371–380 of 737 posts
As an atheist, I see Islam as a barbaric belief system of some ancient cave men. Sorry but I feel very difficult to empathise with people who in this day and age feel so strongly about religion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So let's quantify your definitions of "significant" and "terrorism". In the past 5 years, about 2% of terrorist attacks in Europe were found to be religiously motivated [0]. The majority are perpetrated by separatist organizations. There are over 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide [1]. Size estimates for the terrorist groups are: ISIS (52k - 258k [2]), Al Qaeda (19k-27k [3]). There are others, but I believe these are the…
Counting "number of attacks" is extremely misleading (I'm tempted to think, deliberately so). A moment's Googling shows that Islamic terror is responsible for the majority of deaths, by a long way http://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7552225/terrorism-europe-chart (and you can add a big chunk of green for France November 2015 now too)
I work with a Muslim and I'm a Christian. Since we are both very conservative, I actually have more in common with him than with my secular coworkers and friends. Unfortunately we both work remotely and live several hundred miles from each other. I think we could be good friends if we lived closer. One thing I have learned talking with my Muslim coworker is that, just like in Christianity, there are many divisions an…
This is often referred to as the narcissism of small differences. It's one of those terms I found had a lot of applications once I knew it so I thought I'd share.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because these people live in societies that have been colonized, manipulated, held down and bombed for decades on end, forcing them to get radically hateful and fundamentalist as a response and pass that on to others (younger men etc). Why would a white Swedish, Canadian etc. have any reason to do the same? Besides, is it just terrorism that's incompatible with an "open society", or other acts of murder and oppressio…
What's your point? That Islamic terrorism is compatible with open society because of a bunch of things were done to them over the past thousand years? Or is it that because Western society has had some bad actors/states, that we can never thereafter point to bad behaviors or systems of thought?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whilst I'm not the OP I'll happily give my thoughts as a not very good Anglican - who embodies the "great Anglican fudge". 1. Offended no. I'll think you're rather rude, the same as if I wrote $manifestDestiny = false. If you know someone you can have banter with them. 2. IT has all sorts of articles of faith. vi versus emacs, I'm weird as I like nano. Religion is a way of living your life, my code is in no way affec…
Thank you for your honest answers. Let me respond to your counter question. I'm considering myself as an atheist. I graduated law and (but) I'm currently working in IT. What I found about myself and my own beliefs ( good vs. bad ) is basically a consequence of thousands of years of human civilization absorbed and morally embeded in human beings and in logically written laws. So basically what I believe doing is good…
The concept of "no good without religion" has a pretty decent intro with both sides at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_morality#Morality_requ...
Personally utilitarianism, often held as the secular morality, threatens to go down some really dark paths and has done so. You could easily see how things like eugenics (widely practised in the West until the Nazis put it beyond the pale) became popular, and it was the Catholic church who led the fight against it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you come up with one where significant numbers of the billions of Muslims in the world are committing terrorist atrocities abroad? The vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace, just like everybody else. To your question though, the French resistance during the second world war could easily have been called terrorists, as could the American revolutionary army.
If you want to consider the list (that's as long as my arm) of Islamic terror attacks in the 21st century "insignificant", then that's on you, I guess. It's absolutely not inconsistent to hold the view that Islamically-inspired terror is a big problem for the world, whilst simultaneously holding the view that the vast majority of muslims are peaceful. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise.
A vocal and deplorable minority of Muslims are actively attempted to split the world into Us and Them, I don't see that playing into their hand and deciding that I'm going to declare all Muslims want me dead is really going to help matters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, that's a complete cop out. Can you come up with any definition of "terrorist" where significant numbers of the one billion Chinese are commiting terrorist atrocities abroad, for example?
So let's quantify your definitions of "significant" and "terrorism". In the past 5 years, about 2% of terrorist attacks in Europe were found to be religiously motivated [0]. The majority are perpetrated by separatist organizations. There are over 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide [1]. Size estimates for the terrorist groups are: ISIS (52k - 258k [2]), Al Qaeda (19k-27k [3]). There are others, but I believe these are the…
I find this comment very strange. It's as though I can't acknowledge that Islamic terror is the biggest violent threat facing Europe whilst at the same time not hate muslims (?!?!?! how can anyone do that ?!?!?!).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that the kind of place where you'd expect apostates to be killed, if anywhere? Not necessarily, no. Support for murdering apostates can be low in countries with a majority Muslim population (Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are all in the low single-digit percentage range, it's at 8% in Turkey), and the figures for minority Muslim communities in western countries might be comparably low. Also…
You're down from "40%" to single examples. Time to stop worrying ;)
Isn't it sad that this has to be said at all? "Hey, not every adherent of a religion supports killing innocent people of a different religion". It'd be like us having to apologize for the Crusades. Besides, the hits were driven by politics, religion is just a facade.
Up until a few weeks ago I used to think that religion is just a facade, but I no longer think that is true. Religion is the center of their beliefs, and a very important factor that drives their actions. When the Boston bomber says "Know you are fighting men who look into the barrel of your gun and see heaven, how can you compete with that?" he is not lying. This is what these people truly believe. They think the me…
Do not give them death them. Give them suffering for years and years without the release of death. Let's see how they enjoy that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I support freedom of speech - absolute and unrestricted. What if my "free speech" involves drawing masses of people and telling them, persuading them, to kill you, your wife, your kids, your mother and father because you have the wrong skin color, eye color, religion or whatever else I imagine?
Then I disagree with what you say, but will defend your right to say it.
I've seen first hand that most people bend easily. A very charismatic leader can do a lot of harm.
I'm a firm believer in anti-hate-speech laws.