Good article here by Sam Harris: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-freedom-to-offend-an-imaginary-god
Stay with me for a sec here: Women can dress in any manner they want, and sexual aggression towards them is the total responsibility of the aggressor. Why the double standard with religious people? Why not apply the same principle to religious aggressors who are provoked by movies, cartoons, and books? Why are WE being asked to curtail our freedom of expression so as not to provoke religious anger, when we wouldn't dare ask a woman to lengthen her skirt or cover her cleavage?
It's a double standard, to which I offer an explanation: it's the party that is the most angry that gets the rules bent their way. I personally think Muslims should give their heads a shake, and that our governments should have strictly enforced non-tolerance policies in regards to religious activism/terrorism, but that's me...
I dont think mooslums have any sense of humor at all...Am I wrong?
Quote from: Stever on September 20, 2012, 11:53:18 PM
I dont think mooslums have any sense of humor at all...Am I wrong?
Well, they do laugh when infidels are blown to bits. That count?
Proud infidel, here.
It's double fuckin standards man.
I'm gonna fight for the right to ask women to lengthen (that's surprisingly hard to spell) their skirts.
Or maybe I'll just have a drink and a little nap instead.
Yeah..longer skirts,and less cleavage...its so distracting,when you are trying to bowl! :o
In my opinion this entire episode is just another illustration of why religion is a force that runs contrary to our basic freedoms. It is incompatible with the kind of society that intelligent humans would eventually create.
Religion is the problem and both the people who require tolerance and those who would infringe on our freedoms are dicks.
But that's just like my opinion man.
And it's not just Islam.
If a guy in Texas made a film showing Jesus being gay how long do you think it would take before he ended up dragged behind a pickup by a noose? The film about Mohammed had him being gay.
So their version of fundamentalist redneck asswipes acted just like our version of the same.
Not sure about what the official position of the Government should be.
Ideally I think they should stand up for freedom of speech.
But of course we need to consider that there are people over seize who's lives are in jeopardy. It's a question of whether the actions are motivated by Ideals or by practicality. Perhaps there is no up side to inflaming tensions.
Cleavage and leg is way cool!
It should be encouraged. Except perhaps at funerals and other such times.
I just finished two books: 1) Letter to A Christian Nation by Sam Harris, and 2) The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. In both works, the authors both state the obvious, as you do BD, that the root problem is religion. As one dude said, take away religion and bad people will still be bad, good people will still be good, but for good people to do bad things you need religion.
The PROBLEM is the non-negotiable nature of hard core religious people, particularly in the middle east where there is incredible social and family pressure to maintain "the faith". Add to that their passionate emotional make-up, and you have a powder keg ready to explode at a moment's notice.
Until the common goal of peace becomes our top priority over being "right", we'll continue this mayhem. Specifically, until Islam is cut off at the knees, they will continue to obey the Koran by killing infidels, and following its dictate of converting the world to Islam. To them, there is no middle ground...
Thing is some religions such as: shamanism, druidism, dudeism, buddhism, wicca, sufism and what have you are pretty cool. They often encourage people to work together, reflect on sorting out their own shit, develop a mellow state of being, live with more awareness etc'. Don't really see the value in attacking all religions or religion in itself. Richard Dawkins is the most uptight dude on earth - even more uptight than me!
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 10:06:53 AM
Thing is some religions such as: shamanism, druidism, dudeism, buddhism, wicca, sufism and what have you are pretty cool. They often encourage people to work together, reflect on sorting out their own shit, develop a mellow state of being, live with more awareness etc'. Don't really see the value in attacking all religions or religion in itself. Richard Dawkins is the most uptight dude on earth - even more uptight than me!
The "religions" you list are more philosophical approaches to life than they are dogmatic, canon-based belief structures. In the western world, they attract people of that ilk; libertarian lefties who buck the trend and take ownership of their own growth and evolution. The right-wing conservatives attract the more old-school religious types who believe in the old bearded man upstairs.
Apart from the difference between the two, don't we all want the world to believe what we do? After all, it would be a better place if they did...
Just playing devil's advocate. ;)
It might be possible to combine the libertarian, community spirited vibe of the left with the personal responsibility vibe of the right.
Then you would have a whole new groovy way of being - we could call it 'Dudeism' or something.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 10:44:03 AM
It might be possible to combine the libertarian, community spirited vibe of the left with the personal responsibility vibe of the right.
Then you would have a whole new groovy way of being - we could call it 'Dudeism' or something.
Let's work on that...
"Hey Oliver!!!!!!!!!"
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 10:06:53 AM
Thing is some religions such as: shamanism, druidism, dudeism, buddhism, wicca, sufism and what have you are pretty cool. They often encourage people to work together, reflect on sorting out their own shit, develop a mellow state of being, live with more awareness etc'. Don't really see the value in attacking all religions or religion in itself. Richard Dawkins is the most uptight dude on earth - even more uptight than me!
I admit that it seems more a problem of "Deification".
Even though what we have here with Dudeism is more of a parody of religion, how many of us have grown attached enough that if we are honest about it would feel a personal insult when the character of the Dude is disrespected? (Obviously it's not like it would be for a Christian when Jesus is disrespected or similarly in Islam with Mohammed but it's real)
The deification thing has another interesting consequence.
By giving an embodiment to ideas somehow it seems to free the adherent to attach whatever they want to the embodiment. Hence the prevalence of Christians in the military. In fact one can barely be non christian and have anything like a career in the military. I can find nothing in christian ethics that in anyway promotes or even allows for militarism.
And if people here are honest about it they can see that we really do tend to shift the definition of what is "Dude" and what is "Abiding" on a purely personal basis. The Dude, or Jesus or Mohammed seem to become an empty vessel that people fill with what suits them at the time. Consequently when someone disrespects it the believer takes it personally.
Because it is personal. They have constructed the Deity based on nothing else but personal beliefs no matter how dogmatic the religion is.
Sure the religion acts to guide the beliefs but it seems pretty open ended.
QuoteBecause it is personal. They have constructed the Deity based on nothing else but personal beliefs no matter how dogmatic the religion is.
Insightful point, and it explains the passion (read: anger) that inflames certain individuals towards justified violence. To take it one step further, it seems that the Abrahamic religions have more of a corner on such violence, in contrast to the more evolved philosophies that say "Fuck it - let's go bowling" attitude after a small rant.
I believe that Dudeism is both an 'empty vessel' that can be filled with the personal values of any particular dude and at the same time something that has its own independent if imperfectly defined vibe. As the French thinker Roland Barthes said it is both a 'readerly' and a 'writerly' text i.e. intention and meaning are both contained within it and projected onto it.
Within this here groovy dudeist community we find enough common dude-ground to link us together in a way that I think has a pretty cool combination of friendship and challenge.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 11:46:15 AM
I believe that Dudeism is both an 'empty vessel' that can be filled with the personal values of any particular dude and at the same time something that has its own independent if imperfectly defined vibe. As the French thinker Roland Barthes said it is both a 'readerly' and a 'writerly' text i.e. intention and meaning are both contained within it and projected onto it.
Within this here groovy dudeist community we find enough common dude-ground to link us together in a way that I think has a pretty cool combination of friendship and challenge.
I'm not really speaking about any specific religion.
Once one Deifies something it becomes a useful tool in the bag of tricks that all religions use. That is a self delusion that makes the believer feel better about themselves.
That's the candy that all Deist religions use.
And I personally find the "empty vessel" thing to be a big big problem.
To elevate something to a Deified status that is admittedly without any inherent virtue simply to be filled in later by whoever wishes to is exactly the sort of thing that allows religion to be what it is.
As quoted above. "All things being equal good men do good things, bad men do bad things but it takes religion to make good men do bad things"
I'm not sure religion 'makes' people do anything. We might use it a justification for our actions but we are still responsible for our actions. What we do is our own choice. Also I don't think that a 'good person' can do 'bad things'. After all, we are defined by our actions. If you do bad things you are a bad person, religion or no religion.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 12:14:05 PM
I'm not sure religion 'makes' people do anything. We might use it a justification for our actions but we are still responsible for our actions. What we do is our own choice. Also I don't think that a 'good person' can do 'bad things'. After all, we are defined by our actions. If you do bad things you are a bad person, religion or no religion.
Or misled.
A good person can be acting on wrong beliefs.
We have reasons for what we do.
Those reasons are informed by beliefs.
If that is the case then all the Islamic terrorists are inherently bad people and Islam had nothing to do with it.
Clearly Islam had much to do with it.
Or the US soldier who went out riding his Tank around with "Jesus Kill Mohammed" spray painted on the side then blasted whoever shot at it with the cannon.
Do you suppose that he was criticised by his fellow troops or cheered?
Are they all inherently bad people?
In this day and age it is abundantly clear that Religion makes otherwise good people do a lot of bad things.
How about abortion doctor killings.
Just plain Bad people or damaged misled individuals?
You can only be misled if you choose to follow.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 12:29:18 PM
You can only be misled if you choose to follow.
So then a child born is an Islamic country is making the choice to be islamic.
Despite the fact that everything he is ever taught is directly from Islam.
And he is explicitly taught that to not believe is the highest sin and punishable by death and that he has a responsibility to Jihad and Martydom etc...
I'm sorry I just don't see it.
The same holds true for kids born into fundamentalist Christian homes.
The problem is not as bad but you hear the same story over and over from them that they "just never saw that there was any choice".
And in the case of terrorism and things like killing abortion doctors the individuals believed they were doing "good" specifically because of the beliefs of the religion.
Children usually don't have much choice. As adults we are responsible for our own actions.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 12:42:51 PM
Children usually don't have much choice. As adults we are responsible for our own actions.
And we raise our children to be adults and give them the reasons for the actions they choose.
And it's important to take note that most religions teach people that they don't have those choices.
that's the business of religion. Keeping your pimp hand strong.
My father was a catholic. As a child I went to a catholic school.
Now I am an adult - and agnostic.
My choice.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 12:42:51 PM
Children usually don't have much choice. As adults we are responsible for our own actions.
Put on a tee shirt that says "Allah is a myth and being Gay is OK" and walk around Baghdad and get back to me.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 12:49:54 PM
My father was a catholic. As a child I went to a catholic school.
Now I am an adult - and agnostic.
My choice.
That was a pretty easy choice.
It's not so easy in a lot of places.
I doubt you faced the threat of death.
Even here. A person who leaves Mormanism in Utah faces social death, loss of employment etc etc.
and that's in the US.
Yes some people do but one can't put too much blame on those that don't.
One can't really just say that the person can choose. They can choose in spite of everything that they've been taught and in spite of major consequences
Religions explicitly raise people to believe that they don't have that choice.
I too came from a Catholic home.
A typical suburban Catholic country club home.
If I was not a catholic my parents would have been disappointed but they wouldn't have disowned me and they wouldn't have truly believed I was going to hell.
the reality is that that is not the norm. it is the exception.
for me the choice was easy.
Yes some choices are difficult. My mother in law grew up in Nazi Germany. She chose not to wear the Hitler Youth uniform that was given to her and not to take part in rallies. A very difficult choice - with consequences. But the right one.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:03:31 PM
Yes some choices are difficult. My mother in law grew up in Nazi Germany. She chose not to wear the Hitler Youth uniform that was given to her and not to take part in rallies. A very difficult choice - with consequences. But the right one.
And if she had would that mean that she was a bad person?
I don't think that is necessarily the case.
Let's suppose the her parents really wanted her to.
And they were going to throw her out of the house if she didn't.
A Muslim woman (who appeared once on stage once with the neo-atheism troup "Four Horsemen"), declared herself an atheist. She required police protection from her fellow Muslims, as she was under constant threat of death. People were moving out of her apartment building for fear of RPG attack. And this is in the States!
So, for the few Muslims who have the intestinal fortitude to buck the system, they *know* their lives may be cut short. Not a lot of choice in that environment, is there? All thanks to a 4th-century tribal religion.
Quote from: Hominid on September 21, 2012, 01:17:45 PM
A Muslim woman (who appeared once on stage once with the neo-atheism troup "Four Horsemen"), declared herself an atheist. She required police protection from her fellow Muslims, as she was under constant threat of death. People were moving out of her apartment building for fear of RPG attack. And this is in the States!
So, for the few Muslims who have the intestinal fortitude to buck the system, they *know* their lives may be cut short. Not a lot of choice in that environment, is there? All thanks to a 4th-century tribal religion.
But what about those who grow up true believers?
They do what 99.99999% of all people do.
that is to say that they believe what they are taught by their parents, teachers and their religion.
Are they necessarily evil for believing in what they were raised to believe?
Is there just some gene in parts of the middle east that causes people to blow up planes. No. It's religion.
Their religion explicitly teaches Jihad.
This same thing holds true for all kinds of things.
People here who are raised by bigots end up being bigots.
There are plenty of choices for muslims other than public declarations of atheism. Good choices require good judgement.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:22:37 PM
There are plenty of choices for muslims other than public declarations of atheism. Good choices require good judgement.
And if they choose Islam as they have been taught since birth?
does that mean they are "bad" or "evil"?
They are responsible for their actions. But in ultimate moral terms I agree with Marianne Williamson that "there are no sins only mistakes".
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:22:37 PM
There are plenty of choices for muslims other than public declarations of atheism. Good choices require good judgement.
She's an activist. Such people willingly put themselves in harm's way so others can follow. She's a hero in my eyes...
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:26:57 PM
They are responsible for their actions. But in ultimate moral terms I agree with Marianne Williamson that "there are no sins only mistakes".
Semantics.
Blowing up innocent people is wrong. It's not a "mistake", sorry. Any Ideology that says it's OK is sick.
But if everybody is at the mercy of their upbringing - who is responsible?
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:34:23 PM
But if everybody is at the mercy of their upbringing - who is responsible?
Everyone.
But the amount that we are successful at it is a matter of our upbringing.
I don't really even see this as any psycological or philosophical thing.
It's numbers.
It wasn't like there was something in the water that made people bigoted assholes in the south. it was culture and christianity. The numbers bear out the effects.
It's not like some virus swept the mid east and made them suicide bombers.
It is simply a fact that for every person the force that our upbringing has, (especially religious upbringing) is huge and looking at how uncommon it is for people to buck the trend nearly insurmountable.
It's not that there are just areas of genetically evil people in certain places. It's culture and religion.
In the end we are all responsible for our actions but we all are informed by our culture and upbringing in how we choose those actions and judge the actions of ourselves and others.
So as I have said
Quote
All things being equal good people do good things bad people do bad things but it takes religion to make good people do bad things.
I'd include culture in there also.
Quote from: Hominid on September 21, 2012, 01:29:17 PM
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:26:57 PM
They are responsible for their actions. But in ultimate moral terms I agree with Marianne Williamson that "there are no sins only mistakes".
Semantics.
Blowing up innocent people is wrong. It's not a "mistake", sorry. Any Ideology that says it's OK is sick.
Exactly it's the ideology.
And the people who are following the ideology don't believe it's evil because that is what the religion says.
In the case of Nazi Germany did it take religion to make good people do bad things?
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:50:58 PM
In the case of Nazi Germany did it take religion to make good people do bad things?
It's a generality.
It's a quote. But it has merit.
Religion is not the only thing.
Culture as I've said and a lot of other things can.
Hell poverty can. The difference is that desperation and poverty make people do things that they KNOW are wrong.
Religion makes people do bad things that they believe are good.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:50:58 PM
In the case of Nazi Germany did it take religion to make good people do bad things?
Oh and please lets not go down the road about Hitler being an atheist.
He wasn't by his account and even if he was the more pertinent issue was that he was a lunatic. The 2 are unrelated.
So the quote should be "it takes religion, nazis, stalin, culture, poverty or a lot of other things to make good people do bad things".
Loosing a bit of it's punch now.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:56:04 PM
So the quote should be "it takes religion, nazis, stalin, culture, poverty or a lot of other things to make good people do bad things".
Loosing a bit of it's punch now.
I still think it has lots of punch.
there is clearly abundant evidence of the religious argument.
Suicide bombing, abortion doctor murder, slavery etc etc on through the ages.
And it is clearly religion.
It's not the only thing that can make people do evil but it's the heavy weight champion.
It takes science to make good farmers do bad factory farming.
What are we going to do - get rid of science?
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:59:47 PM
It takes science to make good farmers do bad factory farming.
What are we going to do - get rid of science?
It takes genetically altered crops not science.
Science does a lot of good things.
Religion does not.
Religion does many things.
For example the form of therapy widely used for depression called 'mindfulness' comes directly from Buddhism.
Good article about it in this months 'Kindred Spirit' magazine, featuring Ruby Wax (interviewed by Boston Rockbury).
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 02:04:22 PM
Religion does many things.
For example the form of therapy widely used for depression called 'mindfulness' comes directly from Buddhism.
Good article about it in this months 'Kindred Spirit' magazine, featuring Ruby Wax (interviewed by Boston Rockbury).
I would excuse Buddhism.
And point out that some of it's own adherents say it's not a religion.
http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell03.htm
In solution-focused therapy they say - we expand our consciousness by giving significance to the exceptions we find to our belief systems not by finding support for our existing beliefs.
Buddhism is not an Abrahamic religion; it's a philosophy.
It is more than a philosophy because it is a path of personal developement.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:59:47 PM
It takes science to make good farmers do bad factory farming.
What are we going to do - get rid of science?
And it's not science either it's business.
Large corporations.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 02:12:14 PM
It is more than a philosophy because it is a path of personal developement.
Ya, and when would you ever hear a Jihadist say he was on such a path? Never!
Well that's true, there aren't too many jihadist Buddhists.
You got me there dude - I give up.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 01:59:47 PM
It takes science to make good farmers do bad factory farming.
What are we going to do - get rid of science?
You know it's really interesting you should bring this sort of thing up.
For years the whole Monsanto ties to the CIA and christian fundamentalists has been discussed in hushed tones.
Some really scarey crap about monopolizing the food supply. All kinds of stuff.
Recently Monsanto bought the largest mercenary army in the world. XE formerly Blackwater.
http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/monsanto-now-owns-blackwater-xe/
Once you dig into this pit of ugliness you find a pit of fundamentalist apocalyptic nutbags.
It's really frightening.
So as far as the whole genetically altered crops and factory farms and bullying by big corporations I'm sorry but I really feel the ugliest and most frightening part of religion in there.
It's a bit of the "tin foil hat" sort of stuff but some of that really has something to it.
Or dudeist Jihadists.
Okay dudes, fair enough - I'll come clean. I haven't got a fucking clue what I'm talking about.
I' just trying to get my post count up so I can get an extra star.
Monsanto buys the largest private security force in the world XE formerly Blackwater.
Monsanto + CIA + Blackwater + the rest of the fundamentalist nuts in washington.
Wow.
Now tell me that factory farming and monopolizing the food supply is science and not religion.
http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/monsanto-now-owns-blackwater-xe/
http://digitaljournal.com/article/297701
Blackwater Founder's Visions of Christian Supremacy in Iraq
http://open.salon.com/blog/kevin_gosztola/2009/08/05/blackwater_founders_visions_of_christian_supremacy_in_iraq
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488
Okay this thread will be taken over for the next twenty minutes or so whilst I post a load of random smilies to get me up to four star dude.
I suffer from low self worth so things like that really matter to me.
CIA and stuff probably real fuckin' interestin' but way too heavy for me dude.
Fuck - what do you do to get smileys? Is there a smiley button or something?
javascript:void(0);
No, that didn't work - I'm going for a little nap.
:-)
You laughin at me?
VAGINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How do you get those nice yellow smileys? I tried to drag and drop, but that didn't work.
Either type semi colon capital D or post a message then go to "modify" and click the little icon with the smiley.
;D
:o
???
::)
:P
etc..
your smiley list should be available when you use the reply button on a message, rather than typing into the quick reply box at the bottom.
Quote from: milnie on September 21, 2012, 03:50:37 PM
your smiley list should be available when you use the reply button on a message, rather than typing into the quick reply box at the bottom.
True.
But "quote" takes you to the quick reply so no smileys.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 02:22:58 PM
Well that's true, there aren't too many jihadist Buddhists.
You got me there dude - I give up.
there are plenty of "jihadist" buddhists, they just destroy themselves in protest rather than anyone else.
extremism exists in all religious or spiritual followings. it must by necessity. If there are no absolute believers then a religion would fail.
Quote from: BikerDude on September 21, 2012, 03:59:43 PM
Quote from: milnie on September 21, 2012, 03:50:37 PM
your smiley list should be available when you use the reply button on a message, rather than typing into the quick reply box at the bottom.
True.
But "quote" takes you to the quick reply so no smileys.
a-ha! if you quote from the topic summary while in the reply page, it should appear in the big box you want to type in. i just learned this this second. cool. still cant be arsed using the reply button though because i usualy post using my phone
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 21, 2012, 02:50:14 PM
You laughin at me?
Dude, when in the
"Preview Mode;" (click this button to get there... (http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/6816/previewwuy.jpg)) and you will see a "menu" of various smileys like this...
(http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1880/smileyw.jpg).....
Click one and it will appear in your post. You're troubles are over, dude.
In regards to the original topic, there is only one thought that keeps going around in my head...
" Anything that subverts the basic decency of good people and turns them into killers, violators and oppressors is worthy of the utmost condemnation from now until the stars grow cold."
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 21, 2012, 06:51:51 PM
In regards to the original topic, there is only one thought that keeps going around in my head...
" Anything that subverts the basic decency of good people and turns them into killers, violators and oppressors is worthy of the utmost condemnation from now until the stars grow cold."
Preach it brother...
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 21, 2012, 06:51:51 PM
In regards to the original topic, there is only one thought that keeps going around in my head...
" Anything that subverts the basic decency of good people and turns them into killers, violators and oppressors is worthy of the utmost condemnation from now until the stars grow cold."
Big time.
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 21, 2012, 06:51:51 PM
In regards to the original topic, there is only one thought that keeps going around in my head...
" Anything that subverts the basic decency of good people and turns them into killers, violators and oppressors is worthy of the utmost condemnation from now until the stars grow cold."
I dig what you're saying dude. Just a little worried about the "condemnation" vibe. It feels a kinda heavy. Isn't it better to heal through love?
Hey I could be wrong - just an idea. :-\
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 21, 2012, 06:51:51 PM
In regards to the original topic, there is only one thought that keeps going around in my head...
" Anything that subverts the basic decency of good people and turns them into killers, violators and oppressors is worthy of the utmost condemnation from now until the stars grow cold."
perhaps we should look at how islamic jihad has become so prominent in the world. is it modern technology? is it freedom from oppression by colonial powers? is it because they live in bloody hot contries and that makes anyone mad?!?
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 22, 2012, 03:54:38 AM
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 21, 2012, 06:51:51 PM
In regards to the original topic, there is only one thought that keeps going around in my head...
" Anything that subverts the basic decency of good people and turns them into killers, violators and oppressors is worthy of the utmost condemnation from now until the stars grow cold."
I dig what you're saying dude. Just a little worried about the "condemnation" vibe. It feels a kinda heavy. Isn't it better to heal through love?
Hey I could be wrong - just an idea. :-\
The dudeism ethos is to take it easy. The world would very obviously be a much better place if everyone took it easy. But when there's a force out there that is downright evil, in my mind, it deserves condemnation. Any religion that tells its adherents to kill the infidels should be outright banned.
I don't know man? Isn't fighting for peace like screwing for virginity?
On the original topic I'll say one thing..
We're in LA and a guy comes along and spray paints "Crips are a bunch of pussies" on the side of a house.
Later that day the guy who live in the house walks out and a group of Crips shoot him dead.
Are the Crips excuse from blame? Of course not.
Is the idiot who decided it was a good idea to spray paint the message on the side of the house excuse from blame? Of course not.
He's an idiot.
It does accomplishes nothing and to argue that if the Crips weren't killers is irrelevant.
It is an obviously stupid thing to do and accomplishes absolutely nothing except putting innocent people in danger.
Quote from: BikerDude on September 22, 2012, 12:54:52 PM
On the original topic I'll say one thing..
We're in LA and a guy comes along and spray paints "Crips are a bunch of pussies" on the side of a house.
Later that day the guy who live in the house walks out and a group of Crips shoot him dead.
Are the Crips excuse from blame? Of course not.
Is the idiot who decided it was a good idea to spray paint the message on the side of the house excuse from blame? Of course not.
He's an idiot.
It does accomplishes nothing and to argue that if the Crips weren't killers is irrelevant.
It is an obviously stupid thing to do and accomplishes absolutely nothing except putting innocent people in danger.
You seem to be saying that once crips start breeding with muslims we're all fucked - right?
It'd be like that film Underworld where the vampire breeds with the werewolf to make a kinda all-powerful crip-mooslim
"Condemn" does not equal " let's hate them and bomb them into oblivion". But, in my opinion, it is right to openly state that any ideology that turns decent folks into madmen is bad for them and bad for the human race.
We have no problems condemning the ideology behind Nazi Germany. But, and I am getting ever closer to BikerDude's mindset, it seems, when it's about religion turning good folks into a violent mob, we are supposed to just sit back and take it?
I am perfectly willing to argue with a muslim from a perspective informed of compassion and concern for his mental and spiritual well-being. Because I actually am. I am perfectly willing and ready to be non-condescending and friendly. Sadly, some folks out there would still want to kill me if I did that.
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 22, 2012, 01:37:03 PM
in my opinion, it is right to openly state that any ideology that turns decent folks into madmen is bad for them and bad for the human race.
But then you would have to ban the Republican Party. I'm not saying that would be a bad thing but some people might object.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 22, 2012, 01:05:26 PM
Quote from: BikerDude on September 22, 2012, 12:54:52 PM
On the original topic I'll say one thing..
We're in LA and a guy comes along and spray paints "Crips are a bunch of pussies" on the side of a house.
Later that day the guy who live in the house walks out and a group of Crips shoot him dead.
Are the Crips excuse from blame? Of course not.
Is the idiot who decided it was a good idea to spray paint the message on the side of the house excuse from blame? Of course not.
He's an idiot.
It does accomplishes nothing and to argue that if the Crips weren't killers is irrelevant.
It is an obviously stupid thing to do and accomplishes absolutely nothing except putting innocent people in danger.
You seem to be saying that once crips start breeding with muslims we're all fucked - right?
It'd be like that film Underworld where the vampire breeds with the werewolf to make a kinda all-powerful crip-mooslim
Ha?
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 22, 2012, 01:37:03 PM
"Condemn" does not equal " let's hate them and bomb them into oblivion". But, in my opinion, it is right to openly state that any ideology that turns decent folks into madmen is bad for them and bad for the human race.
We have no problems condemning the ideology behind Nazi Germany. But, and I am getting ever closer to BikerDude's mindset, it seems, when it's about religion turning good folks into a violent mob, we are supposed to just sit back and take it?
I am perfectly willing to argue with a muslim from a perspective informed of compassion and concern for his mental and spiritual well-being. Because I actually am. I am perfectly willing and ready to be non-condescending and friendly. Sadly, some folks out there would still want to kill me if I did that.
But that's not what the film did.
It just took the image of Mohammed and showed him being a womanizer and being gay (or bi I guess).
Basically it was constructed to intentionally offend.
That is not the same as condemnation or criticism.
It served no purpose and ended up getting people killed.
But on the other hand with Salman Rushtie and then the danish Cartoon and then this latest nonsense I'm semi wondering if it might not be sort of good to take the George Carlin "dirty words" approach. Maybe the world should join in producing an absolute shit storm of movies and cartoons and every other sort of thing making fun of Mohammed.
Maybe an absolute tsunami of this from every corner of the planet would simply render the entire point moot. I mean they would be running around in circles tryna stomp out little fires.
Eventually they'd just have to shut up about it. And what are they gonna do be more pissed?
Is that even possible?
Unilateral Mohammed bashing.
The Alliance of the inane.
What a concept.
The French might even be on board.
I know. I am just arguing the general point about them going all apeshit about this.
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 22, 2012, 02:08:41 PM
I know. I am just arguing the general point about them going all apeshit about this.
Ah. Got it.
Quote from: BikerDude on September 22, 2012, 01:59:50 PM
with Salman Rushtie and then the danish Cartoon and then this latest nonsense I'm semi wondering if it might not be sort of good to take the George Carlin "dirty words" approach. Maybe the world should join in producing an absolute shit storm of movies and cartoons and every other sort of thing making fun of Mohammed.
Maybe an absolute tsunami of this from every corner of the planet would simply render the entire point moot. I mean they would be running around in circles tryna stomp out little fires.
Eventually they'd just have to shut up about it. And what are they gonna do be more pissed?
Is that even possible?
We'd just have to decide whether to call it a 'war on Islam' or a 'crusade'. Both sound pretty good - maybe we should get some advice from George Bush.
If we're trying to stamp out ideologies that lead to death and destruction let's not forget what a great job American political ideology did in Iraq.
That was a real fucking winner.
Never said the West is any better...sadly, it isn't :(
We're all still finding our way into the future. I personally would just like it if we could avoid hurting people anymore doing that.
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 22, 2012, 03:06:39 PM
Never said the West is any better...sadly, it isn't :(
We're all still finding our way into the future. I personally would just like it if we could avoid hurting people anymore doing that.
Trying to reason with a madman is a fool's errand. It's nice to say "take it easy" and "do no harm", but we can't all just sit back in blissful peace and ignore the rest of the world. I truly wonder if BD's idea of over-stimulation would render the Islamic insanity infective. Such a shit storm would have to hit hard, fast, and continuously. Who has the balls?
But who are the real 'madmen'? Western consumerist societies are the worst offenders of climate change and that will do infinately more damage to humankind than a few nutters burning down the odd cinema. WE are mad. It's just more comfortable to point the finger somewhere else.
but we all have to remember that a few hundred years ago it was us (not the americans as they didn't exist yet ) who were the terrorists, running around enforcing our god on the heathens and killing anyone who didnt believe, ... , or just looked funny. what goes around comes around dudes. welcome to the other side of extremism. sucks, dont it?
and we're still doing a bunch of shit right now. Every time we eat factory farmed meat or buy some cheap 'made in China' crap produced by some dude who is over-worked, under-paid and exposed to industrial contaminants. We live mad, immoral lives but we are so close to it we don't see it.
its a classic strategy mate - the subserviant invasion. the developed nations become so dependant on developing nations, the developing nations actually become bigger and more powerful and the master/servant role switches.
give it another 50 years dudes, if the world isn't baked or in a nuclear winter, we'll all be speaking chinese.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 22, 2012, 02:18:51 PM
Quote from: BikerDude on September 22, 2012, 01:59:50 PM
with Salman Rushtie and then the danish Cartoon and then this latest nonsense I'm semi wondering if it might not be sort of good to take the George Carlin "dirty words" approach. Maybe the world should join in producing an absolute shit storm of movies and cartoons and every other sort of thing making fun of Mohammed.
Maybe an absolute tsunami of this from every corner of the planet would simply render the entire point moot. I mean they would be running around in circles tryna stomp out little fires.
Eventually they'd just have to shut up about it. And what are they gonna do be more pissed?
Is that even possible?
We'd just have to decide whether to call it a 'war on Islam' or a 'crusade'. Both sound pretty good - maybe we should get some advice from George Bush.
If we're trying to stamp out ideologies that lead to death and destruction let's not forget what a great job American political ideology did in Iraq.
That was a real fucking winner.
What?
How in the hell does anything that you quoted suggest either a war on Islam or a crusade?
If people talk about speaking out against Islam in spite of the typical political correctness of not criticizing any religion no matter how loathsome I just don't see how that can be compared to the war in Iraq. I'm having a tough time following.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 22, 2012, 05:51:12 PM
But who are the real 'madmen'? Western consumerist societies are the worst offenders of climate change and that will do infinately more damage to humankind than a few nutters burning down the odd cinema. WE are mad. It's just more comfortable to point the finger somewhere else.
Some things we do are bad and certainly religious fundamentalism is.
Criticizing one does not indicate acceptance of the other.
It's not 2 sides one with white hat and one with black hats.
There are plenty of things to criticize western societies and Christianity but that's not what this topic is about.
Are you suggesting that it's all the fault of US policies?
Our history of misdeeds in the mideast is to blame and the religion that prescribes Jihad and terrorism is actually incidental?
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 22, 2012, 06:05:53 PM
and we're still doing a bunch of shit right now. Every time we eat factory farmed meat or buy some cheap 'made in China' crap produced by some dude who is over-worked, under-paid and exposed to industrial contaminants. We live mad, immoral lives but we are so close to it we don't see it.
That's all true.
I suggest that nobody lose site of what the issue is.
It is spelled out pretty comprehensively in Osama Bin Laden's letter to America in his own words.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver
He lists a bunch of grievance first some that have merit and some that really do amount to "hating our freedoms". But in the end any of his grievances are all irrelevant.
Once he reaches the part about what he requires from us the first item is that we become Islamic.
His version of Islam is 100% literal. It requires acceptance of Islam period.
What we have is a clash of the 2 most vile and intolerant religions in the world.
And both sides have drawn a line in the sand. More specifically the religions draw a line in the sand.
Both require people to follow them to the exclusion of all others.
When he talks about the the "Zionist Crusaders" in the mid east he has a point.
But it is a fact that Islam is a vile and horrible monstrosity that is simply the most repressive and evil thing that anybody could imagine. So for him to point out all of the myriad of sins of the west in the end is irreverent. It's their way or the highway. I am talking about the 100% literal reading of Islam.
My sentiments about Christianity are not much better.
Most of the most vile things that are done in it's name are not spelled out in a fatwa but they are real.
There's a reason why the nickname for the CIA is "Christians in Action".
All you have to do is look at Blackwater (XA) and a lot of the stuff that has been done by big corporations and guess what, it's all tied up in this weird apocalyptic lunacy.
The left behind series of books sells millions here. If a mushroom cloud appeared above Baghdad there is no doubt that there are a lot of Christians that would happy about it.
Christianity has nearly transformed to an apocalyptic cult of people cheering for the end times.
It's absolutely sick.
The enemy is religion.
It's all insane.
But that's just my opinion.
As soon as you have an 'enemy' you have a big problem. Better to use all of one's mental powers to re-frame one's relationship with religion in a way that avoids enmity.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 23, 2012, 03:25:59 AM
As soon as you have an 'enemy' you have a big problem. Better to use all of one's mental powers to re-frame one's relationship with religion in a way that avoids enmity.
So then we should accept Nazi's?
I just don't buy that religion should get different treatment.
And actually I find this confusing. Several post ago I see.....
Quote
But who are the real 'madmen'? Western consumerist societies are the worst offenders of climate change and that will do infinately more damage to humankind than a few nutters burning down the odd cinema. WE are mad. It's just more comfortable to point the finger somewhere else.
But when it comes to criticizing religion I should avoid emnity?
Isn't this another case of "Special Pleading" for religion. That it should be treated with different rules?
Here's another interesting article on the same site as linked in the original post.
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/islam-and-the-future-of-liberalism
and
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/september-11-2011
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 22, 2012, 05:51:12 PM
But who are the real 'madmen'? Western consumerist societies are the worst offenders of climate change and that will do infinately more damage to humankind than a few nutters burning down the odd cinema. WE are mad. It's just more comfortable to point the finger somewhere else.
You've built up a false dichotomy; it's not a case of one or the other being more right based on their contribution to global warming. The extent of a society's morality and integrity are just various shades of grey when compared to other societies... The fact that we contribute to global warming has not one shred of continuity with the Islam problem, so let's stick to the issue: Burning down cinemas, and murdering people because one's religious sensibilities are offended is just plain wrong. Period. No excuses. It's whacked...
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 23, 2012, 03:25:59 AM
As soon as you have an 'enemy' you have a big problem. Better to use all of one's mental powers to re-frame one's relationship with religion in a way that avoids enmity.
Oh, so we should white-wash the fatwas, minimizing them to something inconsequential for the sake of having a mental spa? These whacky Muslims don't need to be handled with kid gloves. I'm not saying return evil with evil, but they're like any child that needs discipline when having a tantrum...
Quote from: Hominid on September 23, 2012, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 23, 2012, 03:25:59 AM
As soon as you have an 'enemy' you have a big problem. Better to use all of one's mental powers to re-frame one's relationship with religion in a way that avoids enmity.
Oh, so we should white-wash the fatwas, minimizing them to something inconsequential for the sake of having a mental spa? These whacky Muslims don't need to be handled with kid gloves. I'm not saying return evil with evil, but they're like any child that needs discipline when having a tantrum...
Put the piece away dude. You claim to have converted to atheism but you still sound like a Polish Catholic. We don't need to "discipline" children we just need to love them and teach them and if that teaching involves natural consequences it should still be done with love.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 24, 2012, 09:31:31 AM
Quote from: Hominid on September 23, 2012, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 23, 2012, 03:25:59 AM
As soon as you have an 'enemy' you have a big problem. Better to use all of one's mental powers to re-frame one's relationship with religion in a way that avoids enmity.
Oh, so we should white-wash the fatwas, minimizing them to something inconsequential for the sake of having a mental spa? These whacky Muslims don't need to be handled with kid gloves. I'm not saying return evil with evil, but they're like any child that needs discipline when having a tantrum...
Put the piece away dude. You claim to have converted to atheism but you still sound like a Polish Catholic. We don't need to "discipline" children we just need to love them and teach them and if that teaching involves natural consequences it should still be done with love.
The natural consequences of the last 1500 years has done nothing to stop the idiocy... Your "Doctor Spock" child psychology will do nothing but allow them continued licence to be the assholes that they are.
Quote from: Hominid on September 24, 2012, 09:44:43 AM
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 24, 2012, 09:31:31 AM
Quote from: Hominid on September 23, 2012, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 23, 2012, 03:25:59 AM
As soon as you have an 'enemy' you have a big problem. Better to use all of one's mental powers to re-frame one's relationship with religion in a way that avoids enmity.
Oh, so we should white-wash the fatwas, minimizing them to something inconsequential for the sake of having a mental spa? These whacky Muslims don't need to be handled with kid gloves. I'm not saying return evil with evil, but they're like any child that needs discipline when having a tantrum...
Put the piece away dude. You claim to have converted to atheism but you still sound like a Polish Catholic. We don't need to "discipline" children we just need to love them and teach them and if that teaching involves natural consequences it should still be done with love.
The natural consequences of the last 1500 years has done nothing to stop the idiocy... Your "Doctor Spock" child psychology will do nothing but allow them continued licence to be the assholes that they are.
That's just the question though dude. Are they really "assholes"? If it wasn't for arabs we wouldn't have most of mathematics, a lot of modern medicine and DB's favorite web-site hottiesinhijabs.com (don't pretend you never looked dude).
It's Dr Baer by the way, not Dr Spock.
Honestly mate if any of my muslim friends ever looked at this site they'd think is was a KKK convention.
It *is* Dr. Spock, and the dudes burning down cinemas and murdering people over a Youtube video are indeed assholes. Can't argue over that point dude...
Dr Greg Baer (Real Love) - different philosophy to the Spockmeister.
Don't you think Mandela had every right to call whites 'assholes' after twenty-seven years in prison? But he didn't. He shook their hands as brothers.
We can do the same. It's a lot more challenging than dismissing people as idiots or assholes but we cannot have peace in our own hearts when we hold hatred towards anybody else - even that cunt who scammed me by charging for oak logs and delivering beech. - Okay, maybe that bastard's an exception.
Quote from: Boston Rockbury on September 24, 2012, 10:41:26 AM
Dr Greg Baer (Real Love) - different philosophy to the Spockmeister.
Don't you think Mandela had every right to call whites 'assholes' after twenty-seven years in prison? But he didn't. He shook their hands as brothers.
We can do the same. It's a lot more challenging than dismissing people as idiots or assholes but we cannot have peace in our own hearts when we hold hatred towards anybody else - even that cunt who scammed me by charging for oak logs and delivering beech. - Okay, maybe that bastard's an exception.
It's about Religions that PROHIBIT peace with others not of the same religion.
To criticize and yes condemn the religion is IMHO correct and imperative.
As far as calling them assholes, well it's certainly a handy term. I'd use zealot.
But I do not believe for a second that "shaking hands" is going to do a damn thing.
The beliefs of extremist's like Bin Laden are in reality a literal interpretation.
They don't happen in spite of the religion they are implicit in it.
As far as I'm concerned when we see certain types of activities from Christians it is perfectly reasonable to condemn that religion likewise. The beliefs of the people from Westboro baptist church can not be separated from the fact that they take their belief system from a book that condemns homosexuals. So it unsurprising that some Christians end up like these jerks. Nor can we dismiss the fact that the south justified slavery and thought themselves to be fighting on the side of God completely based on the writings of the bible. Which explicitly supports slavery.
As far as I'm concerned when you see behavior from people of a given faith that mirrors exactly what the faith prescribes it is absurd to separate the 2 or expect that appeals to sense are likely to have any effect.
IMHO the most strident criticism of that faith is valid and imperative.
Hey dude you have a constitutional right to go forth and 'stridently criticise' - just seems a little reactionary that's all.