Religion is great, just how it is used that is bad (292)
miketango:
Faith can only come voluntarily, not by force or fear. And in this age of the internet anyone can discuss any subject without being afraid. The irony is that some people now have religion-phobia, they are strict about refusing it, despite having no concrete proof against the existence of God or the falsity of Religions!
Faith can only come voluntarily, not by force or fear. And in this age of the internet anyone can discuss any subject without being afraid. The irony is that some people now have religion-phobia, they are strict about refusing it, despite having no concrete proof against the existence of God or the falsity of Religions!
Unfortunately, people feel they cannot discuss any subject without being afraid.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: Unfortunately, people feel they cannot discuss any subject without being afraid.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
well said
------ This thread is Archived ------
Most religions teach peace, love, and tolerance. Its too bad its been used as a excuse for some of the most bloodiest wars in our history.
If people were truly religious, they would not go to war in the name of.
If people were truly religious, they would not go to war in the name of.
------ This thread is Archived ------
pedalguy59: Yes, there are no postings of the Crusades either,
of the killing of all Muslims. Tunnel vision and two dimensional
thinking tends to make us think in this way.
of the killing of all Muslims. Tunnel vision and two dimensional
thinking tends to make us think in this way.
Comparing what happened like 1000 years ago with what is going on now?
Nowadays no one kills screaming: in the name of the God.
What do we hear though, oh yes: allahu akbar
------ This thread is Archived ------
miketango: Are humans different ? I mean in the sense that we all love to do good things, to help others if we can.
What I want to say that if Islam was all about killing and conquering and violent, it wouldn't have spread across continents defying the barriers of language and culture and race !!
The point is : there are good sides to Islam, BUT what everybody talks about is what is perceived as "bad" side.
The most kind word to describe such behavior would be "imbalanced" !
What I want to say that if Islam was all about killing and conquering and violent, it wouldn't have spread across continents defying the barriers of language and culture and race !!
The point is : there are good sides to Islam, BUT what everybody talks about is what is perceived as "bad" side.
The most kind word to describe such behavior would be "imbalanced" !
well if the punishment for leaving it is death....hmmm
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: Unfortunately, people feel they cannot discuss any subject without being afraid.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
No, only one religion! People can say whatever they want about the Pope and the Christians in general without any fear, while talking about islam...a whole different matter.
------ This thread is Archived ------
An expert on Islam is warning that the whole premise of Islam, the idea that Muhammad got the Quran from Allah, recited it, then it was written down – all of that might be based on a faulty assumption.
Read more at
------ This thread is Archived ------
Capricorn143: No, only one religion! People can say whatever they want about the Pope and the Christians in general without any fear, while talking about islam...a whole different matter.
Now, not so much.
But growung up, there were lots of movies and events which were banned from being shown here as they were declared 'blasphemous '.
Even films like The Life of Brian!
This might also be of interest:
" Christendom has reacted in mixed ways to free speech. Countries that were historically Christian have often censored whatever mediums established churches could control. The British Board of Film Censors was much-criticized for its Christian bias since its founding in 1912 when it banned film-makers from directly depicting Christ at all. Many other films were similarly curbed and prohibited for infringing upon Christian sensibilities. These bans lasted decades. Some similar restrictions existed in America too; liberalisation began in the 1960s but that decade still saw Spanish actor Enrique Irazoqui 15 months hard labor in Spain for portraying Jesus in 1964. 2.
Aside from film and television entertainment in the 20th century, Christian institutions also reacted badly to other historical innovations in mass media. Christian authorities burned and banned the first English-language Bible (the Tyndale Bible) that was destined for the masses because it would replace the Latin ones (that only rare educated priests could read). They feared the masses would come to question clergy and debate scripture for themselves. There were warning signs that Christianity would take the route of oppressor where it could: it took a few hundred years, in the Second Council of Nicaea in 787CE, for an official declaration to be made that (religious) artistic images were allowed at all after a long period spent in suspicion of imagery in general.
Obviously, Islamic states will take a long time to catch up, if ever.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: Now, not so much.
But growung up, there were lots of movies and events which were banned from being shown here as they were declared 'blasphemous '.
Even films like The Life of Brian!
Obviously, Islamic states will take a long time to catch up, if ever.
But growung up, there were lots of movies and events which were banned from being shown here as they were declared 'blasphemous '.
Even films like The Life of Brian!
Obviously, Islamic states will take a long time to catch up, if ever.
Again you are comparing what no longer is with what is going on and obviously, your won conclusion, will exist for a long long time.
The Christian world has moved on, progressed, the Muslim world has not, it seems that since 1930s (the Muslim Broherhood) it has moved backwards again.
The scientific research shows that the more religious you are, the less tolerant you are to others.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Capricorn143: Again you are comparing what no longer is with what is going on and obviously, your won conclusion, will exist for a long long time.
The Christian world has moved on, progressed, the Muslim world has not, it seems that since 1930s (the Muslim Broherhood) it has moved backwards again.
The scientific research shows that the more religious you are, the less tolerant you are to others.
The Christian world has moved on, progressed, the Muslim world has not, it seems that since 1930s (the Muslim Broherhood) it has moved backwards again.
The scientific research shows that the more religious you are, the less tolerant you are to others.
I agree.
Although most religions preach tolerance, it is one message that has not got through to the more fervent followers.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: I agree.
Although most religions preach tolerance, it is one message that has not got through to the more fervent followers.
Although most religions preach tolerance, it is one message that has not got through to the more fervent followers.
There is a confusion of terminology in different cultures, e.g.
- when Islam talks about "peace" it refers to the state you achieve when you completely submit to Alah. For us peace is something else.
- Another example is "respect" - for Muslims this refers to the feeling that you have to automatically have towards e.g. parents, husband< a person of authority. To us respect is earned.
So when we say tolerance, god knows who means what, and when you see that non muslims in e.g. Pakistan are sentenced to death for desecrating Quran (even though that was just an unfounded rumour), then tolerance is very questionable. When Muslims burn the Bible...well, who cares. Take as an example that Bavarian school that asked the non muslims to change their behaviour only because the Muslims demanded it.
Throughout history, Jews and Christians had to pay a special tax to the Muslim authorities to be able to live in the muslim controled areas. IS is just reading what it says in Quran and taking it litterally.
The Bible also has violent verses, but they are in the Old Testament, which almost no one uses nowadays. the New Testament is about turning another cheek.In the Quran, on the other hand, the older, more friendly part is abrogated by the more violent later part. So the development of the two followed a different path.
I do not care about the books anyway, what I care about is the level of religiousness - and it is much much much higher in the Muslim world.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: Unfortunately, people feel they cannot discuss any subject without being afraid.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
The murder of journalists and cartoonists put an end to that.
Religion and free-speech are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
1-I am not here to prove that Islam is the best, or defend the atrocities made in its name.
2-I believe in democracy and individual freedom, and I do not see them conflict with me being a Muslim.
3-I participated in this discussion because the members who started it did sound flexible, as opposed to the rigid mentalities that had shown in later posts.
4- None of us knows can be always right. So, when entering any discussion, people should be ready to explore other points of view, and embrace the possibility of being wrong about a detail or about a concept.
All scriptures have different explanations, and if some groups adopt a radical explanation, and carry's out atrocities in its name.
And to say atrocities have been committed in the name of Christianity also (the inquisitions and the crusades), does not validate them or undermine their evils.
Making use of the anonymity provided by the internet, can help individuals look for knowledge without fear of terror.
Firmly declaring that "X" can never meet "Y", require good knowledge
of both subjects.
------ This thread is Archived ------
miketango: 1-I am not here to prove that Islam is the best, or defend the atrocities made in its name.
2-I believe in democracy and individual freedom, and I do not see them conflict with me being a Muslim.
3-I participated in this discussion because the members who started it did sound flexible, as opposed to the rigid mentalities that had shown in later posts.
4- None of us knows can be always right. So, when entering any discussion, people should be ready to explore other points of view, and embrace the possibility of being wrong about a detail or about a concept.
All scriptures have different explanations, and if some groups adopt a radical explanation, and carry's out atrocities in its name.
And to say atrocities have been committed in the name of Christianity also (the inquisitions and the crusades), does not validate them or undermine their evils.
Making use of the anonymity provided by the internet, can help individuals look for knowledge without fear of terror.
Firmly declaring that "X" can never meet "Y", require good knowledge
of both subjects.
2-I believe in democracy and individual freedom, and I do not see them conflict with me being a Muslim.
3-I participated in this discussion because the members who started it did sound flexible, as opposed to the rigid mentalities that had shown in later posts.
4- None of us knows can be always right. So, when entering any discussion, people should be ready to explore other points of view, and embrace the possibility of being wrong about a detail or about a concept.
All scriptures have different explanations, and if some groups adopt a radical explanation, and carry's out atrocities in its name.
And to say atrocities have been committed in the name of Christianity also (the inquisitions and the crusades), does not validate them or undermine their evils.
Making use of the anonymity provided by the internet, can help individuals look for knowledge without fear of terror.
Firmly declaring that "X" can never meet "Y", require good knowledge
of both subjects.
If you read my further posts, you would have seen that I also gave historic examples of Christian intolerance.
And I reiterate the fact that I still do not believe in organised religion, so therefore am not in favour of Christianity any more than Islam.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Capricorn143: Comparing what happened like 1000 years ago with what is going on now?
Nowadays no one kills screaming: in the name of the God.
What do we hear though, oh yes: allahu akbar
Nowadays no one kills screaming: in the name of the God.
What do we hear though, oh yes: allahu akbar
So, killing while saying : "in the name of god" is ok ?
There are more than a billion Muslims in the world, don't you think if all of them have the same understanding of Islam as the radical groups the world would be at war, and not just suicide attacks or explosions ?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Capricorn143: well if the punishment for leaving it is death....hmmm
I do not think its fare to take your ideals, which resulted from a specific culture or background, and impose them on a completely different context.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Capricorn143: No, only one religion! People can say whatever they want about the Pope and the Christians in general without any fear, while talking about islam...a whole different matter.
Well, no one talks about Judaism .... at all!!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
miketango: So, killing while saying : "in the name of god" is ok ?
There are more than a billion Muslims in the world, don't you think if all of them have the same understanding of Islam as the radical groups the world would be at war, and not just suicide attacks or explosions ?
There are more than a billion Muslims in the world, don't you think if all of them have the same understanding of Islam as the radical groups the world would be at war, and not just suicide attacks or explosions ?
What I said was that no one kills in the name of god as opposed to killing in the name of alah.
a. There are different interpretations, I know that but what does everyone say about:
1. what to do with apostates
2. what to do with those that leave islam
3. which law is the real law: sharia or some men-made laws?
b. how come that there are such violent reactions to what offends Muslims (thats usually when you mention muhamed) and why do not all those that do not agree with the radicals keep silent?
------ This thread is Archived ------
mollybaby: Now, not so much.
But growung up, there were lots of movies and events which were banned from being shown here as they were declared 'blasphemous '.
Even films like The Life of Brian!
This might also be of interest:
" Christendom has reacted in mixed ways to free speech. Countries that were historically Christian have often censored whatever mediums established churches could control. The British Board of Film Censors was much-criticized for its Christian bias since its founding in 1912 when it banned film-makers from directly depicting Christ at all. Many other films were similarly curbed and prohibited for infringing upon Christian sensibilities. These bans lasted decades. Some similar restrictions existed in America too; liberalisation began in the 1960s but that decade still saw Spanish actor Enrique Irazoqui 15 months hard labor in Spain for portraying Jesus in 1964. 2.
Aside from film and television entertainment in the 20th century, Christian institutions also reacted badly to other historical innovations in mass media. Christian authorities burned and banned the first English-language Bible (the Tyndale Bible) that was destined for the masses because it would replace the Latin ones (that only rare educated priests could read). They feared the masses would come to question clergy and debate scripture for themselves. There were warning signs that Christianity would take the route of oppressor where it could: it took a few hundred years, in the Second Council of Nicaea in 787CE, for an official declaration to be made that (religious) artistic images were allowed at all after a long period spent in suspicion of imagery in general.
Obviously, Islamic states will take a long time to catch up, if ever.
But growung up, there were lots of movies and events which were banned from being shown here as they were declared 'blasphemous '.
Even films like The Life of Brian!
This might also be of interest:
" Christendom has reacted in mixed ways to free speech. Countries that were historically Christian have often censored whatever mediums established churches could control. The British Board of Film Censors was much-criticized for its Christian bias since its founding in 1912 when it banned film-makers from directly depicting Christ at all. Many other films were similarly curbed and prohibited for infringing upon Christian sensibilities. These bans lasted decades. Some similar restrictions existed in America too; liberalisation began in the 1960s but that decade still saw Spanish actor Enrique Irazoqui 15 months hard labor in Spain for portraying Jesus in 1964. 2.
Aside from film and television entertainment in the 20th century, Christian institutions also reacted badly to other historical innovations in mass media. Christian authorities burned and banned the first English-language Bible (the Tyndale Bible) that was destined for the masses because it would replace the Latin ones (that only rare educated priests could read). They feared the masses would come to question clergy and debate scripture for themselves. There were warning signs that Christianity would take the route of oppressor where it could: it took a few hundred years, in the Second Council of Nicaea in 787CE, for an official declaration to be made that (religious) artistic images were allowed at all after a long period spent in suspicion of imagery in general.
Obviously, Islamic states will take a long time to catch up, if ever.
Christians are evolving, not Christianity. And I assure you Muslims are going to catch up within 50 years (in my opinion).
I took 2000 years for Christians to get this place. For Muslims its now only 1400 years! In the 15th century, Christians were forming inquisitions from Europe to the Americas.
------ This thread is Archived ------
miketango: No one will notice a Muslim person if he/she is not doing something peculiar.
There are Muslims you do not even notice their Islam. Why ?
Because they are peaceful, they are not trying to condemn your dress, they are not trying to enter discussions about how Islam is right and every other religion is wrong. You know why ? Because they know their religion well enough, and they are not insecure about their faith and trying to impose it on others. Those are the silent majority, they are just like you : they do not define you by your religion.
And if you come across anyone who have visited a Muslim country, ask them how people treat them "when in a Muslim country"!
To say that all the actions of a person are caused by his/her religion is not correct, because it ignores other factors like economy and social factors. In the end, we are all human.
There are Muslims you do not even notice their Islam. Why ?
Because they are peaceful, they are not trying to condemn your dress, they are not trying to enter discussions about how Islam is right and every other religion is wrong. You know why ? Because they know their religion well enough, and they are not insecure about their faith and trying to impose it on others. Those are the silent majority, they are just like you : they do not define you by your religion.
And if you come across anyone who have visited a Muslim country, ask them how people treat them "when in a Muslim country"!
To say that all the actions of a person are caused by his/her religion is not correct, because it ignores other factors like economy and social factors. In the end, we are all human.
hey cannot define me by my religion because I do have have any signs/symbols that tell everyone which religion I belong if any.
In light of what is being done in the name of your religion, the silent majority needs to stop being silent.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
See It All The Time
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
The Real Stormy Story
Kultur-multur
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
biggest lie
Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
Trump Elementary
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Related Forums
- See It All The Time
- Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
- The Real Stormy Story
- Kultur-multur
- More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
- I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
- biggest lie
- Are the ads on here as phony as some of the profiles?
- Trump Elementary
"I believe that if people believe in a higher being, that they should do so privately and as an individual, not as part of a mass movement. "
Isn't that against individual freedom, I mean people are free to practice privately or in groups.
@mollybaby
"Having said that, I believe that most religions, especially those developed in ancient times, have writings and scriptures too open to interpretation.
Therefore, those who want an excuse to kill or disempower in the name of religion, can find the words in the sacred writings to do so."
I agree. But again misinterpretation comes from ignorance.
..
..
Faith can only come voluntarily, not by force or fear. And in this age of the internet anyone can discuss any subject without being afraid. The irony is that some people now have religion-phobia, they are strict about refusing it, despite having no concrete proof against the existence of God or the falsity of Religions!