Soldier shot at National War Memorial in Ottawa

[Martinus]

There is no bigotry in stating that their so-called prophet committed numerous atrocities and adapted his 'revelation' to suit him committing these atrocities, thus presenting a nice religious dispensation for his followers (both early and later) to commit more atrocities. The difference between "what would Jesus do" and "what would mohammed do" is quite clear.

Too bad all the Christians who have committed atrocities in the name of their religion didn't understand "what Jesus would do" as clearly as you seem to think.  Also it is difficult to explain all the peaceful Muslims if "what Mohammad would do" is as clear as you think.



Deus Vult and all that 

Apparently, according to a Gallup poll done in 2007, 61% of UK muslims (and 71% of young UK muslims) believed homosexuality should be illegal. Not sure how many UK Christians believed that at the time but I suspect the percentage was smaller. Which is why reasoning like yours is pretty fallacious.

[crazy canuck]

There is no bigotry in stating that their so-called prophet committed numerous atrocities and adapted his 'revelation' to suit him committing these atrocities, thus presenting a nice religious dispensation for his followers (both early and later) to commit more atrocities. The difference between "what would Jesus do" and "what would mohammed do" is quite clear.

Too bad all the Christians who have committed atrocities in the name of their religion didn't understand "what Jesus would do" as clearly as you seem to think.  Also it is difficult to explain all the peaceful Muslims if "what Mohammad would do" is as clear as you think.



Deus Vult and all that 

Apparently, according to a Gallup poll done in 2007, 61% of UK muslims (and 71% of young UK muslims) believed homosexuality should be illegal. Not sure how many UK Christians believed that at the time but I suspect the percentage was smaller. Which is why reasoning like yours is pretty fallacious.

The claim being made was that Islam is evil but Christianity is good.  If we are to measure evil and goodness by the respective stances of each religion on the issue of gays, the Bible suggests that gays should be killed ("If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." ) and certainly there are Christians who still believe the being gay should be illegal.  So explain to me how, on your view of what is the defining issue, one religion can be judged more moral than the other?

[Martinus]

I don't care what religious text say (and you don't care either, as you said before). What I care about is what people who describe themselves as followers of a given religion say.

Did I claim that no Christians believe that homosexuality should be illegal? No, I claimed the percentage is much smaller than among UK-based Muslims (if I were to guess, among UK-based Christians, it would be 10% or less).

Now, I don't have more recent statistical data so this number may have fallen among UK Muslims, but I would say it highlights a very strong disconnect between this religious minority and the society at large, which has just passed gay marriage.

Btw, thinking that something should be illegal is quite different than disapproving of it morally (and I think Christians, even fundamentalist ones, usually grasp that difference). (Incidentally, a 2009 poll among UK Muslims apparently did not find a single one who did not disapprove of homosexuality morally).

In other news, apparently Muslims (which represent 2% of the UK populace) are responsible for app. 25% of acts of homophobic violence in the UK as well. I am also pretty happy to use willingness to violently beat and/or kill someone because of their sexuality as a measure of evil - do you disagree with that?

[Viking]

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things.

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims Christians/Jews good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things God either ordered that it be done or saw that it was good.

See how silly that sounds?

and just so there is no confusion about how graphic the Bible can get on these topics.

Look, if you want to argue which of the Quran and Old Testament is the most evil book in religion and which is the second most evil book in religion then I think you are wasting your time. I think you are sort of making my point for me by comparing The Quran either favorably or comparably to the The Old Testament.

You may have noticed that I am just as vitriolic about the Old Testament as I am about the Quran. There are long tedious threads in Languish devoted to just that.

Now, to the comparison, not so much of the books but of the theology behind them and the behavior they provoke today.

Not insignificant cases of paedophilia/torture/decaptiation/polygamy/FGM/assassination/desacration (which I will refer to as "evil" (the noun) from now on) are being carried out today by muslims with theological justifications. This evil is on a scale many orders of magnitude larger than the evil performed with theological justifications by any other major religion. And, yes, when an act is carried out with a theological justification it is carried out by the religion.

The Old Testament Temple Judaism has been replaced by Rabbinic Judaism and New Testament Christianity in virtually all cases. Rabbinic Judaism spends most of it's theological energy finding out how they can get around the stupid laws in the old testament. Christianity has the theological tools to just ignore anything they dont' like in the old testament. Rabbinic Judaism, like the Ahmadi and Ismaili sects in many places, has had to do it's theology in minority situations where they do not have the power of the state or society to back them up so all three of these sects have adjusted their theology accordingly. Sunni Islam doesn't have the theological tools to do any changes. It is an article of faith with them that they already know what the perfect society is and that is the islamic state in mecca and medina under the prophet. 

The Old Testament evils were not general they were specific to time and place. The muslims are commanded by god to do evil to a general class of people (including all of us here on languish). There are some jewish nutjobs that try to claim the palestinians are amalekites or jebusites or whatever. The point there is that muslims are commanded to do evil to named groups still existing today. Me included.

In any case, it is Tu Quoque, and a pathetic one at that when used on a radical atheist such as myself. In any case, so what if the Old Testament is evil? Does that somehow make the Quran less evil?

[crazy canuck]

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things.

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims Christians/Jews good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things God either ordered that it be done or saw that it was good.

See how silly that sounds?

and just so there is no confusion about how graphic the Bible can get on these topics.

Look, if you want to argue which of the Quran and Old Testament is the most evil book in religion and which is the second most evil book in religion then I think you are wasting your time.

I really wish people would pay attention to what was being said before making stupid comments like this.

The claim being made was that Islam was evil and Christianity was good.

I am not trying to make an argument that one is morally superior.  Just that they both have warts.  If you want to engage in the silliness of claiming that one is clearly superior to the other then fill your boots but I always thought you comdemned all religion equally.

[crazy canuck]

I don't care what religious text say (and you don't care either, as you said before). What I care about is what people who describe themselves as followers of a given religion say.

Did I claim that no Christians believe that homosexuality should be illegal? No, I claimed the percentage is much smaller than among UK-based Muslims (if I were to guess, among UK-based Christians, it would be 10% or less).

Now, I don't have more recent statistical data so this number may have fallen among UK Muslims, but I would say it highlights a very strong disconnect between this religious minority and the society at large, which has just passed gay marriage.

Btw, thinking that something should be illegal is quite different than disapproving of it morally (and I think Christians, even fundamentalist ones, usually grasp that difference). (Incidentally, a 2009 poll among UK Muslims apparently did not find a single one who did not disapprove of homosexuality morally).

In other news, apparently Muslims (which represent 2% of the UK populace) are responsible for app. 25% of acts of homophobic violence in the UK as well. I am also pretty happy to use willingness to violently beat and/or kill someone because of their sexuality as a measure of evil - do you disagree with that?

lol, yeah, fundamentalists are well known for their thoughtful position on the issue http://www.defendthefamily.com/index.php?viewmode=resources

[Viking]

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things.

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims Christians/Jews good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things God either ordered that it be done or saw that it was good.

See how silly that sounds?

and just so there is no confusion about how graphic the Bible can get on these topics.

Look, if you want to argue which of the Quran and Old Testament is the most evil book in religion and which is the second most evil book in religion then I think you are wasting your time.

I really wish people would pay attention to what was being said before making stupid comments like this.

The claim being made was that Islam was evil and Christianity was good.

I am not trying to make an argument that one is morally superior.  Just that they both have warts.  If you want to engage in the silliness of claiming that one is clearly superior to the other then fill your boots but I always thought you comdemned all religion equally.

Their metaphysical claims are equally silly and stupid, but the difference here is that evil a consistent consequence of islamic epistemology and theology.

The big difference is that the literal reading of the quran leads you to join ISIS and behead journalists and take sex slaves. The literal reading of the new testament leads you to selling your property abadoning your children and becoming a monk. Both are stupid and self destructive, but only one is evil.

[crazy canuck]

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things.

That's part of the problem. Paedophilia, Torture, Decapitation, Polygamy, FGM, Assassination and Desecration are for all muslims Christians/Jews good under certain circumstances since there were circumstances under which the prophet did all these things God either ordered that it be done or saw that it was good.

See how silly that sounds?

and just so there is no confusion about how graphic the Bible can get on these topics.

Look, if you want to argue which of the Quran and Old Testament is the most evil book in religion and which is the second most evil book in religion then I think you are wasting your time.

I really wish people would pay attention to what was being said before making stupid comments like this.

The claim being made was that Islam was evil and Christianity was good.

I am not trying to make an argument that one is morally superior.  Just that they both have warts.  If you want to engage in the silliness of claiming that one is clearly superior to the other then fill your boots but I always thought you comdemned all religion equally.

Their metaphysical claims are equally silly and stupid, but the difference here is that evil a consistent consequence of islamic epistemology and theology.

The big difference is that the literal reading of the quran leads you to join ISIS and behead journalists and take sex slaves. The literal reading of the new testament leads you to selling your property abadoning your children and becoming a monk. Both are stupid and self destructive, but only one is evil.

Consistent?  There are 100s of millions of Muslims who are not rushing to join the extremists. 

[Viking]

Consistent?  There are 100s of millions of Muslims who are not rushing to join the extremists.

Million of germans weren't concentration camp guards but millions were NSDAP members. You don't need 100s of millions to make life a living hell for a country you just need thousands. The 100s of millions are the sea in which those thousands of fish swim. The 100s of millions are the ones who don't want to blow themselves up on a school bus, but thinks that it is good that somebody does. The 100s of millions are the ones that teach their kids to believe that the book which tells them to hate and fight the infidel is true and good.

It's a BS argument to say that less than X% of muslims are radicalized murderous nutjobs when the number X is larger than the membership of the NSDAP. The crusades only needed a small percentile active nutjobs to cause mahem. It also needed the "100s of millions" equivalent to make that percentile possible.

[Razgovory]

I'll take the non-answer as a "no".  You don't actually talk to Muslims about what they believe, you just read anti-Muslim screeds.

[Zoupa]

All religions are pretty stupid guys.

They usually mellow out with time, that's all.

[Razgovory]

Consistent?  There are 100s of millions of Muslims who are not rushing to join the extremists.

Million of germans weren't concentration camp guards but millions were NSDAP members. You don't need 100s of millions to make life a living hell for a country you just need thousands. The 100s of millions are the sea in which those thousands of fish swim. The 100s of millions are the ones who don't want to blow themselves up on a school bus, but thinks that it is good that somebody does. The 100s of millions are the ones that teach their kids to believe that the book which tells them to hate and fight the infidel is true and good.

It's a BS argument to say that less than X% of muslims are radicalized murderous nutjobs when the number X is larger than the membership of the NSDAP. The crusades only needed a small percentile active nutjobs to cause mahem. It also needed the "100s of millions" equivalent to make that percentile possible.

Ha!  Nice try.

[Valmy]

All religions are pretty stupid guys.

They usually mellow out with time, that's all.

Surely you are not including le Culte de l'Être supreme there

[Valmy]

I'll take the non-answer as a "no".  You don't actually talk to Muslims about what they believe, you just read anti-Muslim screeds.

My understanding is that Muslim extremism is more about identity politics and nationalism than religion and spirituality. 

[garbon]

I'll take the non-answer as a "no".  You don't actually talk to Muslims about what they believe, you just read anti-Muslim screeds.

I'm know a broken record but we really should stop talking to Viking about religion.