The Quran - how is it that the world has such mass violence based on it?

[LogicIsForSquares]

 

So we can just ignore the entire Old Testament then?

 

Or is it ok to keep selectively ignoring it? Which Christian denomination does that?

 

Christians tend to use modern day common sense, morality, culture norms to realize that they shouldn't kill non-believers and cut the hands off of thiefs and such. How come Muslims can't do the same thing? (Hint: they do)

 

And you talk "context" You definitely don't know the context of the Quran passages you talk about - and likely not the biblical ones you talk about either.

So the Islamic scholars who definitely confirm that apostasy is punishable by death in Islam don't know the context of the passages?

 

I didn't quote the bible at all. I could give a shit but the people rushing to Islam's defense are hilarious.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I'm trying to figure out why all the anti-christian posts in here when clearly the modern day terror are all muslim inspired terror. Why do you all find it necessary to attack christians while defending thug muslims? Is it taught to you or what?

[StinkHole]

I'm trying to figure out why all the anti-christian posts in here when clearly the modern day terror are all muslim inspired terror. Why do you all find it necessary to attack christians while defending thug muslims? Is it taught to you or what?

Stuart

 

 

 

Its astonishing isn't it?

 

To top it off none of these assholes ever refer to the Koran as some fictional storybook about a wizard that lives up in the sky.

 

That only applies to the Bible and Christianity.

[bbedward]

I just don't like seeing a large part of my country discriminate against an entire religion - given the country I live in is founded up religious freedom for all.

 

So I rebuttal against ass backwards logic that tries to say their religion is different than mine.

[The Cysko Kid]

Islam stands in opposition of everything liberals stand for. You'd think they'd have a lot more common ground with jesus than muhammed the beheader.

[Pumpkin Eater]

Deuteronomy 13:1-xx is in reference to a specific time period when evil needed to be expelled from Israel. God is instructing his children to be on the lookout for evil and false prophets. It is Moses' last words written to the second generation of Israelites as they entered to promised land.

 

Does not apply, is not open ended like the Koran.

[The Cysko Kid]

I just don't like seeing a large part of my country discriminate against an entire religion - given the country I live in is founded up religious freedom for all.

 

So I rebuttal against ass backwards logic that tries to say their religion is different than mine.

Their religion is vastly different than mine, since I'm not religious at all. But given the choice between living in a place dominated by Christians or one dominated by muslims I'll choose christians 100% of the time

[LogicIsForSquares]

Sam Harris is a well known lecturer and atheist.

 

[LogicIsForSquares]

Since we seemed to delve into comparing Christianity to Islam...

 

[Osiris]

So you are trying to tell me that at no point does it say to kill apostates? You know google exists right?

 

Yes, I google before every response I post. It isn't my job to teach you how to use it. This topic is discussed here:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kashif-n-chaudhry/does-the-koran-endorse-ap_b_5539236.html

 

"Apostasy laws - like the blasphemy laws - have been borrowed from older scriptures. They have no basis in the Koran. This is why clerics who espouse such extremist beliefs show continued reluctance to debate Muslim scholars and intellectuals on this issue. The fourth Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, for instance, Mirza Tahir Ahmad, authored a detailed rebuttal of the Maududian philosophy on apostasy several decades ago.

In short, it is not due to the scholarship of the Koran, but because of the ignorance and insecurity of extremist clerics that countries like Sudan punish apostasy. The Koran upholds Freedom of Conscience in clear terms."

[StinkHole]

So we can just ignore the entire Old Testament then?

 

Or is it ok to keep selectively ignoring it? Which Christian denomination does that?

 

Whats your point? For all intents and purposes yes it can be ignored. Theres a reason its called Christainity

Christian churches preach the teachings of Christ, who appeared in New Testament. The Catholic churches that I have attended will seldom touch on the Old Testament.

 

Christians tend to use modern day common sense, morality, culture norms to realize that they shouldn't kill non-believers and cut the hands off of thiefs and such. How come Muslims can't do the same thing? (Hint: they do)

Right and wrong. Right in that you answered your own question about ignoring the Old Testament...modern day common sense by rejecting parts that contains barbarism.

 

Completely out of touch and profoundly wrong in your belief that Muslims do the same. I worked in Saudi Arabia for 15 months, outside the "holy" city of Medina. Executions and hand choppings for the crime of theft were conducted on Fridays.

Execution are held publically in front of a cheering audience, and Westerners, including myself were encouraged to attend...being promised front row seats. I respectfully declined. An Egyptian physician that I knew explained in detail what goes on..which I wont go into right now.

 

Are you really that oblivious to the stoning of women, and the execution of gays and such that goes on today?.. sentences handed down from Islamic courts? Theocratic courts that view Islam as the law of the land? Try Google.

[LogicIsForSquares]

 

Yes, I google before every response I post. It isn't my job to teach you how to use it. This topic is discussed here:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kashif-n-chaudhry/does-the-koran-endorse-ap_b_5539236.html

 

"Apostasy laws - like the blasphemy laws - have been borrowed from older scriptures. They have no basis in the Koran. This is why clerics who espouse such extremist beliefs show continued reluctance to debate Muslim scholars and intellectuals on this issue. The fourth Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, for instance, Mirza Tahir Ahmad, authored a detailed rebuttal of the Maududian philosophy on apostasy several decades ago.

In short, it is not due to the scholarship of the Koran, but because of the ignorance and insecurity of extremist clerics that countries like Sudan punish apostasy. The Koran upholds Freedom of Conscience in clear terms."

I guess HuffPo > The Hadith to a Muslim?

 

"All the deeds of the apostate become null and void in this world and the next. He must be killed. His wife must be separated from him and he has no claims on any inheritance"

 

"The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

 

I

[LogicIsForSquares]

I can keep posting more direct quotes from the Hadith if you would like. But I guess editors at HuffPo > Islamic scholars who quoted Muhammad directly.

[LogicIsForSquares]

I just don't get the defenders of Islam being a religion of peace. Muhammad was a warlord. Why would it be something terribly shocking to hear that he wanted his religion to expand by the sword?

[LogicIsForSquares]

Os, I know you don't believe in the whacky "hack heads off" interpretation of the Koran. That is great but the most straight forward interpretation from the Koran is that Muhammad was not a nice guy to those who left the religion or refused to convert.

[calfoxwc]

Apparently from different sources, about 3-5 percent of all Muslims are extremists

in the world.

 

That makes many millions. Tens of millions, I think.

 

And the obaMAO's "DHS" released a terrorist from gitmo in 2012, who is now the leader of

al quaida sp? in Yemen.

 

And, under obamao's orders, a key member of the DHS, who had a commendation for

being responsible for catching 300 terrorists... was demoted, his secret clearance taken away,

and his program cancelled. Amazing interview on Fox News. He had letters telling him that

his program had to be cancelled, because it was not allowed to profile Muslims.

 

Except he tracked known terrorists to certain mosques, and sure enough, those particular mosques

were where they collected.

 

And one of the mosques... was where the two islamic terrorists murdered Americans in California.

 

and obamao demands that we let in immigrants from those countries in the tens of thousands

at a time, way too fast to vet them, and meanwhile, the vetting process is asinine and worthless.

Look who the murderess islamic "wife" was... and she easily got a visa. And obamao insists

that most of the immigrants are women with children. She had a child.

And obamao did what progressive dicktaters do - he has allowed discord, strife, and pro-all immigration

to flood our country, and terrorism has hit our shores again...

 

and he USED THE CRISIS to further his anti-Constitutionist goals, namely, American gun owners.

 

THIS is big, serious trouble, getting ready to slam into our country more and more all the time.

[VaporTrail]

Islam is the worst of the 3 Abrahamic religions when it comes to justifying violence. It was only a few hundred years ago that Catholicism and Christianity were used to justify more widespread violence than what the West is seeing now. And even still, the Bible was used just a few weeks ago to justify the murder of innocent people at a Planned Parenthood. People who take -isms to these lengths are fucking assholes.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I read yesterday that about 85 people who work for the Department of Homeland Security are on the No Fly Watch list. What the fck? How did they pass a background check?

[StinkHole]

Islam is the worst of the 3 Abrahamic religions when it comes to justifying violence. It was only a few hundred years ago that Catholicism and Christianity were used to justify more widespread violence than what the West is seeing now. And even still, the Bible was used just a few weeks ago to justify the murder of innocent people at a Planned Parenthood. People who take -isms to these lengths are fucking assholes.

They're still trying lol.

 

At least you could have prefaced all that with "I'm not trying to place Christianity on the same level as the threat we are facing from Islamic extremism, but....."

 

 

So which do you think is a greater threat to you, a white person that happens to be Christian, about to shoot up an abortion clinic because he hates baby killing, or a Muslim about to shoot up any random public, or private facility to his liking because he hates every last thing about you?

 

 

Today the governments of nearly every European nation are debating strategies on how to combat Islamic extremism, not raids on abortion clinics.

That should help you put things into perspective.

 

Muslims hate liberals. They hate liberals because liberals are Hollywood, liberals are the purveyors of porn, immorality, gay rights, LBGT rights etc.

 

Muslims hate conservatives too. They hate conservatives because we want to kill them.

 

They hate conservatives because we want to preserve what they hate, the American way of life... which includes protecting you liberal nut jobs and your warped ideologies.

[jbluhm86]

[StinkHole]

 

Stuart

 

 

 

That's true but its hard to believe that without religion good people wouldn't be doing evil things.

 

Its a wash.

[jbluhm86]

Stuart

 

 

 

That's true but its hard to believe that without religion good people wouldn't be doing evil things.

 

Its a wash.

 

Your reply makes it sound as if people are naturally inclined to commit evil, but only refrain from doing so because of religion. If so, that is rather poor endorsement for the "morality" that many religious people claim to possess.

 

 

“Do you really mean to tell me the only reason you try to be good is to gain God's approval and reward, or to avoid his disapproval and punishment? That's not morality, that's just sucking up, apple-polishing, looking over your shoulder at the great surveillance camera in the sky, or the still small wiretap inside your head, monitoring your every move, even your every base thought.”

― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

[calfoxwc]

obamao ordered the spouse immigration system to

be eased.

 

and, she got here easily.

 

and murdered Americans.

[jbluhm86]

...I also think the difference is... that Jesus died for us on the Cross. We don't have to work our way to Heaven,

it's impossible anyways. All we have to do, is know He died for us, and accept the grace gift of salvation...

and repent....

 

...So, there may be harsh violence in the Bible, note - primarily the New Testament.... but it was superceded

by the life and sacrifice in his own death - once and for all - wiped all that out. It's free..eternal life...

 

 

“I find something repulsive about the idea of vicarious redemption. I would not throw my numberless sins onto a scapegoat and expect them to pass from me; we rightly sneer at the barbaric societies that practice this unpleasantness in its literal form. There's no moral value in the vicarious gesture anyway. As Thomas Paine pointed out, you may if you wish take on a another man's debt, or even to take his place in prison. That would be self-sacrificing. But you may not assume his actual crimes as if they were your own; for one thing you did not commit them and might have died rather than do so; for another this impossible action would rob him of individual responsibility. So the whole apparatus of absolution and forgiveness strikes me as positively immoral, while the concept of revealed truth degrades the concept of free intelligence by purportedly relieving us of the hard task of working out the ethical principles for ourselves.”

― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

[StinkHole]

Your reply makes it sound as if people are naturally inclined to commit evil, but only refrain from doing so because of religion. If so, that is rather poor endorsement for the "morality" that many religious people claim to possess.

 

Stuart

 

 

Really? My reply imlied that? Don't read into something that wasn't there.

 

Again, yes religion can make good people do evil, but good people that are not religious can commit evil as well, that's all.

 

But since you mentioned it, people are naturally inclined to do wrong.

 

Those stupid all loving, all compassionate, all caring liberals believe people are inherently good. Its societies fault they turn bad. The truth is that people are born bad. People are inherently bad and have to work at being good. For some its easier than it is for others. Some rely on religion to steer them in the right direction, some don't.

 

Proof is the child. He or she is born naturally bad and must be taught to be good. Taught to share with others, taught not to hit other kids, taught not to be greedy, taught not to talk back, taught that he or she can't have everything their way...

Everyone is naturally greedy to an extent. How many of us think about, or actually have stolen something from work thinking its no big deal?

 

In reference to "evil", the fact remains that secular societies throughout history have inflicted more suffering and have murdered more people, committed the most genocide then religious ones.

 

http://www.ukapologetics.net/secularism.htm

[jbluhm86]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/our-humanity-naturally/201103/misinformation-and-facts-about-secularism-and-religion

 

http://pitweb.pitzer.edu/academics/wp-content/uploads/sites/38/2014/12/FAC-Zuckerman-Sociology-Compass.pdf

 

Misinformation and facts about secularism and religion

 

Unfortunately, in his recent post, "Do we need religion to be ethical?" Thomas Plante, PhD, makes statements that perpetuate common misinformation with regard to religion and secularism. While I doubt that Plante intended the comments to be disparaging toward secular individuals, they most certainly are. In fact, considering that the statements come from an educated man and not some uniformed member of the general public, they are especially troubling.

Plante casually claims that religious people are "better citizens" and "behave better." And without citing any sources, he tells us: "Research has consistently found that religious people are less likely to engage in criminal behavior, marital infidelity, alcoholism, unprotected sexual activity. . ."

In other words, according to Plante, if you're not religious you might be a good person, but on average you are more likely to have these undesirable characteristics. This is a bold assertion that, of course, immediately puts secular individuals on the defensive. (Just imagine if the same claims were made against any other minority group.) It is precisely claims like these that lead to many Americans having an unfavorable view of atheists and other nonbelievers.

Fortunately for atheists, agnostics, and secular humanists, there is no factual basis for Plante's claim that "research has consistently found" secular individuals to be more prone to such antisocial behavior. Consider, for example, a March 2009 academic article in Sociology Compass that extensively researched the subjects raised by Plante. The article, by Phil Zuckerman of Pitzer College, is entitled "Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being: How the Findings of Social Science Counter Negative Stereotypes and Assumptions" (link is external) and, unlike Plante's article, it cites detailed studies of the areas in question.

Zuckerman analyzed a wide array of data comparing religious nations to less religious nations and also, interestingly, religious states within the United States (i.e. "Bible-belt" states) to less religious states. While I encourage readers to examine the article directly through the link above, here are just a few of the highlights:

Criminal Behavior:

Citing four different studies, Zuckerman states: "Murder rates are actually lower in more secular nations and higher in more religious nations where belief in God is widespread." He also states: "Of the top 50 safest cities in the world, nearly all are in relatively non-religious countries."

Within the United States, we see the same pattern. Citing census data, he writes: "And within America, the states with the highest murder rates tend to be the highly religious, such as Louisiana and Alabama, but the states with the lowest murder rates tend to be the among the least religious in the country, such as Vermont and Oregon."

And these findings are not limited to murder rates, as rates of all violent crime tend to be higher in "religious" states. Zuckerman also points out that atheists are very much under-represented in the American prison population (only 0.2%).

Marriage and Family:

Zuckerman cites a 1999 Barna study that finds that atheists and agnostics actually have lower divorce rates than religious Americans.

He also cites another study, in Canada, that found conservative Christian women experienced higher rates of domestic violence than non-affiliated women.

Unprotected Sex:

As for Plante's claim that studies have "consistently " found that religious people are less likely to engage in unprotected sex, that claim is directly refuted by a 2009 study that found the reverse - teens who make religion-inspired "virginity pledges" are not only just as likely as their non-pledging peers to engage in premarital sex, but more likely to engage in unprotected sex.

Other Findings of Interest:

Happiness: The most secular nations in the world report the highest levels of happiness among their population.

Altruism: Secular nations such as those in Scandinavia donate the most money and supportive aid, per capita, to poorer nations. Zuckerman also reports that two studies show that, during the Holocaust, "the more secular people were, the more likely they were to rescue and help persecuted Jews."

Outlooks and Values: Zuckerman, citing numerous studies, shows that atheists and agnostics, when compared to religious people, are actually less likely to be nationalistic, racist, anti-Semitic, dogmatic, ethnocentric, and authoritarian. Secularism also correlates to higher education levels. Atheists and other secular people are also much more likely to support women's rights and gender equality, as well as gay and lesbian rights. Religious individuals are more likely to support government use of torture.

Of course, studies can be cherry-picked to present religiosity in a better light than above, and the point of this article is not to prove the moral superiority of secularism. Nevertheless, whatever Plante wishes to cite, it is impossible to claim that studies "consistently" support his claims of positive social outcomes correlating to religion. To the contrary, the weight of most data seems to indicate that religiosity is a poor indicator of social health or personal virtue.

To Plante's credit, he acknowledges that religion is not necessary for ethical behavior. Still, the thrust of his message attempts to make a case for religion (and implicitly critical of secularism) that simply isn't supported by facts. Most secular individuals would not argue with him when he asserts that religion might help some to be good, and even when he argues that religious institutions can sometimes help toward that end, but such claims do nothing to justify the perpetuation of plain falsehoods regarding atheists, agnostics, and secular humanists, falsehoods that in turn perpetuate prejudice against them

[Westside Steve]

Morality, or the difference between righteousness and evil, right and wrong, good and bad is a fabrication of mankind.

 

Isn't it a bit ridiculous to listen to pompous assholes fight with each other over the reasons they believed their set of rules has a more realistic set of criteria?

The entire concept of morality is created by rudimentally thinking creatures who have an unfounded notion that it is good resist the laws of nature, and pretend it's because of society or religion.

 

WSS

[calfoxwc]

Well, we are not religious at all. It's religion that is the problem,

not spirituality.

 

Big difference. I know God is there, and Jesus died for us.

 

And, from experience, I know that the biggest trouble with churches and

religion, ....is that there are a bunch of people there, and some of the people

are worse than just sinners. They are contolling liberal sumbeeches.

 

Therefore, I "turned the other cheek" into the door on my way out the last time I went.

[MLD Woody]

Hahahaha

 

Even when you explain why you don't like religion (right...) you blame liberals.

[bbedward]

I could imagine Cal going to church and hearing a sermon about how we need to be accepting and tolerant towards gays, muslims, etc. - then walking out the door and never returning because the church was filled with "liberal sumbeeches"