This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Islam: Is it inherently Evil?

Jump to new
Craton said:
my argument holds true.
Click to expand...

Not really, you said

I don't think any religion is inherently evil, just the practitioners that want to interpret the written word into their own distorted and perverted world view and impose that onto the masses that are inherently evil
Click to expand...

You give the impression here that the all religions must be based on sound virtues, and it is only some individual practitioners who distort the texts that are evil, However what I am saying is that the original texts themselves as they were written have teachings which are immoral teachings.

The religions that have been built around these texts have adopted some of these immoral teachings, some of the biggest foundational ideas of these religions, eg the Jesus sacrifice, are universally held by all the various christian religions, So it is not a matter of people distorting the text.

--------

But you have kind of muddied the water here, the religion is not the book, the religion is was the practitioners preach and accept. eg the catholic religion is not the bible, its based on the bible, and has adopted some of the immoral concepts written in it, but its not the bible.

If you don't think all religions have immoral teachings, can you please name one that doesn't?
 
luutzu said:
haha... Correlation does not equal causation, but if causation exists it indicates correlation, correlation therefore means causation - sometimes, definitely here when RY said so.

What have you been smoking RY?
Click to expand...

Here is referring to the "false cause fallacy", It's one of the many common logical fallacies people can make.

eg,

You presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other.

Many people confuse correlation (things happening together or in sequence) for causation (that one thing actually causes the other to happen). Sometimes correlation is coincidental, or it may be attributable to a common cause.

Example: Pointing to a fancy chart, Roger shows how temperatures have been rising over the past few centuries, whilst at the same time the numbers of pirates have been decreasing; thus pirates cool the world and global warming is a hoax.

pointing to a high prison population of muslims, doesn't automatically suggest it's the "muslim" part that's the problem, there could be other factors as already pointed out,
 

Murky water indeed.

Now VC, you make the point for me. The original texts were immoral teachings so by extrapolation, the writers of the teachings were immoral to start with and again, hence my view that religion per se isn't evil, it's the practitioners. Anyhow, in essence I agree with you.

Some clarity on the meaning of the word religion using Google Fu may help (me):

Not being a theologist, the impression is that our society makes out that religion is virtuous and pious. I do not subscribe to this thinking although the Ten Commandments comes close, especially if the word love is substituted for the word "God". Again and as you say, it's the preachers that hold sway of the followers. Anyways, the sheeple that follow blindly are as much to blame as the immoral preachers.

Is Agnosticism or Atheism a religion?
 
Some primate imitating a mullah calls for the killing of two adults and an unborn because he can. Calls in the troop to do it = gutless ******.
 
Craton said:
hence my view that religion per se isn't evil, it's the practitioners.
Click to expand...

I think a significant part of the dogma of most major religions is inherently evil and some of the practitioners are. It is not a benign dogma that is misinterpreted by some, but is (parts of) itself inherently evil.

Every religion has a majority of practitioners who are basically good people. They are good because they chose to ignore the parts of the dogma that is evil and concentrate on the good. They cherry pick the dogma and live by those creeds that they regard as good. However, even though basically good, their attitudes can still often be influenced by parts of the dogma that a humanistic society would regard as repugnant. Is it a coincidence that the two people on this and similar threads that are the least accepting of homosexuality are also the (only?) two who categorise themselves as devout Christians? I believe this attitude comes directly from their religious beliefs.

Equally many of those who chose to do evil deeds do so not by subverting the dogma of their religion, but by choosing those parts that are intrinsically evil as their guidance. Westboro Baptist Church followers are a good example of such Christians and of course ISAL in the Muslim world. Listening to some of the spokespeople from such groups, it is often hard to see where their interpretation of the fundamentals of their religion's dogma is any less valid than the mainstream. It is often just a matter of which parts to chose or emphasise.
 
Is it a coincidence that the two people on this and similar threads that are the least accepting of homosexuality are also the (only?) two who categorise themselves as devout Christians? I believe this attitude comes directly from their religious beliefs

Bellenuit, if you are talking about me, I have only ever stood up for 'Traditional Marriage'.
 

You should watch Chomsky. He's a very smart and funny guy. Probably the most intellectually honest guy I come across.

A quote: "If they do it, it's terrorism. If we do it, it's counter-terrorism".

On National Interest: What is national interest? The Realist school on International Relations define it as a thing that nations do that serves their interests. This is an illusion. It assumes that the CEO of General Motors share the same interest as the person who clean its floors. They share very different interests and almost always it's the CEO's and GM's interests that become the national interest.


----

But that's outrageous! Why if the people knew that, they'd be upset. Hence the media. Hence, the budget always favouring the rich but it's people power; the poor work day and night and could barely make ends meet but they gotta work harder and stop complaining. If there's anything to complain about, blame it on the other poor and lazy welfare cheats... that and terrorists.

And our soldiers? Our heroes? Yea mate, we know it's 3% inflation but times are tough and 1.5% increase is as good as it gets. We all got to make sacrifices and **** happens (to you guys) sometimes but that's what our nation need... heroes, and heroes don't need to pay the bills or feed their family that much. Oh hey Gina and Mr Palmer sir, hey there Big Aussie and Big Coal and Iron... who needs more money on unnecessary mining tax and carbon blah blah blah

Anyway, when it serves our national interests we see no evil and hear no evil, and do a lot of freedom freeing democracy thingy. But when it serves no purpose, no immediate purpose, mehh... ebola! Ebola kills everyone indiscriminately, worst than ISIS! But mate, ebola don't travel, and since ebola kills everyone equally, it's not evil.

Don't get me wrong, I think our system of gov't is the best there is. Just we might want to be a bit more objective and see reality for what it is. That way, hopefully we could demand some changes. This us good them evil... save it for a Stallone movie or something - with all due respect to Mr Stallone.
 

How does homosexuality harm "traditional marriage"?

By all means stand up for something. But that does not always mean you have to step on something else to stand for that something.

Yea, traditional marriage is so wonderful, no one ever cheats, they both always raise their kids right... it's so wonderful it shouldn't be shared with those queers. If they have it, there will be nothing left.
 

Yea. But i think his ethno/religious pride got the better of him here though.
 
luutzu said:
You should watch Chomsky
Click to expand...

Is that the best you can come up with. I was referring to a group of 500 Muslims burning to death a Christian couple, the lady being pregnant, under the direction of a Mullah based on some trumped up blasphemy charge and you dismiss it off hand by saying I should watch Chomsky. Every time someone mentions some atrocity committed by Muslims or in the name of Islam, you seem unable to express any condemnation or acknowledgement that the act is horrific, but instead try to obfuscate by alluding to something Chomsky said or wrote.
 
Currently I work in a nursing home where I feed old people. Some times after work I have a chat for about an hour with an old man living there.


Now this old man is very intelligent. He has pursued the aquisitiin of knowledge for a very long time. He currently has cancer and refuses it will kill him. He is a full blooded aussie, and he has the koran sitting on his desk. He told me he wanted to figure out why so many peope flock to this religion.

So far he is 3/4 through with no answers. He even pointed out quotes to me where it allows man to legally rape his wife and slaves which he owns. Now to me that already proves that somethings not right. It also tells follows that if you dont listen to the koran you are an evil doer and your head should be chopped off. Lol
 
darkhorse70 said:
No offence to my muslim friends.
Click to expand...

If you had read "The Book" you would know your friends are at best fair weather ones should the occasion arise they are ordered to follow the path. That is what it takes to be a true believer ... "The Book" above all others.

The pecking order or obedience is simple and guiltless; 1) the rules prescribed, 2) the orders given by council 3) the local leader 4) ......... n-1) friendship, n) conscience.
 

The Bible says the same stuff, except it was wriiten a few centuries earlier when stoning was more popular than beheading, In the bible it lays out the rules for slavery, tells you how you need to drive a spike through the ear of your slave to mark him as a slave, Jesus himself says "slaves obey your master", it says non believers should be stoned, gays should be stoned, witches should be killed (which is causing trouble in Africa now as some local religions have witch doctors who are being burned alive by the new Christians), etc etc

I challenge people here to find an immoral teaching in the qu'ran (Koran), which does not have a similar idea mirrored in the bible.
 
Craton said:
I do not subscribe to this thinking although the Ten Commandments comes close, especially if the word love is substituted for the word "God".
Click to expand...

The ten commandments is a rubbish list, and any thinking person could put together a better list, out of the ten there is only a handful that are worth anything, for example the first 4 are worthless, and could easily be replaced by much more meaningful sentiments.
 
Craton said:
Is Agnosticism or Atheism a religion?
Click to expand...

No,

Agnosticism is just a statement referring to your position regarding knowledge on subject.

Atheism is a statement describing a persons position on religion, it means "lack of belief in a religion"

Atheisim is one answer to one question, "do you believe a god exists" if the answer is no, then your an atheist, that doesn't make you a member of a religion,
 
Value Collector said:
I challenge people here to find an immoral teaching in the qu'ran (Koran), which does not have a similar idea mirrored in the bible.
Click to expand...

True, but at least the Christians have advanced somewhat and no longer believe in slavery whereas some Muslim groups kidnap girls and women and put them into bondage.

Christianity has at least recognised it needs to change with the times, Islam wants to stay in the Middle Ages.
 
Tink said:
Bellenuit, if you are talking about me, I have only ever stood up for 'Traditional Marriage'.
Click to expand...

Is that where a man sells/exchanges his daughter for cattle or pieces of silver?

Because the idea of a man marrying a women in a consensual union based on love is a relatively new thing, For most of our history traditional marriage involved selling off your daughter.

or do you mean the traditional marriage from the bible where Abraham has many wives? is it polygamy you want?

or do you mean the 19th century traditional marriage of 1 white man to 1 white woman? Are you against interracial marriages? because these where protested in the 20th century.

What exactly is your concept of a traditional marriage?
 

In the more developed countries yes, that's because they are being held accountable and secular society won't put up with it, but never forget how they acted when they truly had the power.

In less developed countries Christianity is still causing a lot of trouble, In Uganda the Christian government has made homosexuality a crime where you face life imprisonment or death, It's a crime to be an atheist, other African countries are having the traditional regional religions members being burned alive for witch craft, condoms are being banned in areas that are rife with aids, birth control denied to woman( which is actually vital for getting areas out of poverty).
 
Your thinking? Don't you think it's distorted by comparing one situation to another that are not the same? Another poster here used the word "apologist". An apologist is someone who defends a controversial issue, ideology or belief. How deep does your apologising run? Are you a passive adherent to the Quran? Are you a moderate swinger between passive and extreme or are you (and I don't think you are) a fanatical believer that manifests violent behavior?

Well you are in the right country to make democratic changes if you want. The steps are :-

1) Join a political party or create your own. (e.g. fat boy Clive and the motor enthusiast party dude)
2) Campaign your electorate announcing your beliefs, ideologies, policies etc.
3) Wait for the end of voting day to see if the majority has accepted your campaign
4) Lobby for the parties policies with all the other political parties and come to a compromise

You see, you can whinge but that is what minorities do. However the best part about living in Australia with the laws of the land and the leading political parties of the time is:-

if you don't like it, you can f off to another country and take the **** in your head with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Iran Is not Iraq
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
12K
Dona Ferentes
K
  • Poll
FOS - Is it independent or is it controlled by a corrupt Bank?
Replies
0
Views
3K
Keighery
K
Top of this cycle for ASX 200, cash is king?
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
16K
kahuna1
Has the 100 year Jihad (war) begun ... ???
50 51 52
Replies
1K
Views
96K
DB008
D
What is true in investing over the long term?
Replies
4
Views
5K
Dona Ferentes
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...