Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Let us pray to all the good Gods that Allah dies soon.
As to Muslims that do not want to be Muslims, all they have to do is stop supporting Islam.
Easy enough to do in the West but possibly deadly if not in a free country which excludes many Muslim countries.
Regards
DL
As to Muslims that do not want to be Muslims, all they have to do is stop supporting Islam.
Easy enough to do in the West but possibly deadly if not in a free country which excludes many Muslim countries.
Regards
DL
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
We'll know the end is nigh when they start yelling "God used to be great!"Greatest I am wrote:Let us pray to all the good Gods that Allah dies soon.
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Indeed.Dubious wrote:We'll know the end is nigh when they start yelling "God used to be great!"Greatest I am wrote:Let us pray to all the good Gods that Allah dies soon.
Regards
DL
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Muslims say submit or burn in hell. Christians are civil about their requirement of submit or burn in he'll. Judaism who knows. Not to say there isn't good people in those religions but all religions that require submission or burn in hell is the number one plague of humanity in all of history. I know religious freedom is a deserved right but these are the oldest cults that ever existed.
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Osgart wrote:
It's a seesaw situation in free countries and the law is a balancing act. There is hope that educating the masses will increase reasonable behaviour.
Obviously, unfree societies such as dictatorships promote belief systems, often religious belief systems, which are indispensable for controlling public behaviour and even for controlling private thoughts. The public promotion of religion and lack of freedom go hand in hand.
I have to agree. Despite that religions are all dangerous some more so than others, we need to promote freedom of thought, speech and assembly.I know religious freedom is a deserved right
It's a seesaw situation in free countries and the law is a balancing act. There is hope that educating the masses will increase reasonable behaviour.
Obviously, unfree societies such as dictatorships promote belief systems, often religious belief systems, which are indispensable for controlling public behaviour and even for controlling private thoughts. The public promotion of religion and lack of freedom go hand in hand.
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Religious freedom is not something deserved if the religion is more Satan-like than God-like. What if the religion, like Islam, is a slave holding religion.osgart wrote:Muslims say submit or burn in hell. Christians are civil about their requirement of submit or burn in he'll. Judaism who knows. Not to say there isn't good people in those religions but all religions that require submission or burn in hell is the number one plague of humanity in all of history. I know religious freedom is a deserved right but these are the oldest cults that ever existed.
Rights are earned, they are not granted to all as all are not worthy.
Regards
DL
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Indispensable!Belinda wrote:Osgart wrote:
I have to agree. Despite that religions are all dangerous some more so than others, we need to promote freedom of thought, speech and assembly.I know religious freedom is a deserved right
It's a seesaw situation in free countries and the law is a balancing act. There is hope that educating the masses will increase reasonable behaviour.
Obviously, unfree societies such as dictatorships promote belief systems, often religious belief systems, which are indispensable for controlling public behaviour and even for controlling private thoughts. The public promotion of religion and lack of freedom go hand in hand.
That is not so. In fact, less religious nations are more peaceful.
The social control you say is their forte can easily be taken on by the state.
Freedom of though and speech are great but freedom of action by these Satanic-like religions cannot be allowed in a civilized world.
Gods like Yahweh and Allah are barbaric and evil tyrants and if we allow those Gods full rein, free people would have to watch the stoning of gays and adulterers on our streets just like in Saudi Arabia.
Best to advocate freedom from religions and a ban on those that follow Satanic Gods like Yahweh and Allah.
Regards
DL
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Greatest I Am, please go back and read my sentence again. In it I was writing about illiberal societies. I actually agree with you.
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Yes I know.Belinda wrote:Greatest I Am, please go back and read my sentence again. In it I was writing about illiberal societies. I actually agree with you.
It was your view of "religious belief systems, which are indispensable for controlling public behaviour", that I was questioning.
The state can do what religions doe and so they are quite dispensable.
Regards
DL
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10001
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
I implore everyone that wants to understand Islam to watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCUpgZaClZA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCUpgZaClZA
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Greatest I Am wrote:
The difference between religions and states is that religions are undemocratic by definition, as God's edicts are permanent. States can be truly democratic and so states can be amenable to changes in societies.
Certainly there is a resemblance between states and religions. Centuries ago in Europe governance and religions were indistinguishable.Then ,centuries ago in Europe states could not govern without some established religioun simply because people took God as a given.
I understand you to claim, Greatest I Am, that both religions and states are dispensable. Isn't your opinion of human nature very optimistic?
The state can set itself up as a god, true. Kim Jong Il has done so.The state can do what religions doe and so they are quite dispensable.
The difference between religions and states is that religions are undemocratic by definition, as God's edicts are permanent. States can be truly democratic and so states can be amenable to changes in societies.
Certainly there is a resemblance between states and religions. Centuries ago in Europe governance and religions were indistinguishable.Then ,centuries ago in Europe states could not govern without some established religioun simply because people took God as a given.
I understand you to claim, Greatest I Am, that both religions and states are dispensable. Isn't your opinion of human nature very optimistic?
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Let me add some statistics to that dialog.attofishpi wrote:I implore everyone that wants to understand Islam to watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCUpgZaClZA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... SPvnFDDQHk
Regards
DL
- Greatest I am
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:09 pm
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Apologies.Belinda wrote:Greatest I Am wrote:
The state can set itself up as a god, true. Kim Jong Il has done so.The state can do what religions doe and so they are quite dispensable.
The difference between religions and states is that religions are undemocratic by definition, as God's edicts are permanent. States can be truly democratic and so states can be amenable to changes in societies.
Certainly there is a resemblance between states and religions. Centuries ago in Europe governance and religions were indistinguishable.Then ,centuries ago in Europe states could not govern without some established religioun simply because people took God as a given.
I understand you to claim, Greatest I Am, that both religions and states are dispensable. Isn't your opinion of human nature very optimistic?
They "they" in the quote above refers to religions and not the state governments.
I do not believe communities should live without governments. That would lead to chaos and anarchy.
Regards
DL
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Perhaps this just means that warmongering has very little to do with religion and very much to do with money, self-serving politics, and gullible drone populations.Wyman wrote: ↑Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:24 amThe religious right hit its height and flamed out in the late eighties. I agree with you that US policy in the mid-east is a mess and for the life of me I don't know why we enter pre-emptive wars to protect Israel. I'm just saying that I have never heard the religious right advocate war in the middle east. Jerry Falwell and company harped almost exclusively on their fellow Americans and their fellow Americans have pretty much ignored them since the nineties. They're borderline irrelevant except as punching bags for the left from time to time. Clinton, Obama and Trump (and Hillary Clinton) are non-religious figures, only going through perfunctory motions as far as religion is concerned - like going to funerals and such. The religious zealots voted for Trump for Chrissakes - a womanizing, pro-gay lech who said he was against the Iraq war and wanted to get out of the middle east. Now, I don't believe him, mind you, but you have to admit, they did not back a war mongering prude. George W. did have religious support. But as Trump shows, the religious right will stick with the republican at all costs no matter what. It was as usual the moderates that threw things to Bush because Gore was a stiff, as was Kerry. Where have you been? Hanging out in Alabama?Hobbes' Choice wrote:On the contrary. The scientific idealism of the 50s is long gone. What has happened in the last 30 years if the meteoric rise of the religious right, deeper and stronger links with Israel and A continued war against Islamic countries.Wyman wrote:
You're stuck in the 1950s. .
The US has flooded Israel with arms, and funded a range of de-stabilising and modernising dictatorships.
Have you not been paying attention.
Re: Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.
Vegetarian taxidermy wrote:
Warmongering, yes. But WW11 was generally a just war for the part of the Alllies: Nazism is unjust.Perhaps this just means that warmongering has very little to do with religion and very much to do with money, self-serving politics, and gullible drone populations.