I wonder if Islamic terrorism has anything to do with western foreign policy, in particular, America's?
Muslim Gangs Impose Religious Rule By Terrorizing British Citizenry
- Thread starter hellblazer
- Start date
I wonder if Islamic terrorism has anything to do with western foreign policy, in particular, America's?
pffffffff. read above bro. that's an extraneous concern for SOME terror brought by ancient beliefs. the people who committed 9/11 would not have been so willing were they not salivating at the thought of paradise. 72 virgins and martyrdom, while cliche, is why they're such willing drones. OF COURSE violence is committed for other reasons too...and i would argue that's bad too! stuff that leads to violence is usually bad!!!!....like religion.
I guess next, you're going to tell me the Crusades were to do with religion?
But seriously, I'm not arguing with the fact that religion is a factor, but if you poke a beehive don't be surprised if you are stung. Japan is a mostly Buddhist country and committed awful war atrocities in China and across asia when they had an empire, explain that one.
i don't have to "explain that one" because i'm not claiming other factors don't lead to violence. i'm just not willing to gloss over obvious babble that leads to daily deaths and hardship around the world in the name of "being respectful" (to the unsubstantiated claims of a less advanced group of people...and, no, not all beliefs and societies are created equal). imagine if people were killing each other over which operating software is better...Windows 98 or Linux....oh wait, that's already happening but people have been pussified into calling a loon a loon, or a loony belief a loony belief. people should be made to feel embarrassed over uncritical beliefs.
the "why can't we all just respect each other" attitude is well-meaning, but destructive when you take into account that it will likely be child's play for a loon with ancient looney tune beliefs to kill a million people 100 years down the road. beliefs are actions in potentia. the source of these beliefs must be criticised and made fun of just as i should be criticised if i say that the cure to all cancer is to eat red gummy bears for one-year straight. if i don't have any evidence to back that up, i should be rightfully ridiculed. if i charge money to elderly cancer patients to perform my gummy bear services, i should be put in prison for scamming, not celebrated or respected. i could say you're supposed to respect my "beliefs" (unsupported by evidence) about gummy bears and cancer, but you wouldn't...and for good reason...because there is no evidence.
why is religion literally the only belief allowed to get a pass to most criticism? because some people seem to think morality is derived from religion and that this morality can't be found elsewhere....well guess what, it can be found elsewhere. morals come from people, not an ancient and cobbled together religion which has some decent commonsense advice that can be inferred or had without it.
Getting it all off your chest bud? Regardless of how much you huff and puff about the wrongs of the world and society, life is going to go on and religion is going to be a part of life until it is dis-proven. This is why I don't waste my energy worrying about religion or religious people.
At the moment it's a matter of probability whether there was an intelligent creator or if it was "The Big Bang", while it remains that way, millennia old habits and beliefs will not be broken through reasoning or common sense, especially Islam which is deeply ingrained into the cultures and identity of many nations.
atheists don't say "god does not exist", they say "show me the evidence". the burden of proof is not on atheists. you can't disprove a false positive. i believe that outerspace reindeer exist...this belief cannot be disproven...respect my beliefs. i believe zeus sucks on my dick invisibly at night...this can't be disproven...respect my beliefs.
i agree that it is likely to go on and on and on, but if the tone changes and religion becomes an acceptable target of ridicule, not a mandatory object of unquestioning respect and adulation and wishful thinking, there will be less religiosity and less whackjobs prone to killing people over ancient texts (which happens on a daily basis as a matter of fact). i say that's not a good thing and that it is something that should be called into question. you're dimly apathetic. your accepting attitude only fosters their ongoing belief in pure garbage (i'm speaking of all religions here).
people should be made to feel silly for unsubstantiated beliefs when these beliefs have the power to be extremely destructive should they go unchecked. your beliefs are no longer private the moment they have the potential to affect me and my safety in very negative ways. certain beliefs are straight up dangerous when truly believed.
they might not be eradicated, but of course they can be broken stupid. you don't think arguments and conversation has the power to change minds? wake up. if people are made to feel silly for their goofy beliefs, they might revisit and revise their beliefs altogether. if, on the other hand, libtard moderates demand the equal respect of all beliefs, progress won't occur, things will remain forever conflicted as is, and a greater percentage of people will walk around with dangerous or harmless ghosts in their head.
Feel free to go forth and change the world. You sound like a bit of a radical yourself. People with powerful beliefs are more likely to do harm to others than apathetic people brah.
That's deep. But I'm still not volunteering to try and make 1.6bn Muslims feel silly for their unsubstantiated beliefs.
there's absolutely nothing wrong with being radical if your beliefs are non-violent/forceful and positive for humanity. sometimes there is a right side and a wrong side to things. having a strong belief in something right is certainly better than not participating or having a viewpoint one way or the other. you could have just said i'm passionate about facts.
That's deep. But I'm still not volunteering to try and make 1.6bn Muslims feel silly for their unsubstantiated beliefs.
you don't have to do that. it's probably not a good idea as you might have inferred (were the Muhammad cartoon deaths related to religion or were they sociopolitical?). it could start with your christian friends who are less likely to stone you (as their book would advocate) due to secular advancements if you call them on their bullshit. you don't have to go on and on about it, but you could strike up a conversation and make fun of them a little. they're probably not used to that and might find it refreshing...they or you may even learn something. if they get all whiny about it, don't talk about religion with them. simple as that. what bothers me is the whole "religion and politics are off the table" attitude that some people seem to have been brought up with. i don't get it. in doing so, those people are taking some of the most interesting things to talk about out of conversation. only because they're meek pussies afraid to offend or be provocative, even amongst their friends and family. that's how much unwarranted protection religious faith has. though shalt not critique.