You belong to the generation that experienced the standard of living no other generation will experience ever again so don't whine.
And, like he said, he paid his taxes/social security along the way. If your government wasn't so determined to wipe out the middle class and return to a state of Very Few Rich and Very Many Poor there is no reason why your standard of living shouldn't continue to rise.
The only people standing up for Western values are the 'crazy' white people... as you would probably call them. In the UK... it's the EDL
Hmmm... now you're either dangeroussly ignorant or else a rather subtle troll.
For the information of people who don't follow UK politics, the EDL (English Defence League) is a far-far-right bunch of nutters, whose supporters think that people like Anders Breivik (The Norwegian neo-Nazi Mass Murdering Shitbag) had it about right.
there are a lot of moderate muslims. there is also a heck of a lot of extremist muslims. it's hard for the moderates to exercise restraint and power when they aren't actually fully in power
That is too sweeping a generalisation. Not all countries with a lot of Muslims are as bad as Iran or Pakistan. Somewhere like Turkey (or here in the UK) has a lot of moderate Muslims. I don't suppose they were too thrilled by the crappy anti-Muhammed film, but there weren't widespread riots and killings, just a few protests.
However, the point about the protests is that they are broadly anti-American, with the film being a slightly tenuous pretext. The fact is that a lot of the world now hates the US, and it has nothing to do with religion, other than in the sense that many of the civilians killed in places like Iraq and Afghanistan were Muslims.
People like you amuse me. When someone criticizes a non-Christian religion you respond with "Well, the Bible is bad too..."
Why do you feel that everyone that criticizes a non-Judeo-Chrisitian religion must be a Judeo-Christian? Couldn't it be possible, for example, that a person who rejects Islam because of it's seemingly violent nature rejects Judeo-Christianity for the same reason?
It's because such comments are largely couched in US [*] vs.THEM language
In short, the difference is that in Christianity being violent is God's job (and no one else's), in the Quran being violent is the job of the believer. There are scores of Christians who want to help God a little (wrongfully if they had read their book) and scores of Muslims who do not kill anyone (wrongfully if they had read their book).
That is a fucking genius re-writing of both the religious texts and the last two thousand years of history. Congratulations, you should be a science fiction writer like old Ron L and start your own religion, as you've clearly got the gift of the gab.
And Christianity is different how? Yet there are plenty of peaceful Christians around who denounce the violence.
You have answered your own question.
Yes, because no Muslims have denounced violence ever, certainly not recently in Benghazi when a peaceful crowd effectively booted out the violence-causing militias. Oh no.
No, I've studies the Qur'an and listened to the dictates and fatwas of Imams and it certainly is what Islam decrees
No, you've found what you were looking for in the same way that extremist terrorists do. Do you think that the hundreds of millions of non-violent Muslims in the world are just too lazy to fight or just too stupid to understand their Imams' explanations?
or Athiests during WWII (Stalin), Cambodia (Pol Pot), China (Mao), etc.
Don't forget the French Revolution. The triumph of atheism and rational thought brought about The Terror.
Yes, and it inspired ther US Founding Fathers. Clearly the world would be a better place if we still had the French monarchy and the US was still just one of the Queen's colonies.
No, the point is that the past actions of both Christians and Muslims are broadly irrelevant. But where we in the West laugh at extremists calling the US "crusaders" there are many people here who are prepared to take seriously the idea that "Islam" is about to start some holy war to reintroduce the fucking Ottoman Empire Mk 2 or something.
it's a feeble God who needs armed men to defend himself.
This is brilliant, mind if I pass it around?
No no, it's just God giving mere mortals a chance to exercise their free will, which He gave them in the first place. So they could choose to defend Him. Or something.
What ever makes you think they've been exposed to right and good positions through facts and logical argument? Seriously? I posit the following: every human being on the planet believes at least one absurd thing they have never been reasonably challenged on.
You are free to believe in whatever stupid crap you like, but unless you were raised by wolves or something it's impossible that you can get to be an adult and have no idea that other people find it idiotic, offensive, or whatever.
Just because someone subscribes to at least one unethical and foolish position does not justify categorizing them and hating them
Yes it does. If someone chooses to be a racist, I will judge them as a racist idiot, full stop. I don't care if you're a racist who is good with children, donates to animal charities and can tell a good joke, you're still a racist and I'm basically not interested in spending time in your company
BTW if you think of racism as merely "unethical and foolish" I'd take a good hard look at your own beliefs before commenting on other people's behaviour..
The Islamic community do not want their women to be educated. To legislate education might actually be disrespectful if not blasphemes to their religion.
Funny how I've worked with Muslim women with higher degrees than me then. Oh, of course you mean, some extremist countries like Saudi Arabia.
By your logic, because some Christian groups in the US are violently anti-gay and anti-abortion, then "the Christian community" is homophobic, misogynistic and reactionary.
Then why do half of all scientists consider themselves Christian?
Because they're just as weak and vulnerable as any other human beings when it comes to parental and societal indoctrination?
unless you have experienced God personally, the only logical belief is agnosticism
No it's not. I'm not agnostic about the Ancient Egyptian or Greek or Aztec gods: they don't exist. And, incidentally, I'm sure most Christians or Muslims would agree.
The problem is that people who believe in a particular religion think that their own God is the Only One, and this is logically impossible unless you start on the old "primitive people have a partial glimpse of the truth of the Actual Real Christian God in their amusingly skewed religions" argument.
as people become more educated, they become less religious
Unfortunately, that is not entirely true. You still end up in the West with extremely well educated people believing in God. Although there is a more generally satisfying decline in church attendance in Europe, if not the US.
I suppose it's bound to take time, given the hugely entrenched psychological dark spot that religion has cast over the human psyche for thousands of years.
The fact that the scientific method may not be 100% capable of self proof does not mean that therefore any other belief or set of descriptions is equally valid.
Or, if it does, it still wouldn't give any greater weight to the claims of God over the FSM.
If there was actual overwhelming evidence that God existed then people wouldn't argue about it any more than they do over whether the Earth is flat or not. Yes, there would still be the equivalent of Flat Earthers, but the vast majority of people would accept the evidence.
Unfortunately for people who believe in God, there is no such evidence, and religious belief comes down to faith, which is not subject to proof or disproof, and is therefore not science.
Without any evidence that God exists, the whole of the rest of religious belief becomes equally unfalsifiable/unproveable. You can believe in God, the FSM or pixies sprinkling magic dust on flowers to make them grow if you like, but you're never going to persuade anyone else they exist without evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
You belong to the generation that experienced the standard of living no other generation will experience ever again so don't whine.
And, like he said, he paid his taxes/social security along the way. If your government wasn't so determined to wipe out the middle class and return to a state of Very Few Rich and Very Many Poor there is no reason why your standard of living shouldn't continue to rise.
The sensible Muslims are out there, especially here in the USA. The problem is that they are vastly outnumbered by the crazypants Muslims.
Only in the sense that Koran-burning, gay-hating, racist Christians outnumber moderate Christians, i.e. they get a lot more publicity.
The only people standing up for Western values are the 'crazy' white people... as you would probably call them. In the UK... it's the EDL
Hmmm... now you're either dangeroussly ignorant or else a rather subtle troll.
For the information of people who don't follow UK politics, the EDL (English Defence League) is a far-far-right bunch of nutters, whose supporters think that people like Anders Breivik (The Norwegian neo-Nazi Mass Murdering Shitbag) had it about right.
there are a lot of moderate muslims. there is also a heck of a lot of extremist muslims. it's hard for the moderates to exercise restraint and power when they aren't actually fully in power
That is too sweeping a generalisation. Not all countries with a lot of Muslims are as bad as Iran or Pakistan. Somewhere like Turkey (or here in the UK) has a lot of moderate Muslims. I don't suppose they were too thrilled by the crappy anti-Muhammed film, but there weren't widespread riots and killings, just a few protests.
However, the point about the protests is that they are broadly anti-American, with the film being a slightly tenuous pretext. The fact is that a lot of the world now hates the US, and it has nothing to do with religion, other than in the sense that many of the civilians killed in places like Iraq and Afghanistan were Muslims.
People like you amuse me. When someone criticizes a non-Christian religion you respond with "Well, the Bible is bad too..."
Why do you feel that everyone that criticizes a non-Judeo-Chrisitian religion must be a Judeo-Christian? Couldn't it be possible, for example, that a person who rejects Islam because of it's seemingly violent nature rejects Judeo-Christianity for the same reason?
It's because such comments are largely couched in US [*] vs.THEM language
[*] Pun intended.
In short, the difference is that in Christianity being violent is God's job (and no one else's), in the Quran being violent is the job of the believer. There are scores of Christians who want to help God a little (wrongfully if they had read their book) and scores of Muslims who do not kill anyone (wrongfully if they had read their book).
That is a fucking genius re-writing of both the religious texts and the last two thousand years of history. Congratulations, you should be a science fiction writer like old Ron L and start your own religion, as you've clearly got the gift of the gab.
And Christianity is different how? Yet there are plenty of peaceful Christians around who denounce the violence.
You have answered your own question.
Yes, because no Muslims have denounced violence ever, certainly not recently in Benghazi when a peaceful crowd effectively booted out the violence-causing militias. Oh no.
No, I've studies the Qur'an and listened to the dictates and fatwas of Imams and it certainly is what Islam decrees
No, you've found what you were looking for in the same way that extremist terrorists do. Do you think that the hundreds of millions of non-violent Muslims in the world are just too lazy to fight or just too stupid to understand their Imams' explanations?
Thankfully not all Muslims know about abrogation and of those who do, only a minority take seriously.
Right, so it's just their stupidity that prevents the nice Muslims being as bad as the Osama bin Laden ones?
Thanks for that cultural insight.
or Athiests during WWII (Stalin), Cambodia (Pol Pot), China (Mao), etc.
Don't forget the French Revolution. The triumph of atheism and rational thought brought about The Terror.
Yes, and it inspired ther US Founding Fathers. Clearly the world would be a better place if we still had the French monarchy and the US was still just one of the Queen's colonies.
No, the point is that the past actions of both Christians and Muslims are broadly irrelevant. But where we in the West laugh at extremists calling the US "crusaders" there are many people here who are prepared to take seriously the idea that "Islam" is about to start some holy war to reintroduce the fucking Ottoman Empire Mk 2 or something.
If there is this huge worldwide Muslim conspiracy to kill all Christians and non-believers, they're doing a fucking useless job of it.
And what if it is? It seems to me that Islam does condone (hell no, recommend) the use of violence to spread Islam.
Yes, and in related news, all Christians are murderous imperialists because of the actions of the Crusaders.
it's a feeble God who needs armed men to defend himself.
This is brilliant, mind if I pass it around?
No no, it's just God giving mere mortals a chance to exercise their free will, which He gave them in the first place. So they could choose to defend Him. Or something.
Why has this been modded funny? As far as I can see the poster is totally serious, and probably mentally ill. You shouldn't mock the afflicted.
What ever makes you think they've been exposed to right and good positions through facts and logical argument? Seriously? I posit the following: every human being on the planet believes at least one absurd thing they have never been reasonably challenged on.
You are free to believe in whatever stupid crap you like, but unless you were raised by wolves or something it's impossible that you can get to be an adult and have no idea that other people find it idiotic, offensive, or whatever.
Just because someone subscribes to at least one unethical and foolish position does not justify categorizing them and hating them
Yes it does. If someone chooses to be a racist, I will judge them as a racist idiot, full stop. I don't care if you're a racist who is good with children, donates to animal charities and can tell a good joke, you're still a racist and I'm basically not interested in spending time in your company
BTW if you think of racism as merely "unethical and foolish" I'd take a good hard look at your own beliefs before commenting on other people's behaviour..
The Islamic community do not want their women to be educated. To legislate education might actually be disrespectful if not blasphemes to their religion.
Funny how I've worked with Muslim women with higher degrees than me then. Oh, of course you mean, some extremist countries like Saudi Arabia.
By your logic, because some Christian groups in the US are violently anti-gay and anti-abortion, then "the Christian community" is homophobic, misogynistic and reactionary.
Then why do half of all scientists consider themselves Christian?
Because they're just as weak and vulnerable as any other human beings when it comes to parental and societal indoctrination?
unless you have experienced God personally, the only logical belief is agnosticism
No it's not. I'm not agnostic about the Ancient Egyptian or Greek or Aztec gods: they don't exist. And, incidentally, I'm sure most Christians or Muslims would agree.
The problem is that people who believe in a particular religion think that their own God is the Only One, and this is logically impossible unless you start on the old "primitive people have a partial glimpse of the truth of the Actual Real Christian God in their amusingly skewed religions" argument.
as people become more educated, they become less religious
Unfortunately, that is not entirely true. You still end up in the West with extremely well educated people believing in God. Although there is a more generally satisfying decline in church attendance in Europe, if not the US.
I suppose it's bound to take time, given the hugely entrenched psychological dark spot that religion has cast over the human psyche for thousands of years.
The fact that the scientific method may not be 100% capable of self proof does not mean that therefore any other belief or set of descriptions is equally valid.
Or, if it does, it still wouldn't give any greater weight to the claims of God over the FSM.
I don't see how that would be incompatible.
If there was actual overwhelming evidence that God existed then people wouldn't argue about it any more than they do over whether the Earth is flat or not. Yes, there would still be the equivalent of Flat Earthers, but the vast majority of people would accept the evidence.
Unfortunately for people who believe in God, there is no such evidence, and religious belief comes down to faith, which is not subject to proof or disproof, and is therefore not science.
Without any evidence that God exists, the whole of the rest of religious belief becomes equally unfalsifiable/unproveable. You can believe in God, the FSM or pixies sprinkling magic dust on flowers to make them grow if you like, but you're never going to persuade anyone else they exist without evidence.
That is indeed the meme shift underway.
The word "meme" has been redndered meaningless by being co-opted to mean the same thing as "a running gag on the internet".
The OP was talking about the hatred shown by (some) religious people towards gays.
"judge not" has a great deal of context around it and does not mean "judge not" at all
And that, gentlemen, is why we don't write laws based on two thousand year old religious texts.