years ago would have be classed as something else!
-
so where we have a different meaning emerging that maybe 100 years ago would have be classed as something else!
And then add to that the fact that the Bible was in aramaic translated to latin and then into English. Some of the subtleness of the true meaning of the words must have been lost.
-
http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplayer/cbnplayer.swf?aid=17933 (http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplayer/cbnplayer.swf?aid=17933)
News Report on the Islam and France.