• Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Steven wrote
    Dammit, I was hoping for a trademark Martijn essay with counterarguments against my own! (Or at least those that I've borrowed from others that I happen to agree with. biggrin )


    Counter arguments?
    Are there any points you made that you consider a need for to be balanced?
    I'll happily play the devil's advocate (or God's, as the case may be biggrin ), but for my own part there's little I find issue with, aside from this blanket statement from the previous page:
    The religion of Islam encourages and teaches evilness at its very core

    which is factually wrong.

    The religion of Islam is neither more merciful nor more cruel than other religions, nor is its holy text. It most certainly does not teach evil as a way of life, not even as defined by our own enlightened standards. There is however the widespread problem that no one is is permitted to interpret and explain the Quran's texts as it's supposed to be "the literal word of God". Of course more flexible and constructive souls still do question the validity of literally applying a millennium later 9th century rules made up by a moderately succesful warlord (and VERY successful prophet) to try and bind an inherently tribal and savage people together.

    However the more vocal followers of Islam go out of their way to explain why it's OK to slap a woman around ("well, you can, if she's, like, bad or something" ), and it's cool to hate all Jews ( "apes and pigs!").

    As per usual, it's the militant, fundamentalist followers of a book that was quite relevant and reformative in many ways a thousand years ago, but has no bearing on any socio-economic, legal and political circumstances, and only the most basic of bearing on any 21st century ethic and moral standards, that pose the problem. And sadly these are the guys in charge in Afghanistan, Iran, Malyasia and Saudi-Arabia.
    Not the moderates.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Fair enough I guess. The Koran, although it may indeed have 'good' things to teach as well, they certainly cannot account for such things as:


    'Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.' - Koran 9:73

    'Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them. Know that God is with the righteous.' - Koran 9:123

    'Let the believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful - he that does this has nothing to hope for from God - except in self-defense.' - Koran 3:28

    'Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage. ...[I]f they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they desist, God is forgiving and merciful [yeah, right]. Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers.' - Koran 2:190-93


    Once the person truly believes this to be the word of God, then it would seem they are free and justifiably able and willing to perform acts of 'evil', as we would see it. (To them, they would be performing acts of 'righteousness' - which is a problem with the faith itself.)

    So I don't know whether to laugh or cry. biggrin sad
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    Martijn wrote
    Steven wrote
    Dammit, I was hoping for a trademark Martijn essay with counterarguments against my own! (Or at least those that I've borrowed from others that I happen to agree with. biggrin )


    Counter arguments?
    Are there any points you made that you consider a need for to be balanced?


    Yeah! I don't hold my opinions particularly highly, I'm more than willing to change them (or perhaps adjust them) if someone else can challenge them intelligibly. (That's the beauty of atheism right there. biggrin )
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Steven wrote
    Fair enough I guess. The Koran, although it may indeed have 'good' things to teach as well, they certainly cannot account for such things as:

    <lots of bad or at least easily evilly interpretable things>

    So I don't whether to laugh or cry. biggrin sad


    No different from most any high profile religious tome.
    Fanaticism (which is how I would label using such prehistoric rhetoric as literal commandments) almost always goes hand in hand with absolute intolerance. Islam, while currently the most high profile of all world religions, and the one that currently sees the most high profile excesses in fundamentalism and fanaticism, by no means stands alone.

    Steven wrote
    Martijn wrote

    Are there any points you made that you consider a need for to be balanced?


    Yeah! I don't hold my opinions particularly highly, I'm more than willing to change them (or perhaps adjust them) if someone else can challenge them intelligibly. (That's the beauty of atheism right there. biggrin )


    Nothing to do with atheism, but rather with a lack of inflexibility and of a closed mind to the ever changing nature of truth. Rest assured, I'll challenge what I think is worth challenging. But I'm not going to put forth any counterarguments that are logically flawed or that I do not have faith in myself.
    Otherwise this will just become an academic debating game, which can be fun, but is rather more an excercise than a proper and interesting conversation.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorplindboe
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    The Qur'an contains some sickening stuff, but so does the Bible. In a primitive culture, these religions can be very dangerous; the islamic world is currently undergoing their version of the Dark Ages. I don't think anti-islamic sentiments help, while they may be justified. Frankly I don't think there's much we can do, as the changes that are needed should probably come from the inside, but I think it will happen sooner or later.

    Peter smile
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Theists and the like tend to argue that anti-religious people only focus on the bad parts of religion. And that is an understandable reaction, particularly if their religion has indeed done a lot of good for them. But my hunch is that, quantitatively, perhaps religion has encouraged more good and happiness than evil and suffering. Qualitatively it may be the polar opposite.

    As I said before, I wish humans could find a better way of making themselves feel better (which is basically what religion tries to do in the modern world). Ultimately it is making them feel a lot worse! (On a larger scale.)

    But I'll be damned if I knew what could replace religion for the religiously-minded.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    Opium?

    wink
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    For the masses? cool
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    ...yeah... that was the joke. rolleyes
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    Yeah... I know... rolleyes

    biggrin
  1. Steven wrote
    Theists and the like tend to argue that anti-religious people only focus on the bad parts of religion. And that is an understandable reaction, particularly if their religion has indeed done a lot of good for them. But my hunch is that, quantitatively, perhaps religion has encouraged more good and happiness than evil and suffering. Qualitatively it may be the polar opposite.

    As I said before, I wish humans could find a better way of making themselves feel better (which is basically what religion tries to do in the modern world). Ultimately it is making them feel a lot worse! (On a larger scale.)

    But I'll be damned if I knew what could replace religion for the religiously-minded.


    It really depends here, Steven. Of course, you can build a dichotomy of religion and science and science DOES seem to be the biggest threat to religion. Or not?

    I've heard of many priests becoming physics professors, specializing in cosmology. Yes, that;s what happens today. Probably we could end up with some kind of a modern St. Thomas looking for a scientific proof of God's existence. Which is maybe pretty good, but what for?

    Faith. What is faith? Suspension of disbelief. As I said. People feel better thanks to religion, because they are put in a metaphysical context. They have somebody they can refer their problems to and ask for help. I remember that religion helped me out in a very depressive period in my life. Yes, I started to go to church again and so it went.

    Let's differ the original concept of religion from modern interpretations of it. It all changed in course of history, but the whole thing with not tolerating other religions was because, not sure here, didn't research it religion was one of things differing nations. So we are good, they are bad and we have the right to existence. Religion grounded existence. Then happened medieval times, where it was all rather bad and remember that finally the Pope John Paul II apologized for Crusades, Inquisition, not sure about America.

    Islam. Not an easy case. I'll add to Martijn's words one thing noticed by somebody whose name I don't remember. The Crusades gave Western civilization a big boost in civilization development. Islam world degraded. Everything polarized and that's why it all looks so bad today. And committing a sacriliege just for the case of freedom of speech is NEVER a good idea, because it is an evidence of cultural disrespect.
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    I disagree VEHEMENTLY.

    Faith is powerful enough to be able to handle anything perceived as sacrilege, as long as it remains within the boundaries of the rules we have agreed upon (i.e. no transgression of the law in any way).

    Freedom of speech is an absolute, not to be curtailed when it becomes inconvenient.
    Cultural respect (or rather relativity) in some weird way tends to propagate that most ludicrous of ideas that all cultures in some odd, abstract way are equal.

    They are NOT, nor have they EVER been.
    While there certainly is no culture that is "the best", there most certainly are cultures which are (infinitely) preferable over others due to communally held beliefs and convictions (whether they stem from the ten commandments, Rousseau's ideas on society or common sense) that life, liberty, justice and freedom are universal.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
  2. Yes, but what these caricatures were REALLY about?
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Incidentally, the Crusades did nothing to further Occidental civilization (quite the contrary: it was not until another two hundred years after the very last crusade that we stepped out of "the dark middle ages" ). Nor did it quench the the East: the collapse of the great Eastern Empires was effected far earlier than that by the Francs stopping them invading Europe at the battle of Poitiers in 732.
    The consequent backlash within Islamic ranks split leadership and (consequently) decisiveness, and reasserted the old tribal rivalries and politics.

    Certainly: some concerted efforts were made to repel the Western invaders during the Crusades, but that actually united the Islamic world again. The level of economic, technological, political and scientific prowess that was part of the Islamic world pre-Poitiers was however never again paraleled.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    PawelStroinski wrote
    Yes, but what these caricatures were REALLY about?


    The right to assert an opinion, however politically inconvenient.
    Nothing more.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
  3. For me it's a case of cultural respect, They knew how Islam sees any kind of depiction of people, especially Muhammad. And they still do the stuff. It's not a case of convenience to me. It's a case of decency and respect.

    Though respect is something of a big principle to me. Probably I find much more disrespectful than others, maybe I am even neurotic about it.
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Yeah, well, the huge problem with these "Islam sees (insert whatever you like) as A TERRIBLE INSULT" statements, is that Islam in fact generally does no such thing. In this case it takes but a bit of research to find out there are in fact many icons of Muhammed out there, including obviously a lot of Islamic ones. It's only certain interpretations (or followers of fundamentalist who twist certain takes on possible interpretations to fit their own myopic world views) that consider this "an insult".

    Generally though, there is no considered response: it's simple mob rule, where the mob, incited by manipulators whose words they would never even think of checking (let alone questioning), is quite easily drummed up to agitate against the hated (fill in whatever the Arab world happens to be hating today).

    I have never had anything but the deepest disdain for those who willingly and of their own volition remain stupid. I'll be damned if I start respecting them now simply because they now choose to remain so under the all-encompassing and convenient excuse of religion.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    I was wondering if there's anyone on this board who is Muslim?

    I'm guessing not!?
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
  4. Probably no Muslims here, yeah.

    And hopefully almost no or no anti-Muslims too!
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    I'm anti-Islam. Does that count?
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    I'm wondering if there are any Buddhists (I have a bone to pick with you guys on this whole detachment thing)
    Or Hindus (I have a bone to pick with you guys on this whole treatment of women thing)
    Or Rastafarians (I have a bone to pick with you guys on this whole dope thing)
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    PawelStroinski wrote
    Probably no Muslims here, yeah.

    And hopefully almost no or no anti-Muslims too!


    True, I would like to think everyone is anti-hate!
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008 edited
    Martijn wrote
    I'm wondering if there are any Buddhists (I have a bone to pick with you guys on this whole detachment thing)
    Or Hindus (I have a bone to pick with you guys on this whole treatment of women thing)
    Or Rastafarians (I have a bone to pick with you guys on this whole dope thing)


    "Rastaman vibration, yeah, is possitive"

    -Bob Marley wink


    I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the worst thing a man can be reincarnated as in Buddhism is a Woman ? My girl Mel once said Buddhism was the only religion she leaned toward until she found that out.
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
  5. I have a bone to pick up with myself on...

    OK, OK. I'm not a religion biggrin
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorplindboe
    • CommentTimeJan 2nd 2008
    The cartoons was about self-censorship due to muslims' wanting to enforce their religious taboos on non-muslims. Should our media just remain quiet out of fear of offending people who get violently offended even by the slightest provocation? There would be no media, or only the kind of media we see in totalitarian states, if we self-censored anything that could possibly offend.

    Peter smile
    • CommentAuthortjguitar
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2008
    Buddhism makes the most sense to me, but I wouldn't call myself Buddhist. I'm no sure it's necessarilly a religion either...though it certainly can be.

    I've been more on the atheist side but I'm more apathetic/agnostic, really.
  6. I'm really theist. I must admit and strongly theist. I respect other views a lot though. I know many great atheists, agnostics to see that there's nothing wrong with them. I hate zealousness (word?)
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2008
    Pfff, I guess that if one'd really felt a need to pigeonhole me, I'd probably be most like a secular humanist, but at the end of the day I'm not to worried with labels. It's only when certain philosophies or religious views are abused to cover up or contravene common sense and certain values I hold to be inalienable that I'll be getting up on the barricades.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorplindboe
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2008
    If I were to be religious I'd without doubt follow Ganesha. There's something cool about a god with an elephant head.

    Peter smile
    • CommentAuthortjguitar
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2008
    Martijn wrote
    Pfff, I guess that if one'd really felt a need to pigeonhole me, I'd probably be most like a secular humanist, but at the end of the day I'm not to worried with labels. It's only when certain philosophies or religious views are abused to cover up or contravene common sense and certain values I hold to be inalienable that I'll be getting up on the barricades.



    i feel somewhat similarly.