Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

No need for a cartoon mocking the idea of mocking bad ideas...

Actually, its not. The term "race" refers to two things (which people often fail to recognize are two different things) -- self-identity with a particular group -- which can change -- or an external, social perceived association with a particular group -- which can also change.

> You are responsible for the memes you host and propagate

Group identity (both self-identification and which buckets you put other people in) is a set of memes as much as any religion is (in fact, historically, its often been a set of memes tied to religion.)

The first example that came to mind was the Unabomber - last attack was 1995, and he was explicitly opposing the technology-rich western world.

A simple google search for "terrorist attacks not muslim" brought up: http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/

"only 6% of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil from 1980 to 2005 were carried out by Islamic extremists."

"In fact, a whopping 99.6% of terrorist attacks in Europe were by non-Muslim groups; a good 84.8% of attacks were from separatist groups completely unrelated to Islam. Leftist groups accounted for over sixteen times as much terrorism as radical Islamic groups. Only a measly 0.4% of terrorist attacks from 2006 to 2008 could be attributed to extremist Muslims."

Then you didn't read the actual Quran. I will not claim that the Quran is more violent than other holy books, but it certainly has its share of calls to violence.

Compelling, of course, is a subjective word. So, you mean to say that there is no evidence that compels you. But, certainly, you are aware of eyewitness accounts of, say, Jesus' life and work, as well as archaeological evidence. You can choose not to be compelled by the evidence, but you cannot say it doesn't exist. And, you obviously cannot claim that it fails to compel others.

>I fully believe that unicorns could exist. But if you claim they do exist, I will call you on your bullshit, and demand you present a proof.

It's pretty stunning that, to your mind, nothing exists unless it can be proven. Again, I take you back to that trite and cliche notion that you cannot prove your own existence.

Alone, that statement would be pseudo-philosophical mumbo-jumbo, but I say this here only because the utter paucity in what any of us knows should undermine your confidence in imposing your own beliefs at least somewhat?

But, keeping it to the physical world, you are arguing, essentially, that you can explain (or prove) each and every thing that you observe.

>No, you don't understand science. There is not faith. There are only measurements.

Measurements are mere interpretations of what is "demonstrated". There is faith in science the moment we draw a conclusion predicated upon something that we cannot fully explain, but can only observe. In fact, religion itself has served this very role for millennia.

Some of our most accepted and consequential theories (e.g. Big Bang itself) are predicated on things that we cannot yet explain. In fact, we make "allowances" for some of these things that are themselves yet proven.

Yeah, it's the best scientific explanation we have so far. But, I think it's a bit presumptuous to go bashing people over the head with it.

>This is the other part of my argument; even if we assume that the universe and everything in it was created by God, the question is, which God?

Well, I wonder, if you allow that any God created the universe, whether the discussion about which God dissolve into pure meaninglessness? That is, if you acknowledge the existence of a God that created the Universe (and you), then are you really in a position to quibble about God's nature if you're not willing to consider the "evidence" from those who claim to know?

But, any one of these, all of these, or none of these could be correct. There could be some truth that reconciles all of these, as much as some unknown about dark matter or gravity or time could unify physics.

>Occam's Razor, a mental trick commonly applied in science, suggests that all religions are false.

Yeah, I think I may have come across one of the most famous "mental tricks" in the world from time-to-time! Seriously, it actually has an interesting history with regard to religion and its namesake, who was actually a Christian. You should look it up.