What we are up against!!!

[Guest]

I am curious Eckadimmock, specifically which regimes were avowedly Atheist? That have been warlike that is. Russia? Cuba?, What war did they start? We might not like their methods of running their countries or treating their people but what countries did they wage war upon (not talking about defending themselves but aggression itself). The "Cold War" doesn't count.

The Soviet Union was very antireligious, as was Mao's China and Pol Pots' Cambodia. So are the Tamil Tigers, though I'm not sure if you can call that a regime. Can we count wars against their own populations, such as Tibet or the cultural revolution? (part of the rationale of this was to stamp out fuedal superstitions). The Soviet Union launched wars against dissidents in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, against Afghanistan in the 1980's, and aided various other military efforts worldwide. The Chinese have attacked Vietnam, India and South Korea at different times.

I don't say this is in any way caused by Atheism, but it illustrates that absence of religion does nothing in itself to promote peace.

[Eckadimmock]

Forgot to put the name; the above was me.

[YF]

Their ideology was essentially a secular religion. They told you how you ought to live and tried to enforce it.

[Eckadimmock]

Their ideology was essentially a secular religion. They told you how you ought to live and tried to enforce it.

Personally, I prefer the term "nationalism" as George Orwell used it (http://www.george-orwell.org/Notes_on_N ... ism/0.html)

By 'nationalism' I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human
beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions
or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled 'good' or
'bad'.[See note, below] But secondly--and this is much more important--I mean
the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing
it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of
advancing its interests.

As he makes clear, nationalism may not be about a nation, but an ideology, religion or philosophical system.

[whatalark]

[quote="YF"]Is this the kind of love you are talking about? I think I'll pass thank you and take my chances with the rest of the heathens.

“When you draw near to a city to fight against it, offer terms of peace to it. And if its answer to you is peace and it opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall do forced labor for you and shall serve you. But if it makes no peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it; and when the LORD your God gives it into your hand you shall put all its males to the sword, but the women and the little ones, the cattle, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourselves; and you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the LORD your God has given you. Thus you shall do to all the cities which are very far from you, which are not cities of the nations here. But [my italics] in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes…”

[Mrs. A Gandy]

sundaymorningstaple wrote:
... is there any difference in the Jihads of today than the catholic church's crusades of the 1100's? Or for that matter the catholics & protetants in Ireland...
All major religions have killed in the name of religion at some time or another due to mis-interpretions or deliberate actions...

Says who, you??

[Wind In My Hair]

God doesn't make or decide what is good, good exists indepently. The "Good" is the ends, not religion. Religion is only a means, and often, a very bad one at that.

Good does not exist independently, unfortunately. I think it was Shakespeare who wrote "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." And I agree that there is no objective 'good'. Morality is dependent on the thinking of a society or culture, shaped over centuries or millenia.

Yet without morality society would descend into chaos. So we all have to choose a morality. Whether you choose the US Declaration as your guiding beacon, or Christianity, or your own secular self-defined version of morality... you made a choice at some point.

Religion provides a morality for those searching for one. And I agree that religion is a means... but to what? To the 'good'? What is good? And why be good? If the good existed independently wouldn't everybody aspire to the same good? Yet looking around the world surely you realise that is not true at all.

[YF]

Ohhhhhh.....I see. So its okay to put everyone to the blade and make slaves out of them if they live "subhuman lives" and don't give in to god.........Yaaaaahhhhh, again. I'll take my chances with the heathens. I've read Deuteronomy and much of the rest; I know what it says--I don't need some 20th century anachronistic interpretation to tell me what was *really* meant it seems all pretty clear to me. This isn't the only kind of passage like that.

Did you know the Bible was written by the same people who thought the world was flat?

-Rob

[ksl]

well you guys I was the OP of this thread interesting as it is, I would just like to add a little thought to how infiltrated Europe is.

Back in 84 to 87 i was employed in the refugee council, my position was to gain the trust of the refugees, to stop intimidation and riots, within a camp of approx 200. It used to get rather volatile, when the authorities never came up with their promise to rehouse them.

Many I do recall were very politically active, from the Mujahedin party, scattered in every European country back in the early 80's, they were freely allowed to collect funds on the streets to support their cause, to bring down the Iranian government. These people were financially backed from Saddam Husseins Iraq.

You can read a little here about it.

http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/mek.htm

There are some fair comments on the thread, but i really believe that in my opinion, that George Bush and Tony Blair have actually opened a can of worms here. Terrorism you can never win, no matter what. But I suppose you can offer them a political seat (Like Adams)

My thoughts are on extremism, which all governments have ignored for many many years, while playing their war games with the USSR. In fact many of these grps have been used by USA and others to further their political and economic influence.

USA wanted Irans imam to be dethroaned, USA must be pretty pissed off now that Iraq have asked Iran to train their forces. The whole shit is back firing on the USA and Britian, if Iran and the new Iraq work together.
and Saddam and the Mujahedins are well entrenched in every city of Europe, and we even keep them, offering our hospitality and welfare system.

Makes you wonder just what is going down, in the future.

[Wind In My Hair]

Ohhhhhh.....I see. So its okay to put everyone to the blade and make slaves out of them if they live "subhuman lives" and don't give in to god.........Yaaaaahhhhh, again. I'll take my chances with the heathens. I've read Deuteronomy and much of the rest; I know what it says--I don't need some 20th century anachronistic interpretation to tell me what was *really* meant it seems all pretty clear to me. This isn't the only kind of passage like that.

Did you know the Bible was written by the same people who thought the world was flat?

-Rob

Hi Rob, no it is NOT okay to use religion as an excuse to seek political power, not in my book. And the last Pope apologised for some of the violence that was committed in the name of God. Don't forget religion can be used or abused and it's a choice that every person makes which way to go.

Look at Mother Teresa and countless others like her, who ministered to the sick and dying... most of whom were Hindus or agnostics... and she did not even try to convert them, unless they themselves wanted to. Has any non-religious person ever brought that much love to the world? She made it very clear that without God she would never be able to do what she did.

So religion in itself is not good or bad. And I agree with whatalark that it goes much deeper than just quoting a few paragraphs out of context. Yep, the people who wrote the bible lived a long time ago, much longer ago than Chaucer or Shakespeare, and you would not be able to understand those guys without some interpretation, let alone the bible.

Hey I remember you're a PhD student... I would have expected a much more thought-through discourse than what I've read on this thread.

Coming back to the original posting, which is the religious fervor of some Muslims, I do agree that most of us do not realise what we are up against. But I do think that a few black sheep should not turn us against the majority of Muslims, many of whom are moderate and would not support what their more fanatical brethen are doing.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Yep, the people who wrote the bible lived a long time ago, much longer ago than Chaucer or Shakespeare, and you would not be able to understand those guys without some interpretation, let alone the bible.

Of course, we also don't have the original texts (if there were any) either. How many centuries were they handed down by word of mouth prior to being set down in ink? How many translations or mis-translations have the stories been victim of? Ever played 20 questions? Even with everybody speaking the same language do you notice what happens when people paraphrase? So everything has to be taken with a grain of salt (or in my case a whole truckload of salt). I am not saying what we know today courtesy of Gutenberg is not correct. I am saying you have to take everything with a bit of scepticism and laxity (not laxitive). If everybody read the same thing the same way we would only have one religion wouldn't we? With that in mind, I would agree to disagree and leave it at that. Theologians have been arguing much longer than we have and they haven't figured it out yet either.

cool runnings......

sms

[Wind In My Hair]

ok, laxity granted and i know what you mean about the broken telephone. i'm no theologian and not trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking, just that i appreciate a good sensible discussion in a non-threatening environment which i take this to be.

BTW pardon my ignorance but 'cool runnings' is slang for what?

[sundaymorningstaple]

It means "Let's not work ourselves up into a lather....."

sms

edited for clarification

[ksl]

Time out ladies and gentlemen please!!!

We are all aware of the sensitivity of politics and religion, So please a little order in the court! I think the discussion is quite an eye opener for many.
But just as there are so many individuals on this earth, there are just as many opinions.

I have really many aquaintences that are of the muslim faith, and I believe there is good and bad in all religions in one form or another, but what it all boils down to is that laws and religion must work together, to protect the naive and weak people from being lead in the wrong direction.

One may say what is the wrong direction! I can only support the legalities of national laws and protection of national security around the world.

It is wrong for extremist to attack our home lands, becuase of their own frustrations of the middle east.

What the extremist are doing In host Countries, will without doubt backfire on the progression of the faith in these Countries, which is a sad day for the religion, and a sad day for those people considering to change faith.

Religion should never be above the law! and yet in many Countries, religion is the law, What we also fail to see, is that some government establishments are above the law.

MOD UK is an example, that it can actually do anything from posioning its own personal, and legally cannot be prosecuted. Weapons of mass destruction where developed and tested on soldiers of the UK from 1950's right up untill 1989, for commercial gain. MOD UK have the Queens protection and cannot be prosecuted under UK law.

This is why I beat my own drum! Many think that I am not patriotic. I am! but am I a patriot, this I believe would have to be no, I have never voted for any government body in the UK ever, because it is my belief, they all piss in the same pot! It's very easy to look at politics and see a religion! So I stay on the side lines.

[Guest]

Time out ladies and gentlemen please!!!

We are all aware of the sensitivity of politics and religion, So please a little order in the court! I think the discussion is quite an eye opener for many.
But just as there are so many individuals on this earth, there are just as many opinions.

I have really many aquaintences that are of the muslim faith, and I believe there is good and bad in all religions in one form or another, but what it all boils down to is that laws and religion must work together, to protect the naive and weak people from being lead in the wrong direction.

One may say what is the wrong direction! I can only support the legalities of national laws and protection of national security around the world.

It is wrong for extremist to attack our home lands, becuase of their own frustrations of the middle east.

What the extremist are doing In host Countries, will without doubt backfire on the progression of the faith in these Countries, which is a sad day for the religion, and a sad day for those people considering to change faith.

Religion should never be above the law! and yet in many Countries, religion is the law, What we also fail to see, is that some government establishments are above the law.

MOD UK is an example, that it can actually do anything from posioning its own personal, and legally cannot be prosecuted. Weapons of mass destruction where developed and tested on soldiers of the UK from 1950's right up untill 1989, for commercial gain. MOD UK have the Queens protection and cannot be prosecuted under UK law.

This is why I beat my own drum! Many think that I am not patriotic. I am! but am I a patriot, this I believe would have to be no, I have never voted for any government body in the UK ever, because it is my belief, they all piss in the same pot! It's very easy to look at politics and see a religion! So I stay on the side lines.

What do you mean..........I mean which religion do you see in politics?