Anonymous wrote:
Are you kidding? I am saying what Islam contends, not what I as an Atheist believe. Islam contends that is not from man, but from "god", and specifically that it is the final message from "god" and is for all eternity unchangeable. Yes, there are differences in interpretation, but all interpretations are profoundly reactionary drawing as they do from the same profoundly reactionary source material that can never, ever be changed, or disregarded and that lays out a great many things in alarming specificity. I regard it all as so much malevolent gibberish, a slightly more malevolent set of gibberish than the other sets of malevolent gibberish that are out there.

Again, you demonstrate the same contradiction. I think that it is so embedded in your thinking that you may not be able to escape from it. As an atheist, you would be expected to know that words on a paper can never be "for all eternity unchangeable" regardless of what some may think. You believe that Islam is "gibberish" and acknowledge that there are different interpretations, but then state your belief that all Muslims believe that Islam is "for all eternity unchangeable". The simple fact that Islam is practiced differently between sects, between geographic regions, and over time shows that such change is there whether you or they choose to acknowledge it. Your statement that "all interpretations are profoundly reactionary" is ignorant beyond belief.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It really is sad and pathetic how liberals such as yourself use variation in the individuals who identify themselves as Muslims to ignore the things that Islam painly says and the effect those things have on people's behavior. Here is an article written with people like you in mind:

https://richarddawkins.net/2014/10/can-liberalism-be-saved-from-itself/

Yes, I understand that you believe that every Muslim should be blamed for every idea or action that any other Muslim has. The pride you take in your bigotry is familiar to us. You proudly call yourself an atheist, while just as proudly tout your particular dislike for Islam. When we are in need of atheist Islamophobes to advise us on Islam, I'm sure you will be the first we call.

As usual you completely fail to understand the distinction between the person and the belief system. I am saying that Islam should be blamed when Muslims act in accordance with the reactionary, illiberal, violent dictates of Islam, particularly when those same Muslims cite Islam as the justification for their actions. Islam is not an identity. It is a belief system that anyone can choose, or reject. Unless, of course, you are surrounded by Muslims who will cut your head off if you leave the religion because Islam tells them to do just that.

No, you fail to understand the difference between Islam and Muslims. ISIS has no interest in islamic doctrines, their fight is a political one, so was Al Qaida's and many others. Whey they beheaded Foley, they didn't say "convert to Islam or we will kill you". There was no religious undertone, or overtone, to the slaughter. ISIS has also beheaded Muslim journalists, and killed other Muslims who in one way or another disagreed with their ideology. I was profoundly touched by Mike Haines, whose brother was beheaded by ISIS who chose to read front he Quran to tell the world that Islam had nothing to do with it :

‘The Muslim faith is not to blame’: Mike Haines reads from Koran to tell the world that his brother David was butchered by ISIS because of extremism, not Islam

Source : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2755617/Brother-ISIS-beheading-victim-David-Haines-reads-Koran-pleads-society-repel-evil-better.html#ixzz3FhhvumCc

As a Muslim, I am appalled, livid whenever I hear about ISIS or read about them. I can not even begin to comprehend their beliefs let alone their actions. Lots of respected Muslim sheikhs came out and denounced them . Sheikh Abu Basir al-Tartus “The group known as ISIS are from the fanatical Khaw?rij, rather they have surpassed the Khaw?rij in many of their characteristics and actions, combining between fanaticism, aggression, hostility and shedding inviolable blood.” He further said: “We call upon all sincere individuals who have been fooled by them while still with this misguided group to severe their ties with it and to declare their freedom from it and its actions.”. But regardless of how loud they reject ISIS's actions, it seems like people like you always want to point the finger back and say "it's the religion that needs to be blamed".

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote: As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise.

You should listen to what those practicing Muslims say. Anyone who claims that Islam is not an "all or nothing" belief system doesn't know the first thing about Islam. Islam literally means submission, YOUR submission to God's will. People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's.

I would not expect that an atheist, as you claim to be, would suggest that there is an Allah in the first place. I would expect that you would believe that anyone following a religion was putting his own or others' thoughts in place of their non-existant god's. This is the same contradiction that you have previously exhibited.

An atheist would fully expect that a religion that comes from man rather than God would be subject to change and dispute. You seem to have the very un-atheist belief that the Quran is the word of God and is indisputable with a single interpretation. Yet, even a cursory understanding of Islam shows significant differences in understanding (e.g the existence of major sects such as Sunni and Shia Muslims).

Are you kidding? I am saying what Islam contends, not what I as an Atheist believe. Islam contends that is not from man, but from "god", and specifically that it is the final message from "god" and is for all eternity unchangeable. Yes, there are differences in interpretation, but all interpretations are profoundly reactionary drawing as they do from the same profoundly reactionary source material that can never, ever be changed, or disregarded and that lays out a great many things in alarming specificity. I regard it all as so much malevolent gibberish, a slightly more malevolent set of gibberish than the other sets of malevolent gibberish that are out there.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote: As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise.

You should listen to what those practicing Muslims say. Anyone who claims that Islam is not an "all or nothing" belief system doesn't know the first thing about Islam. Islam literally means submission, YOUR submission to God's will. People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's.

I would not expect that an atheist, as you claim to be, would suggest that there is an Allah in the first place. I would expect that you would believe that anyone following a religion was putting his own or others' thoughts in place of their non-existant god's. This is the same contradiction that you have previously exhibited.

An atheist would fully expect that a religion that comes from man rather than God would be subject to change and dispute. You seem to have the very un-atheist belief that the Quran is the word of God and is indisputable with a single interpretation. Yet, even a cursory understanding of Islam shows significant differences in understanding (e.g the existence of major sects such as Sunni and Shia Muslims).

I didn't read PP as saying she thinks the Quran is the word of God. I thought she was saying Muslims think it's the word of God. That's the difference.

That's your interpretation. Here is what the poster actually wrote:

"People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's."

The post does not contain a qualification limiting it to Muslims who think it is the word of God. Regardless, the poster ignores the obvious that the various sects of Islam demonstrate that believers have already picked and chosen. To suggest that Islam is "all or nothing" is to suggest that there agreement on what constitutes "all". No such agreement exists. That this is blatantly obvious makes positions such as that poster's incomprehensible.

I think you're misinterpreting her.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote: As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise.

You should listen to what those practicing Muslims say. Anyone who claims that Islam is not an "all or nothing" belief system doesn't know the first thing about Islam. Islam literally means submission, YOUR submission to God's will. People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's.

I would not expect that an atheist, as you claim to be, would suggest that there is an Allah in the first place. I would expect that you would believe that anyone following a religion was putting his own or others' thoughts in place of their non-existant god's. This is the same contradiction that you have previously exhibited.

An atheist would fully expect that a religion that comes from man rather than God would be subject to change and dispute. You seem to have the very un-atheist belief that the Quran is the word of God and is indisputable with a single interpretation. Yet, even a cursory understanding of Islam shows significant differences in understanding (e.g the existence of major sects such as Sunni and Shia Muslims).

I didn't read PP as saying she thinks the Quran is the word of God. I thought she was saying Muslims think it's the word of God. That's the difference.

That's your interpretation. Here is what the poster actually wrote:

"People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's."

The post does not contain a qualification limiting it to Muslims who think it is the word of God. Regardless, the poster ignores the obvious that the various sects of Islam demonstrate that believers have already picked and chosen. To suggest that Islam is "all or nothing" is to suggest that there agreement on what constitutes "all". No such agreement exists. That this is blatantly obvious makes positions such as that poster's incomprehensible.

Anonymous wrote:OK, I gave up at the top of page 5, but the discussion has been very interesting.

I want to add that religion, no matter what variety, is used to control the masses. And he who controls the religion's message controls the believers, regardless of the teachings or "open-mindedness" of the underlying religion. Islam seems to have many people attempting to control the message, including ISIS, and effectively using modern technology to communicate the message.

I am against all organized religions.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote: As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise.

You should listen to what those practicing Muslims say. Anyone who claims that Islam is not an "all or nothing" belief system doesn't know the first thing about Islam. Islam literally means submission, YOUR submission to God's will. People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's.

I would not expect that an atheist, as you claim to be, would suggest that there is an Allah in the first place. I would expect that you would believe that anyone following a religion was putting his own or others' thoughts in place of their non-existant god's. This is the same contradiction that you have previously exhibited.

An atheist would fully expect that a religion that comes from man rather than God would be subject to change and dispute. You seem to have the very un-atheist belief that the Quran is the word of God and is indisputable with a single interpretation. Yet, even a cursory understanding of Islam shows significant differences in understanding (e.g the existence of major sects such as Sunni and Shia Muslims).

I didn't read PP as saying she thinks the Quran is the word of God. I thought she was saying Muslims think it's the word of God. That's the difference.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote: As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise.

You should listen to what those practicing Muslims say. Anyone who claims that Islam is not an "all or nothing" belief system doesn't know the first thing about Islam. Islam literally means submission, YOUR submission to God's will. People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's.

I would not expect that an atheist, as you claim to be, would suggest that there is an Allah in the first place. I would expect that you would believe that anyone following a religion was putting his own or others' thoughts in place of their non-existant god's. This is the same contradiction that you have previously exhibited.

An atheist would fully expect that a religion that comes from man rather than God would be subject to change and dispute. You seem to have the very un-atheist belief that the Quran is the word of God and is indisputable with a single interpretation. Yet, even a cursory understanding of Islam shows significant differences in understanding (e.g the existence of major sects such as Sunni and Shia Muslims).

jsteele wrote: As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise.

You should listen to what those practicing Muslims say. Anyone who claims that Islam is not an "all or nothing" belief system doesn't know the first thing about Islam. Islam literally means submission, YOUR submission to God's will. People that pick and choose, say drinking alcohol or whatever, are just bad Muslims, substituting their own thought in place of Allah's.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It really is sad and pathetic how liberals such as yourself use variation in the individuals who identify themselves as Muslims to ignore the things that Islam painly says and the effect those things have on people's behavior. Here is an article written with people like you in mind:

https://richarddawkins.net/2014/10/can-liberalism-be-saved-from-itself/

Yes, I understand that you believe that every Muslim should be blamed for every idea or action that any other Muslim has. The pride you take in your bigotry is familiar to us. You proudly call yourself an atheist, while just as proudly tout your particular dislike for Islam. When we are in need of atheist Islamophobes to advise us on Islam, I'm sure you will be the first we call.

As usual you completely fail to understand the distinction between the person and the belief system. I am saying that Islam should be blamed when Muslims act in accordance with the reactionary, illiberal, violent dictates of Islam, particularly when those same Muslims cite Islam as the justification for their actions. Islam is not an identity. It is a belief system that anyone can choose, or reject. Unless, of course, you are surrounded by Muslims who will cut your head off if you leave the religion because Islam tells them to do just that.

The klan cited Christianity. Did that make Christianity a bad religion?

Yes, they are all lies. Yes, they are all bad. Throughout history various elements of Christianity have been used to justify awful ends. Yes, that makes it bad, at least until you can look at it and make up your own mind what parts are good and which are not and ought to be ignored, but of course at that point you aren't really a Christian at all. You are just projecting your own values on some ancient gibberish.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It really is sad and pathetic how liberals such as yourself use variation in the individuals who identify themselves as Muslims to ignore the things that Islam painly says and the effect those things have on people's behavior. Here is an article written with people like you in mind:

https://richarddawkins.net/2014/10/can-liberalism-be-saved-from-itself/

Yes, I understand that you believe that every Muslim should be blamed for every idea or action that any other Muslim has. The pride you take in your bigotry is familiar to us. You proudly call yourself an atheist, while just as proudly tout your particular dislike for Islam. When we are in need of atheist Islamophobes to advise us on Islam, I'm sure you will be the first we call.

As usual you completely fail to understand the distinction between the person and the belief system. I am saying that Islam should be blamed when Muslims act in accordance with the reactionary, illiberal, violent dictates of Islam, particularly when those same Muslims cite Islam as the justification for their actions. Islam is not an identity. It is a belief system that anyone can choose, or reject. Unless, of course, you are surrounded by Muslims who will cut your head off if you leave the religion because Islam tells them to do just that.

There are a number of contradictions in your thinking, but the first one I will address is the fact you are an atheist who believes that Islam is a "lie", yet seem to bestow it with divine powers. From an atheist's point of view, words on a paper are simply words on a paper. There is nothing special about them. What is important is what people believe those words to mean. That is not always as simple as it sounds because the words can be unclear -- particularly in Arabic which is probably the least definite language in existence -- and interpretations of the words' meaning can change over time. For example, if the Quran says to behead enemies, does it mean to literally cut off their heads, or does it simply mean to kill them? The Quran was written at a time when the state of medical knowledge didn't allow for checking things like brain activity or other signs of life. Hence, beheading was a practical way to ensure death (and was widely used by members of all religions). So, both interpretations of what is meant by the Quran's reference to "beheading" are possible.

If you say that Islam requires that those who leave the religion be put to death, then what do you say about those who have left Islam with full knowledge of other Muslims, yet live? Have those Muslims who failed to kill them been poor Muslims, or are they Muslims who practice Islam differently than how you would expect? As you say, Islam is a "belief system". But, contrary to what you believe, it is not an "all or nothing" system, despite that many practicing Muslims may claim otherwise. Someone can choose to be a Muslim, yet choose not to kill someone who leaves the religion. Someone -- even one of the greatest Muslim heroes -- can choose to be a Muslim and choose not to kill the population of a conquered city as was the case with Saladin when he captured Jerusalem. Was Saladin a bad Muslim because he didn't behead every male he captured or enslave every woman?

Again, because you are an atheist, I don't understand why you believe that religion has any power beyond the power people choose to give it. Some people who call themselves Muslims (and there is no reason to argue that they aren't) justify terrible deeds on the basis of their religion. I condemn such people and their deeds as vehemently as anyone else. But, there are a others -- a large number of others -- who also call themselves Muslims but who do not believe their religion requires such actions. I stand with that group in arguing against your attacks on their religion.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It really is sad and pathetic how liberals such as yourself use variation in the individuals who identify themselves as Muslims to ignore the things that Islam painly says and the effect those things have on people's behavior. Here is an article written with people like you in mind:

https://richarddawkins.net/2014/10/can-liberalism-be-saved-from-itself/

Yes, I understand that you believe that every Muslim should be blamed for every idea or action that any other Muslim has. The pride you take in your bigotry is familiar to us. You proudly call yourself an atheist, while just as proudly tout your particular dislike for Islam. When we are in need of atheist Islamophobes to advise us on Islam, I'm sure you will be the first we call.

As usual you completely fail to understand the distinction between the person and the belief system. I am saying that Islam should be blamed when Muslims act in accordance with the reactionary, illiberal, violent dictates of Islam, particularly when those same Muslims cite Islam as the justification for their actions. Islam is not an identity. It is a belief system that anyone can choose, or reject. Unless, of course, you are surrounded by Muslims who will cut your head off if you leave the religion because Islam tells them to do just that.

The klan cited Christianity. Did that make Christianity a bad religion?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It really is sad and pathetic how liberals such as yourself use variation in the individuals who identify themselves as Muslims to ignore the things that Islam painly says and the effect those things have on people's behavior. Here is an article written with people like you in mind:

https://richarddawkins.net/2014/10/can-liberalism-be-saved-from-itself/

Yes, I understand that you believe that every Muslim should be blamed for every idea or action that any other Muslim has. The pride you take in your bigotry is familiar to us. You proudly call yourself an atheist, while just as proudly tout your particular dislike for Islam. When we are in need of atheist Islamophobes to advise us on Islam, I'm sure you will be the first we call.

As usual you completely fail to understand the distinction between the person and the belief system. I am saying that Islam should be blamed when Muslims act in accordance with the reactionary, illiberal, violent dictates of Islam, particularly when those same Muslims cite Islam as the justification for their actions. Islam is not an identity. It is a belief system that anyone can choose, or reject. Unless, of course, you are surrounded by Muslims who will cut your head off if you leave the religion because Islam tells them to do just that.

Anonymous wrote:

It really is sad and pathetic how liberals such as yourself use variation in the individuals who identify themselves as Muslims to ignore the things that Islam painly says and the effect those things have on people's behavior. Here is an article written with people like you in mind:

https://richarddawkins.net/2014/10/can-liberalism-be-saved-from-itself/

Yes, I understand that you believe that every Muslim should be blamed for every idea or action that any other Muslim has. The pride you take in your bigotry is familiar to us. You proudly call yourself an atheist, while just as proudly tout your particular dislike for Islam. When we are in need of atheist Islamophobes to advise us on Islam, I'm sure you will be the first we call.

Anonymous wrote:OK, I gave up at the top of page 5, but the discussion has been very interesting.

I want to add that religion, no matter what variety, is used to control the masses. And he who controls the religion's message controls the believers, regardless of the teachings or "open-mindedness" of the underlying religion. Islam seems to have many people attempting to control the message, including ISIS, and effectively using modern technology to communicate the message.

Hmmm. I thought just like you about two decades ago, when I was into Marxist ideology.

Now I'm still extremely liberal, but I realize that "religion exists to control the masses" is pablum used to Marxists to, uh, control their own masses. Religion has a lot of purposes, and some of them are genuine and useful.