| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Monsieur
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1688 Posts |
 Posted - 02/06/2006 : 12:09:50
|
Everything is good - politics, ideologies, cartoons, greed - for people to start acting like serial killers.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust |
 |
|
|
Llamadance
> Teenager of the Year <
United Kingdom
2543 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 12:14:22
|
The aforementioned Richard Dawkins (nee Starkey) used a quote in his TV program about religion. I paraphrase.....
"In a world without religion, good men do good things and evil men do evil things, but it takes religion to make a good man do evil"
I like it, it says a lot of what I think about religion, although it's a huge sweeping statement.
And I think man does need religion, otherwise it wouldn't have evolved. We need it to explain the inexplicable and give us hope. I hope we're reaching a point in our evolution however, where we can can transcend religion.
That which does not kill me postpones the inevitable.
|
|
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 12:29:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Monsieur
quote:
Originally posted by Z_Zoquis
Yeah, renaming french fries and boycotting french wine is pretty similar to rioting, burning down embassies and calling for the murder of innocent people. Good point.
I consider drafted Iraqi soldiers (not terrorists) who got killed by America as innocent people. Not to mention civilian casualties.
That war was meant to destroy weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist.
It was also meant to make Iraq become a better place to live. Right now, it is pretty much like Dante's Inferno in Iraq.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust
Actually, I would suggest that that war was meant to give America strategic opportunities in the Middle East that would allow them to get out of bed with the Saudi's. It's unfortunate that the Bush administration felt the need to emphasize the WMD aspect. Were there ulterior motives for going in to Iraq. No doubt about it. However, if you think America is the only nation hiding ulterior motives, perhaps you should investigate your own nations reasons for choosing not to take part.
The point though is that in spite of your nations stance on the war in Iraq, no French citizens of the US were beheaded, there were no riots against france, and in fact, most of the response that did occur was relatively good-natured. Further-more, even after 9/11, there were no riots against Islam, no (or very very few) instances of American's of middle eastern descent being attacked, etc etc. |
|
|
|
Monsieur
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1688 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 12:58:25
|
Michaėl, it is stupid to argue about this as we both agree on the main issue.
People use religion for their dirty business. They can use other ideologies: like the nazis or the red khmers did.
Ever asked yourself why all the religions condemn homosexuality, for example? And why nazis condemned homosexuality too?
Minorities have always been scapegoats, this has nothing to do with religion (it does, but not only).
I will show you fear in a handful of dust |
|
|
|
Monsieur
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1688 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 13:07:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Z_Zoquis
quote:
Originally posted by Monsieur
quote:
Originally posted by Z_Zoquis
Yeah, renaming french fries and boycotting french wine is pretty similar to rioting, burning down embassies and calling for the murder of innocent people. Good point.
I consider drafted Iraqi soldiers (not terrorists) who got killed by America as innocent people. Not to mention civilian casualties.
That war was meant to destroy weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist.
It was also meant to make Iraq become a better place to live. Right now, it is pretty much like Dante's Inferno in Iraq.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust
Actually, I would suggest that that war was meant to give America strategic opportunities in the Middle East that would allow them to get out of bed with the Saudi's. It's unfortunate that the Bush administration felt the need to emphasize the WMD aspect. Were there ulterior motives for going in to Iraq. No doubt about it. However, if you think America is the only nation hiding ulterior motives, perhaps you should investigate your own nations reasons for choosing not to take part.
The point though is that in spite of your nations stance on the war in Iraq, no French citizens of the US were beheaded, there were no riots against france, and in fact, most of the response that did occur was relatively good-natured. Further-more, even after 9/11, there were no riots against Islam, no (or very very few) instances of American's of middle eastern descent being attacked, etc etc.
Zoquis, do you consider that the carpet bombing of innocent people because of some geopolitical theory is better than killing innocent hostages because of religious extremism? For me it is quite similar.
As for the French decision against war, it was obviously calculated too. I don't necessarily approve everything French politicians are doing.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust |
Edited by - Monsieur on 02/06/2006 13:20:43 |
|
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 13:16:06
|
What carpet bombing? Please, I understand the point you are making and of course any innocent death is tragic, but the fact is, if the US wanted to turn Iraq into a Walmart parking lot they could do it. It's a military operation and people are going to die. That's a terrible thing. Sadly, the world isn't yet at a place in time where any nation can afford to disband their armies (as much as my own country has tried) - war is an unfortunate part of life and America made the decision to go into Iraq (and did so after months and months of internationaal debate don't forget - it was hardly a surprise attack). So yes, I do think theres a difference between what America is doing and what a group of fanatics did on 9/11.
|
|
|
|
Monsieur
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1688 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 13:22:57
|
What you are saying is that the killing of innocent people in Irak was better because it was premeditated? Because they did it with "tears in their eyes"? Come on!
The truth is very simple. You feel 9/11 was horrible because it happened in America. You don't give a fuck about Iraqis getting killed.
It's as simple as that.
I can't understand how people can have so little empathy.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust |
Edited by - Monsieur on 02/06/2006 13:28:53 |
|
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 13:33:36
|
no, what I'm saying is that the killing of innocent people in Iraq is an unfortunate consequence of a military operation the point of which is most definitely NOT to try and kill innocent people. Can the same be said about the actions of the hijackers on 9/11?
|
|
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 13:35:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Monsieur
The truth is very simple. You feel 9/11 was horrible because it happened in America. You don't give a fuck about Iraqis getting killed.
It's as simple as that.
I can't understand how people can have so little empathy.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust
What utter BS. Sorry. You've lost the plot. |
|
|
|
Monsieur
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1688 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 13:40:31
|
Then please explain me.
I will show you fear in a handful of dust |
|
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 14:07:32
|
OK, essentially what you are saying is that accidentally driving through a stop light and cuasing a car accident that results in the death of the person in the other car is morally equivalent to intentionally driving the car into a loaded bus shelter. Does that explain you?
|
|
|
|
PixieSteve
> Teenager of the Year <
Poland
4698 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 14:17:32
|
yeah but the driving through the stop light wasn't the accident. maybe they didn't want to hit another car and kill someone, but they sure went through the red light knowing it was gonna happen.
Your mum |
Edited by - PixieSteve on 02/06/2006 14:17:50 |
|
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 14:23:53
|
actually, I said "accidently" driving through a stop light.
|
|
|
|
PixieSteve
> Teenager of the Year <
Poland
4698 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 14:49:59
|
ugh yes, that was my point. i'm trying to say driving through the stop light is like going to war in your analogy... that wasn't an accident.
Your mum |
Edited by - PixieSteve on 02/06/2006 14:50:42 |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 14:58:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by cassandra is
I think that Religion is a miror of bad human sides. And if I say that I'm not against individuals, it's because I consider that they are victims of it.
I think I'm on fairly safe ground assuming that you don't believe any religion to be true. Therefore, you must take them to be constructed by people. How can you then say religion is evil but that you're not condemning people? Surely people have a choice - maybe a tough one - not to follow a religion, in which case you must be condemning all those individuals who do choose to follow a religion.
I guess the question is: if religion is a man-made thing then it's just a thing, and has no inherent value, good or evil. For example, you say "religions enact", but surely it's people acting out these, not the religions themselves?
I can't deny that people can use religion as an excuse sometimes, but if there were no religions, would people fight about something different?
 I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid |
|
|
|
Z_Zoquis
- FB Fan -
145 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 15:05:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by PixieSteve
ugh yes, that was my point. i'm trying to say driving through the stop light is like going to war in your analogy... that wasn't an accident.
Your mum
I see where your coming from and obviously the bombs are being dropped intentionally. The point though is that they arent being AIMED at innocent civilians. Do civilians get caught up in the mess? Sadly yes. Like I said, that's a tragic consequence of war. But I still feel there is a substantial difference between that and literally intentionally targetting completely innocent civilians thousands of miles away from the nearest war zone. |
|
|
|
Visiting Sasquatch
= Cult of Ray =
USA
451 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 17:42:29
|
Can it be safely said that Islam, while not full of "lunatics", "extremists", or *gasp!* "terrorists", is at the very least an insecure religion as a whole?
And another thing...anyone wanting to curb free speech is a commie!
P.S. - Please do not be offended by my post. I like not being beheaded. |
|
|
|
Carolynanna
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Canada
6556 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 18:53:31
|
Who was it that said something to the effect of;
it is not religion that is a 'disease,' but the idea of monotheism, one single all-powerful god?
__________
Don't believe the hype. |
|
|
|
danjersey
> Teenager of the Year <
USA
2792 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 21:28:14
|
I love the smell of Islam in the morning
and taste the bloody of Christ
making only enough of the Jewish money
to live an Untouchable's life
uh boy
|
|
|
|
Cult_Of_Frank
= Black Noise Maker =
Canada
11687 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 22:41:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cheeseman1000
[quote]Originally posted by cassandra is
I can't deny that people can use religion as an excuse sometimes, but if there were no religions, would people fight about something different?
I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid
That is the question, isn't it. I suppose any reason we find to be different from one another is always reason enough for some. Race, ethnicity, religion, personal values, favourite movies...
Ironically, the best thing any group could do to curb extremism is to denounce it and strip the person from any rank, privilege, or right to that group, effectively creating conflict as a result of difference of opinion.
 "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
|
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5454 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2006 : 23:28:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cheeseman1000
I guess the question is: if religion is a man-made thing then it's just a thing, and has no inherent value, good or evil. For example, you say "religions enact", but surely it's people acting out these, not the religions themselves?
Without religion, I'm not sure anything has inherent value. As those savants, Jane's Addiction, once said, "Ain't right now, ain't no wrong; only pleasure and pain."
However, if you do believe in evil and good, then I do think some man-made things might qualify as evil. Is a human designed biological weapon evil? Is a life-saving medical device good? |
|
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 00:06:59
|
"For example, you say "religions enact", but surely it's people acting out these, not the religions themselves?"
then, just read the bible again
"I can't deny that people can use religion as an excuse sometimes, but if there were no religions, would people fight about something different?"
surely, but these "other things" must be condemned too.
"I think I'm on fairly safe ground assuming that you don't believe any religion to be true."
right
"Therefore, you must take them to be constructed by people."
right again,and it's in human nature to create religions,I'm not denying this.
"How can you then say religion is evil but that you're not condemning people? Surely people have a choice - maybe a tough one - not to follow a religion, in which case you must be condemning all those individuals who do choose to follow a religion."
One time again, I think that most of them are victims. I do not want to be misunderstood with what I'm saying because I don't want to hurt anyone or any belief. It's my opinion. At his point of the debate, my english vocabulary is lacking to express all my thoughts in a clear way, so I will say that I refer to almost everything that Friedrich Nietzsche said about the relationship between religions and humanity.
pas de bras pas de chocolat |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 01:39:10
|
quote:
"For example, you say "religions enact", but surely it's people acting out these, not the religions themselves?"
then, just read the bible again
That was my point, if you believe the Bible to be untrue, you can't blame it or a religion for anything.
Also, I'm not sure how to take your suggestion that I'm a 'victim' because I've chosen to follow a religion, I may have misunderstood.
I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid |
|
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 01:53:59
|
"That was my point, if you believe the Bible to be untrue, you can't blame it or a religion for anything."
I can blame the religions for telling people it's true. It's lies, lies, lies and intolerance (towards everything that does not respect the "rules" and the "Truth").
Hitler statements were untrue (and he surely knew it was untrue), people followed him (for many different reasons), some are to blame, even if all these nazis' theories were wrong.
"Also, I'm not sure how to take your suggestion that I'm a 'victim' because I've chosen to follow a religion, I may have misunderstood."
I don't know you, so I won't judge you. Don't be offended.
pas de bras pas de chocolat |
|
|
|
lonely persuader
= Cult of Ray =
Ireland
488 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 01:58:02
|
Llamadance said it earlier, "And I think man does need religion, otherwise it wouldn't have evolved."
why are some blaming religion.
Cassandra_is put up this list earlier and for some reason blames religion. But scientifically and philohpically each can be argued for or against. I think people blame religion to undermine some-ones position and that is typical of their intolerence (and they claim they are infintely tolerant). Im tolerant aslong as you believe the same as me.
-homosexuality
-abortion
-sexual relations out of wedlock
-the right for women to have the same rights as men
-divorce
-the right to die if you want to die
Now im not saying i agree or disagree either way with them but there are good rational arguments either way that don't use religion.
All these have typically come from the individualistic idea that we do what we like and feck the rest of society. Like it or not everyone has a duty to society. Capitalism works (or i would say does'nt) because of individualistic greed. Look at the race to the bottom that is being driven by commercialism especially in education, music and arts (it has become more apparent in Ireland sine our "good" economy. Commercialism is many people's new religion.
|
|
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
|
|
misleadtheworld
* Dog in the Sand *
United Kingdom
1222 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 02:58:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by cassandra is
"why are some blaming religion."
Human history is full of wars caused by religions beliefs, I think that's a good start.
This is more of an issue of whether people practice what they believe, and a common misconception. If say, real Bible-abiding Christians were active in a war, they would not be Christians and would certainly NOT be abiding by the words of their holy book.
|
|
|
|
lonely persuader
= Cult of Ray =
Ireland
488 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 03:15:57
|
"Human history is full of wars caused by religions beliefs, I think that's a good start."
You mean under the pre-text of religous beliefs. Don't kid yourself there would still be war without religion.
-abortion
It is a scientific fact that unborn babies are human. There is no stage at which you can actually suddenly see then transform into a human and go yep, they have rights.
-the right to die if you want to die
Even if people depend on you for everything. You leave a wife and kids to survive without any help. I know u'll say that usually its terminally ill patients. But why would u discrimate terminally ill people from anyone else who wants to die.
Now these are only possible arguments against since I know that you would argue for. I don't neccessarily agree with all but can see advantages (im not as close minded as some).
-sexual relations out of wedlock
If this happened. There is no way HIV would be killing 50% of the people in some african coutries. It is scientifically impossible since intravenous drug use is not high. Also, it prevents children from growing up without 2 parents. Studies consistently show that a child is better off with 2 parents.
"We don't seem to have the same definition of tolerance. Tolerance has nothing to do with belief, but with respect."
Do you respect my beliefs.
Belief has everything to do with it. Everyone has beliefs (be it religous or not) of some sort and they define that person. But just because someone believes that rape is ok, im not going to tolerate it. |
|
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
|
|
cassandra is
> Teenager of the Year <
France
4233 Posts |
|
|
Newo
~ Abstract Brain ~
Spain
2674 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 03:28:02
|
quote:
Monsieur
Attacking religions is stupid. Religions are what you put in them. I remember Rilke compared God to those little wooden knives children used to play with - two kids were given the same knife and after a year their knives were totally different (note that the choice of "children" and "knives" is not innocent).
Religion is the business of spirituality. The way I sniff out a thought-system is first to tell if it values one person above another instead of regarding us all as equals. If this is the case, then you have what I call a Cult of the Chosen Ones and therefore a control system. All major religions qualify for this. Venerate everybody or nobody, I say.
A second way is I avoid persuasion by anyone who can put a name to what they believe, as beliefs allow the mind to stop functioning. All I know is what feel like doing and don“t feel like doing, I don“t feel the need to put a static principle behind it.
quote:
darwin Posted - 02/06/2006 : 23:28:55
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cheeseman1000
I guess the question is: if religion is a man-made thing then it's just a thing, and has no inherent value, good or evil. For example, you say "religions enact", but surely it's people acting out these, not the religions themselves?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without religion, I'm not sure anything has inherent value. As those savants, Jane's Addiction, once said, "Ain't right now, ain't no wrong; only pleasure and pain."
However, if you do believe in evil and good, then I do think some man-made things might qualify as evil. Is a human designed biological weapon evil? Is a life-saving medical device good?
Way I feel about good and evil is someone can put those names to whatever they want, just they might be waiting a while for me to agree or disagree. Information is neither bad nor good, it just is.
p.s. that“s one of my favourite songs.
--
Buy your best friend flowers. Buy your lover a beer. Covet thy father. Covet thy neighbour's father. Honour thy lover's beer. Covet thy neighbour's father's wife's sister. Take her to bingo night. |
Edited by - Newo on 02/07/2006 03:31:13 |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 03:57:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Newo
Religion is the business of spirituality. The way I sniff out a thought-system is first to tell if it values one person above another instead of regarding us all as equals. If this is the case, then you have what I call a Cult of the Chosen Ones and therefore a control system. All major religions qualify for this. Venerate everybody or nobody, I say.
I would say that certainly should be the intention of any religion - where it's no longer the case, it's been distorted by individuals.
quote:
A second way is I avoid persuasion by anyone who can put a name to what they believe, as beliefs allow the mind to stop functioning.
Can't say I agree with this.
I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid |
|
|
|
Newo
~ Abstract Brain ~
Spain
2674 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2006 : 04:11:54
|
I went back to Ireland for Exmas for the first time in a few years and had a drink with a friend, we“d been to university together and he was the only one who went to classes less than I did - this guy managed about ten a year at best. He“s currently studying another couse in literature and politics, and meeting him again I noticed a big change in the guy: any idea I expressed he would immediately categorise it by answering like “Oh that“s a typical leftist/rightist/anarchosyndicalist/protoliberal/semiskimmed conservative attitude.“ I saw one of the most funny, soulful guys I“ve ever met turn into an intellectual trickster. Just seems to me like labeling in such a style trivialises everything, and opinions are too slippery to be properly categorised.
--
Buy your best friend flowers. Buy your lover a beer. Covet thy father. Covet thy neighbour's father. Honour thy lover's beer. Covet thy neighbour's father's wife's sister. Take her to bingo night. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Muhammad Cartoons
