|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 03/25/2006 : 09:58:54
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/no-tolerance-for-islam_b_17807.html
Couldn't agree more.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 11:47:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/no-tolerance-for-islam_b_17807.html
Couldn't agree more.
I too -- they can all be damned into their own hells. quote:
Religious dogma has no tolerance for you if you do not buy into all of its tenets. In fact, it usually has a special place in hell reserved for you. So, why would you have tolerance for this type of ideology, which certainly does not return the favor?
Polite acquiescence is complicity. Religion is entirely irrational. It must be confronted and defeated. Otherwise, we are going to go another thousand years with people threatening to rip each other's heads off because they don't believe in each other's specific brand of crazy.
But, cynic that I am, I'm betting on the thousand more years of murderous irrationality.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
 |
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 12:08:34 [Permalink]
|
I totally agree with the assertion: quote:
I want to make clear that I am not speaking against spirituality or the belief in a higher consciousness in general. I know that many of you believe that you experience things that cannot be explained by science yet. I have no beef with that.
But when you say we must all follow the mad rants of a long dead rabbi, priest or imam, you cross the line. And when some of you say we should run our government based on these ancient fairy tales or that we should kill based on them, you are so over the line that it requires action against you.
And I also agree that the culture must change in the mid-East before they can have a secular and Democratic government, and that the way to encourage that is through criticism, not violence.
But the article does a wee bit of double talk. For instance it says “Religion has to be torn from the root.”, “Obviously, none of the religions are exempt.” and “Religion is entirely irrational. It must be confronted and defeated.”
So what does his allowance for “spirituality or the belief in a higher consciousness in general.” really mean? Does someone cross the line when they go to an actual house of worship with other people? Do they cross the line when they pray? When they give their “higher consciousness” a name? When they participate in religious rituals of any kind? Can one be a Muslim or Christian at all, or must we criticize Unitarians, Reform Judaism, liberal protestant congregations, and modernized Islamic communities as vemenontly as we criticize Orthodox Jews, Roman Catholics, conservative Evangelicals, and Islamic Fundamentalists?
Just because cleric Abdul Raoulf is “moderate” for Afghanistan doesn't mean he's not a fundamentalist and an extremist by Western standards. If we go by Western standards, there are Christians and Muslims who are not just moderate, but outright humanistic and in full support of secular government. They are a minority, which is all the more reason why they need to be protected, encouraged, and commended. To say that “religion” itself (instead of fundamentalism) is the enemy weakens this otherwise excellent column.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/25/2006 12:09:06 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 13:27:19 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
quote:
So what does his allowance for “spirituality or the belief in a higher consciousness in general.” really mean? Does someone cross the line when they go to an actual house of worship with other people? Do they cross the line when they pray? When they give their “higher consciousness” a name? When they participate in religious rituals of any kind? Can one be a Muslim or Christian at all, or must we criticize Unitarians, Reform Judaism, liberal protestant congregations, and modernized Islamic communities as vemenontly as we criticize Orthodox Jews, Roman Catholics, conservative Evangelicals, and Islamic Fundamentalists?
Just because cleric Abdul Raoulf is “moderate” for Afghanistan doesn't mean he's not a fundamentalist and an extremist by Western standards. If we go by Western standards, there are Christians and Muslims who are not just moderate, but outright humanistic and in full support of secular government. They are a minority, which is all the more reason why they need to be protected, encouraged, and commended. To say that “religion” itself (instead of fundamentalism) is the enemy weakens this otherwise excellent column.
It seemed fairly obvious that the line he is talking about is when your religion doesn't allow tolerance for other religions.
While fundamentalists may be the most blatant, just ask any old christian (who really believes in the whole god/jesus heaven/hell thing) if they think you, as a non-believer, are going to hell. It is a miniscule step from the belief that another person is going to hell to outright discrimination against them.
While some of these problems may have a different root cause, the ones that are currently dragging us down are based in a couple of religions. Without religion, you don't have religious fundamentalism.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 17:20:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
But, cynic that I am, I'm betting on the thousand more years of murderous irrationality.
Unfortunately Filthy, cynicism, rationalism, or even a study of history will most likely get you to the same conclusion. I agree almost entirely. A thousand years is a long time, but it will take a lot of generations, as you almost never convince extremists of any sort to change their minds. The most plausible "solution" is to educate future generations better, as well as reducing the amount of historical hatred that's passed on, so I think you're at the very least in the ballpark. Without some pretty ground-breaking medical discoveries, it's unlikely anyone currently here will see the demise of the insanity.
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
But the article does a wee bit of double talk. For instance it says “Religion has to be torn from the root.”, “Obviously, none of the religions are exempt.” and “Religion is entirely irrational. It must be confronted and defeated.”
It is a little hypocritical. However, in my mind ( I won't pretend to know the Author's), defeated would not mean eradicated. You obviously can't stop people believing things, you can however try to stop them doing bad things to others (or perhaps even themselves) based on their beliefs.
I think we do ourselves a major disservice by being careful not to label organised religions as a whole as irrational. A lot of sensible theists will openly admit that their beliefs aren't rational. Because there certainly are intelligent, religious people who aren't out to either convert/harm everyone else, we often see the argument "see religion isn't all bad". These people would (and this is speculation on my part) generally be just as "nice" in the absence of their religion. We're just a little too careful, in my opinion, about not offending the "little guys". |
John's just this guy, you know. |
| Edited by - JohnOAS on 03/25/2006 17:27:38 |
|
|
|
trogdor
Skeptic Friend
198 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 17:43:53 [Permalink]
|
Hmm...
I'm not sure I agree with you all. Being young and impressionable I have no clear stance on the topic but I will give it a shot.
I think this is just a problem of culture shock. In the US this would be horrible. But the mid east is very very different. should we agree with their persecution? Hell no! But rushing in and making them adopt secular governments will not work.
This is not well thought out. I will think about it while I go maple syruping this week end |
all eyes were on Ford Prefect. some of them were on stalks.
-Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 22:06:38 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote: quote:
It seemed fairly obvious that the line he is talking about is when your religion doesn't allow tolerance for other religions.
That's not what he wrote. That's why I quoted three lines where he says the problem is "religion", not "intolerant religion", not "fundamentalism", just "religion". He also uses the same metaphor of religion being a root that Taslima Nasrin uses. In a 1998 interview she said that there was no difference between Islam and Islamic fundamentalism and "I belive religion is the root, and from the root fundamentalism grows as a poisonous stem. If we remove fundamentalism and keep religion, then one day or another fundamentalism will grow again."
My problem with this argument is that it is a slippery slope. There is in fact a difference between fundamentalists and religions that are compatable with a secular government and modern society. I don't blame Nasrin for holding the opinions she holds considering that she comes from a place where there really isn't any moderate or liberal Islam, and what is called moderate is really just a lesser kind of extremism. But she is out of touch with the majority of religious people of the modern world who are not extremists.
quote:
While fundamentalists may be the most blatant, just ask any old christian (who really believes in the whole god/jesus heaven/hell thing) if they think you, as a non-believer, are going to hell. It is a miniscule step from the belief that another person is going to hell to outright discrimination against them.
Any old Christian, huh? Well I know a whole bunch of them: my mom, brother, brother's girlfriend, many aunts and uncles and cousins, three women in my writing club. Out of all of those Christians, only one (a 19 year old cousin who pretty much joined one of those young, hip, evangelical Christian cult-clubs) who believes that only Christians get into heaven. My 12th grade religion teacher (a Roman Catholic nun) said that she interpreted the passages about getting into the heaven through Christ as that being Christ-like (knowing right from wrong and trying to do right) was enough to get an atheist into heaven. My friend Elena is a Buddhist who married a Christian and he never tries to convert her and isn't Evangelical. If he thought he wife was going to hell, don't you think he'd try to do something about that? Those people are why I'm so fervently protective of what I think are "good" Christians. (All the people I just mentioned are practicing Christians.)
quote:
While some of these problems may have a different root cause, the ones that are currently dragging us down are based in a couple of religions. Without religion, you don't have religious fundamentalism.
Again, slippery slope argument. In North Korea we see vicious, horrible oppression that has nothing to do with religion. There are many examples of non-religious fanaticism that had led to genocide or other types of oppression of groups of people. I don't think religion causes that. I think competition for limited natural resources causes that. And the solution is seeing and treating all people like we are part of one family, rather than emphasizing our differences, be they based on religion, race, ethnicity, or whatever. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/25/2006 22:10:12 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 22:50:10 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
quote:
There is in fact a difference between fundamentalists and religions that are compatable with a secular government and modern society.
Yeah, the difference is that the fundies outnumber anyone with a semi-rational mindset.
quote:
Any old Christian, huh? Well I know a whole bunch of them: my mom, brother, brother's girlfriend, many aunts and uncles and cousins, three women in my writing club. Out of all of those Christians, only one (a 19 year old cousin who pretty much joined one of those young, hip, evangelical Christian cult-clubs) who believes that only Christians get into heaven.
Maybe they are just being nice to you. I have not met anyone who truly believes in the christian concepts of god/jesus and heaven/hell that thinks I will be going to their heaven. Not one. Or maybe they don't really believe the clap-trap and just pay it lipservice because it provides them a sense of belonging.
quote:
My 12th grade religion teacher (a Roman Catholic nun) said that she interpreted the passages about getting into the heaven through Christ as that being Christ-like (knowing right from wrong and trying to do right) was enough to get an atheist into heaven.
That nun certainly isn't towing the official line for her church. Bet she is in a small minority.
quote:
My friend Elena is a Buddhist who married a Christian and he never tries to convert her and isn't Evangelical. If he thought he wife was going to hell, don't you think he'd try to do something about that?
Obviously not a person who truly believes in the official christian version of the afterlife. That's cool though. There are, I think, alot of people(professed christians) who don't buy into the whole literal bible and whatnot. Outside of a Unitarian church these folks are pretty rare though. Evangelicals, catholics, protestants, even liberal episcopalians are all pretty much in the "believe or go to hell" camp, in the official position statements of their churches.
quote:
Those people are why I'm so fervently protective of what I think are "good" Christians. (All the people I just mentioned are practicing Christians.)
"good" christians are outnumbered 10-1 by "bad" christians then.
quote:
In North Korea we see vicious, horrible oppression that has nothing to do with religion. There are many examples of non-religious fanaticism that had led to genocide or other types of oppression of groups of people.
Irrelevent, and a red-herring.
quote:
And the solution is seeing and treating all people like we are part of one family, rather than emphasizing our differences, be they based on religion, race, ethnicity, or whatever.
The solution to religious fanaticism is promoting greater tolerance?
I don't know what the solution is... but yours seems a little to "fluffy and friendly" to work.
How about we establish policy (foriegn and domestic) that bans religion from government? Refuse to deal with any theocratic governments? Refuse to deal with any secular governments that don't uphold basic human rights standards and have basic workers rights?
Oh... nevermind, we'd have to cut the Saudis out of the loop....
See? My idea for a fix has less a chance than yours.
Well, maybe if that political backlash filthy keeps talkin about ever actually gets here we'll have an opportunity to elect some rational people...
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2006 : 23:30:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Yeah, the difference is that the fundies outnumber anyone with a semi-rational mindset.
and quote:
"good" christians are outnumbered 10-1 by "bad" christians then.
Evidence? The highest estimates of fundamentalist Christians in the United States I've heard are 25%. That's definitely enough to influence politics and be a serious threat, but it doesn't make them a majority among people with religious beliefs.
quote:
Maybe they are just being nice to you. I have not met anyone who truly believes in the christian concepts of god/jesus and heaven/hell that thinks I will be going to their heaven. Not one. Or maybe they don't really believe the clap-trap and just pay it lipservice because it provides them a sense of belonging.
What do you mean “truly believes in the Christian concepts of god/jesus and heaven/hell”? To me that means Jesus is divine, his coming to earth brought the salvation of mankind, and there is heaven and hell. The problem is that “divine”, “salvation”, and the concept of any kind of afterlife are all transcendent, metaphysical things that are subject to interpretation. Those things are all mysteries, not clearly defined (in scripture or anywhere else), and many Christians regard them as such. If you are trying to say that someone is not a true Christian unless they interpret all those metaphysical concepts in a particular way, then you are just being ignorant of Christian demographics, theology, and history.
quote:
That nun certainly isn't towing the official line for her church. Bet she is in a small minority.
Oh really? Please quote me some Catholic theology that is considered official dogma of the Catholic Church that clearly states only Christians get into heaven. You can't. There is no official dogma that says that. Many Catholic leaders and theologians have been of that opinion, but that is not the official line.
quote:
Obviously not a person who truly believes in the official christian version of the afterlife.
The “official” Christian version of the afterlife. OK, you obviously don't know much about Christianity beyond contemporary American evangelicalism.
You also completely misunderstood my “solution”. I didn't mean it in a fluffy way or that we should tolerate fundamentalism even more. I've made it pretty clear that I politically and philosophically oppose fundamentalism, and I said that I agreed with almost everything the guy said in his blog entry. I was being broad for the sake of including everything from secular government to open criticism of fundamentalism as a means toward “seeing and treating all people like we are one family”. In my ideal vision, most people probably continue to have religious beliefs, but they don't let their beliefs contradict science and reason, and they base their ethics on what improves the condition of human life on earth. And if fundamentalists still exist, they are a quiet minority that keeps to its own self-isolated communities, and don't get involved in politics, like the Amish.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular
Canada
510 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 00:31:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
In North Korea we see vicious, horrible oppression that has nothing to do with religion. There are many examples of non-religious fanaticism that had led to genocide or other types of oppression of groups of people. I don't think religion causes that. I think competition for limited natural resources causes that. And the solution is seeing and treating all people like we are part of one family, rather than emphasizing our differences, be they based on religion, race, ethnicity, or whatever.
That depends on how you define religion. I would say that North Korea is a theocracy based on worship of Kim Jong Il and his father Kim-il Sung. North Koreans even talk about Kim Jong il coming to them in dreams. The belief in the government is clearly irrational since they are supposed to be a socialist state but they widespread starvation. I would agree that the genocide in Rwanda was caused by competition for resources (a hell a of a lot of priests nuns etc were involved in that one however). The situation in Darfur may have similar roots but religion certainly plays a major role their. Religion is nearly always used as justification for doing terrible things to other people - "god is on our side so what we are doing must be OK"
I would agree with you that the majority of Christians (at least in Canada) are like the people you refer to. However, they are basically ignoring most of what their religion claims is true. I always wonder why they don't just dump the remaining nonsense.
Why are we supporting these barbarians?
|
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King
History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms
"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler
"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 02:43:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by trogdor
Hmm...
I'm not sure I agree with you all. Being young and impressionable I have no clear stance on the topic but I will give it a shot.
I think this is just a problem of culture shock. In the US this would be horrible. But the mid east is very very different. should we agree with their persecution? Hell no! But rushing in and making them adopt secular governments will not work.
This is not well thought out. I will think about it while I go maple syruping this week end
I asked for a suggestion as to how to answer my son's young friends when they made statements that everyone has their own view so who are we to tell them to have ours and one BB member gave an answer that applies here as well.
"This is shinola, that is shit...if you are of the opinion that either can shine your shoes, you're wrong."
I realize it's a tad off the mark but the point is, culture or no culture, it's OK to criticize some stuff and this is one of those times.
We overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan. The Taliban oppressed women and other religions. What is the point of not at least making sure minorities in these countries we are interfering in are afforded some rights?
Bush has screwed this whole thing up and I don't have high expectations he will handle this or the new Iraq government any better. We needed to but didn't make it clear from the start that while we were there to give them autonomy and democracy, we were also there to protect the minorities in those countries. By only offering the simplistic view that majority vote would give majority rule and that was democracy, Bush has now painted our whole country into a corner. If we say you vote but if we don't like it we'll stop you, we look like the obvious puppet masters the population already believes we truly are. If on the other hand, Bush had set out some standards for minority rights from the beginning, and made it clear it was the minority interests we were going to stand up for, rather than our own interests, the issues created by these religious fanatics who have the majority vote wouldn't be so hard to deal with. But then what could we have expected from an incompetent administration that wants majority rule in this country as well, without protection for minority rights here either. |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 08:01:54 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
quote:
The highest estimates of fundamentalist Christians in the United States I've heard are 25%.
I've heard that a percentage greater (20 points) than that believe the god made man exactly how it states in the bible.
I would classify any YECer as a christian fundamentalist. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 03/26/2006 08:02:39 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 11:32:53 [Permalink]
|
Ghost Skeptic wrote: quote:
I would agree with you that the majority of Christians (at least in Canada) are like the people you refer to. However, they are basically ignoring most of what their religion claims is true. I always wonder why they don't just dump the remaining nonsense.
I think that is insulting to those Christians. Some liberals Christians are theologians who have been studying scripture their whole lives. Some are clergy who devote their lives to the betterment of their religious community. Why should fundamentalists (most of whom are practically illiterate and historically ignorant morons) be the ones who get to decide what Christianity claims to be true? Christianity is defined by the beliefs and practices of all of its adherents. There is no clear official line and there never has been. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/26/2006 11:34:21 |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 11:46:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You cannot engage in rational discourse with people who don't believe in being rational. They believe in ancient mythologies that are rooted in utter nonsense.
...
If you buy into the premise that the man in the sky tells you what to do and will torture you forever if you so much as slightly displease him, then you will believe any illogical thing someone tells you.
This, I think, is the crux of the issue. It's the irrationality inherent in revealed religions. The mindset that will accept the nonsensical as truth is a danger. It is a danger to our freedom when proponents of said nonsense claim that it is a legitimate basis for a government. It is a danger to our educational system when believers promote their version of it as scientifically valid. And it is a danger to our lives when the believers are willing to kill and die for their irrational beliefs. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
| Edited by - R.Wreck on 03/26/2006 11:47:58 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2006 : 15:27:11 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
quote:
What do you mean “truly believes in the Christian concepts of god/jesus and heaven/hell”? To me that means Jesus is divine, his coming to earth brought the salvation of mankind, and there is heaven and hell. The problem is that “divine”, “salvation”, and the concept of any kind of afterlife are all transcendent, metaphysical things that are subject to interpretation. Those things are all mysteries, not clearly defined (in scripture or anywhere else), and many Christians regard them as such. If you are trying to say that someone is not a true Christian unless they interpret all those metaphysical concepts in a particular way, then you are just being ignorant of Christian demographics, theology, and history.
Dude, give me a break! I must delete your reply. Please try again…
Kil
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
