|
khwarezm posted:Einstein wasn't really religious in the way some people like to think he was. Besides Nazi Anti-semitism seemed to be more obsessed with the Racial aspects rather than the religious ones. Tei posted:My opinion is that communism was just a sort of religion. Ah okay, so if you do a suicide attack, no matter the reason, if you believe in a God or an afterlife at all then it was that pernicious religion that made you do it. But if you believe in God and make a scientific discovery, oh well then you're not religious at all! But if you're an atheist with an irrational anti-scientific taboo then whatever your convictions are is a religion. Okay I concede that starting from the definition "religion is that which causes all suicide bombings and all irrational anti-science taboos and can never coexist with scientific advances" then yall are perfectly tautologically correct.
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:29 |
|
|
khwarezm posted:What do you mean exactly when you say religious terrorist group? I mean that they were a Catholic terrorist group fighting against a Protestant state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I mean that they were a Catholic terrorist group fighting against a Protestant state. They weren't, actually. They couched their violence in religious terms, but it's widely accepted that the actual conflict was secular in nature.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:They weren't, actually. They couched their violence in religious terms, but it's widely accepted that the actual conflict was secular in nature. They were, actually, by the same definitions that apply to Islamic terrorists. They were a group entirely composed of one religion, fighting against a group composed of those of a religion they considered hostile and against those of their own religion who made common cause with that other group. Of course there were 'secular' aspects to it, because religion is just another part of culture. Daesh also had secular goals and aims. So does Al Queda. If you are going to argue the IRA wasn't a Catholic terrorist group: what percentage of them--the PIRA--were not Catholic?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:They weren't, actually. They couched their violence in religious terms, but it's widely accepted that the actual conflict was secular in nature. There are people ITT who refuse to believe the Pacific Theater in World War 2 was secular in nature because it had kamikaze pilots therefore it must have been fought in the name of religion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I mean that they were a Catholic terrorist group fighting against a Protestant state. By this interpretation we'll have to reexamine what people were saying about the Tamil Tigers earlier, perhaps we should look at them first and foremost as Hindu terrorists fighting a Buddhist state? I don't feel that defining either of these conflicts are well explained religiously, the IRA were quite secular (leftist even) and the Troubles are more an ethnic conflict than a religious, its just that religion became the most important single signifier between the two groups in Northern Ireland.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:There are people ITT who refuse to believe the Pacific Theater in World War 2 was secular in nature because it had kamikaze pilots therefore it must have been fought in the name of religion. If your talking about tei, that guy is legit crazy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Ah okay, so if you do a suicide attack, no matter the reason, if you believe in a God or an afterlife at all then it was that pernicious religion that made you do it. Perhaps the belief in the after life was a enabler. Theres causes and theres facilitators. VitalSigns posted:But if you believe in God and make a scientific discovery, oh well then you're not religious at all! But to answer your question better. Many scientist also believe in religion memes. They still function like scientist and discover poo poo, so religion is not enough a dead weight for people to do science. It helps that many religions don't challenge basic science facts in a day to day basic. Like many christian sects believe the bible is not literal, and need to be interpreted, so any loophole is just really only because is symbolic. I guest it would be complicate to be dinosaur archeologist, if you believe earth is 6000 years old. And to work at NASA, if you believe the earth is flat. It may be a problem for doctors if they deny the existence of evolution. If you are into Dogs, a dog scientist, it will be a problem if you believe evolution don't exist. VitalSigns posted:But if you're an atheist with an irrational anti-scientific taboo then whatever your convictions are is a religion. No, you can be a atheist with irrational taboos, yadda, yadda... that don't make you religious. I think. --- VitalSigns posted:There are people ITT who refuse to believe the Pacific Theater in World War 2 was secular in nature because it had kamikaze pilots therefore it must have been fought in the name of religion. I don't know enough about kamikazes to have a informed opinion. It could be they sacrificed themselves for their country, and religion was not a huge role in it. Anyway, like I say, I know 0.00% about kamikazes. Tei fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:By this interpretation we'll have to reexamine what people were saying about the Tamil Tigers earlier, perhaps we should look at them first and foremost as Hindu terrorists fighting a Buddhist state? Sure, if you use that categorization. So what? quote:I don't feel that defining either of these conflicts are well explained religiously, the IRA were quite secular (leftist even) and the Troubles are more an ethnic conflict than a religious, its just that religion became the most important single signifier between the two groups in Northern Ireland. Hey, maybe that's because religion is just another part of culture
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Tei posted:No, you can be a atheist with irrational taboos, yadda, yadda... that don't make you religious. I think.. Yes, now you're getting it. People are irrational, with brains evolutionarily hardwired to search for and find patterns even on incomplete information. Sometimes that means seeing a face on the moon and thinking it's a man, sometimes that means thinking a prayers and dances control the weather and reinforcing it when it appears to work and rationalizing it away when it doesn't. Sometimes that manifests by noticing religious people doing suicide bombings, concluding religion causes suicide bombings, then inventing a religious explanation for every suicide bombing to maintain the theory
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:They weren't, actually. They couched their violence in religious terms, but it's widely accepted that the actual conflict was secular in nature. Is anyone ITT simultaneously of the opinion that the Tamil Tigers, IRA et al. have secular motivations, while ISIS and al-Qaeda are uniquely religious? It looks to me like people are kind of arguing past each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Note again, I didn't say "publicly cheering that black people were killed", I said "burned down historic black churches". Maybe I don't understand what you're saying, can you clarify? VitalSigns posted:Stalin somehow managed to ban male homosexuality on penalty of hard labor and banned evolution in favor of Lysenko's bullshit all on his own without the TOXIC and EVIL and VILE corrupting religion rotting his brain. You're right, but that doesn't mean in contemporary society that its still true. Banning homosexuality was a relic of Orthodox teachings and Lysenko was a cult of personality that was ultimately a failure because of the scientific ramifications of his junk science and pipe dream promises. It was self correcting. Religious ideology is not. drilldo squirt posted:People are saying you are an islamophobe because you seem to be an islamophobe. No one has called ME an Islamophobe, I was speaking in general terms. Any criticism of religion is often met with "Gasp you just hate brown people" or some nonsense. That isn't the case at all. Religious thought based on faith is bad regardless of the flavor. Islam is just the nastiest one right now, but its no more nasty than the other flavors. Religions become more acceptable the less seriously we take them and the further from the texts and teachings we move. Nevvy Z posted:This is atheist just-worlding. 'It has to be religion's fault because as an atheist I refuse to believe I could be capable of such things.' I'm not saying atheists are incapable of it, I'm simply saying that its a lot harder to get people on the suicide train if they are forced to use rational means to justify it. I believe there ARE rational reasons to use suicide attacks to accomplish your goals. None of them really involve doing it against a civilian population though. Its a lot easier to justify it in religious terms, especially if faith is an acceptable metric by which to reach conclusions. Toxic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Maybe I don't understand what you're saying, can you clarify? I am because: drilldo squirt posted:If you come into an argument about if it's bad to send jews to camps and sterilize them and start talking about how the jewish religion has been a net drain on humanity it's not that hard to assume that you are an antisemite, Islamophobia works the same way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Potential BFF posted:Atheists saying mean things on the internet sure is the issue here. The real problem we need to tackle is all these nasty secular organizations that are devoted to destroying reproductive rights, reversing the supreme court's decision on gay marriage, and getting prayer in and evolution out of schools cause these totally exist. They used to, though not in the US. Most communist and fascist states were not only secular and atheist but actively anti-religion, yet they were still typically just as anti-LGBT and anti-abortion as the US, if not more, and of course there were plenty of instances of science being removed from the curriculum and replaced with propaganda. Da Mott Man posted:Their are atheist Jewish people. When you adopt something as an identity, especially a regional area like Israel, it is no longer tied to your religion. So I'm going to call this a straw man. No offense intended. Depends on who you ask. As far as Jewish authorities in Israel are concerned, non-observant Jews are not Jewish at all, regardless of their own sense of identity. It's actually a significant social problem slowly simmering in Israel - there's an large of people who were considered Jewish enough by the immigration authorities to get a free pass into Israel, but discovered once they arrived that basically every other state agency considers them non-Jewish, because the Law of Return has much broader conditions than everything else. Nori_Takeshi posted:Goalposts never shifted, your aim is just off. I haven't heard of anyone going out to suicide bomb solely because "I'm Muslim, therefore I must suicide bomb" either. Nobody is suicide bombing simply because they're a member of a religion or culture. Tei posted:Generally non-religious activist try to cause terror attacks without dying. While religious terrorist may think that dying don't matter much because they will acquire the reward after dying. The reason is because many religious persons believe in a after-life. This is not only false but patently ridiculous. The concept of sacrificing your life for your country, people, organization, or cause has been around for literally thousands of years, long predating Christianity, and was even present in peoples whose religions declared that the afterlife was just a miserable cosmic garbage can. The concept of an afterlife has little to do with it, and it mostly comes down to devotion to the group, social and societal pressures within it (for example, self-sacrifice for the group even at risk of one's life is often an aspect of ideas like "honor" and "courage"), and often a certain level of hopelessness and misery in life.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
I don't think ISIS are actually religious. They're born out of the remnants of the de-Ba'athification schemes put in in Iraq. Many of their top leaders are allegedly former Ba'ath (which was a secular movement) There's probably a good chance that the rank and file members are potentially true believers but I doubt the convictions of the actual leaders. They're using the religion as a tool for political ends, not as the end itself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yes, now you're getting it. People are irrational, with brains evolutionarily hardwired to search for and find patterns even on incomplete information. Sometimes that means seeing a face on the moon and thinking it's a man, sometimes that means thinking a prayers and dances control the weather and reinforcing it when it appears to work and rationalizing it away when it doesn't. I agree with this. All doctors cure animals. But veterinarians cure all animals, and normal doctors only cure one type of animal. quote:Sometimes that manifests by noticing religious people doing suicide bombings, concluding religion causes suicide bombings, then inventing a religious explanation for every suicide bombing to maintain the theory I agree with you. Is bad logic. Sort of "duck typing". "If cuak like a duck, walks like a duck, .. I call that thing a duck". Or more like "white dog enters coal mine" / "white dog exit coal mine" is the same dog. Is simple logic, that don't take into account all possibilities, and could be wrong. Could be wrong. Tei fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Sure, if you use that categorization. So what? You called the IRA a religious terrorist group, and comparable to Islamic terrorists, but its a loving retarded comparison to something like ISIS since the religious elements are so secondary. First and foremost the IRA is an Irish nationalist group that (supposedly) fights for the defense the Nationalist community of Northern Ireland with the Ultimate goal to unify the North with the South. It is not fighting some kind of sectarian war against all Protestants in the world, but ISIS is with Shiites! The IRA doesn't fight to extend the power of the Papacy but ISIS claims to be setting up the ultimate claimant of authority in the entire Muslim world.There have been attacks that are explicitly about perceived disrespect towards religious practices. The IRA doesn't fight on anything like the same grounds as al-Qaeda or what have you, religion is much more incidental for them by comparison. Its a useless comparison. VitalSigns posted:
I'm just saying that Einstein wasn't really religious at all, especially by the standards of his time, he rejected the idea of a personal god and otherwise seemed to generally Agnostic or of the belief that any creator had little meaning at this point in time, he often compared the wonder he felt at the Universe to that of a religious experience but it didn't make him actually religious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Depends on who you ask. As far as Jewish authorities in Israel are concerned, non-observant Jews are not Jewish at all, regardless of their own sense of identity. It's actually a significant social problem slowly simmering in Israel - there's an large of people who were considered Jewish enough by the immigration authorities to get a free pass into Israel, but discovered once they arrived that basically every other state agency considers them non-Jewish, because the Law of Return has much broader conditions than everything else. Wait what? I lived here practically all my life and have never had an Israeli authority not regard me as Jewish. I've always been secular.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Zanzibar Ham posted:Wait what? I lived here practically all my life and have never had an Israeli authority not regard me as Jewish. I've always been secular. If you were ethiopian you would have been sent to a camp and been sterilised.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:If you were ethiopian you would have been sent to a camp and been sterilised. Okay, but then it wouldn't have mattered if I was observant or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:You called the IRA a religious terrorist group, and comparable to Islamic terrorists, but its a loving retarded comparison to something like ISIS since the religious elements are so secondary. Why are you convinced they're not secondary for ISIS? quote:
Just a total loving coincidence they're all Catholics and fight protestants, they certainly never used such terminology when fighting each other, obviously. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m01_ro0rHc When they disarmed, the fact that the witnesses they chose were a Catholic priest and Protestant minister--just a coincidence! Not because religion was a huge part of the sectarian divide, no no. Anyway, this all doesn't matter because the rear end-stupid theory was that religious people were fine with dying in their cause because the afterlife. You may deny all you want the religious component of the Troubles, but you're not, I assumee, denying most members of the IRA were observant catholics who believed in the afterlife, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Why are you convinced they're not secondary for ISIS? Hasn't ISIS overtly stated that they want to start a new state based on religious terms and texts vs the IRA that wants their culture to unify the entirety of Ireland? I think there are a lot of similarities here, but if you're going to measure how much religion plays a role, ISIS absolutely has the greater religiosity going on. I would posit, as I had before, that if not for religious zealotry there would be far less grounds for either group to rise. Especially since in both cases its been religious sectarian divides that were the basis for their political formation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Hasn't ISIS overtly stated that they want to start a new state based on religious terms and texts vs the IRA that wants their culture to unify the entirety of Ireland? I think there are a lot of similarities here, but if you're going to measure how much religion plays a role, ISIS absolutely has the greater religiosity going on. Sure,. Actually figuring out which was more religious would require actual effort and work and not simply taking statements at face value, but obviously one will have more stuff going on in the area of culture we semi-arbitrarily call 'religion'. quote:I would posit, as I had before, that if not for religious zealotry there would be far less grounds for either group to rise. Especially since in both cases its been religious sectarian divides that were the basis for their political formation. You missed the whole point of that conversation though, you goofball. As an atheist I sincerely wish you would shut the gently caress up forever about religion, by the way. Saying that religious and political divides are seperable is foolish. They're intertwined, because religion is just another part of culture. It is not actually supernatural.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Sure,. Actually figuring out which was more religious would require actual effort and work and not simply taking statements at face value, but obviously one will have more stuff going on in the area of culture we semi-arbitrarily call 'religion'. You keep arguing against something I've never said. I never said they were two separate things, I'm saying that the fact that they are intertwined is bad. I'm arguing that we ought not intertwine them and that the intertwining is what has led to these bad political, social, and yes even economic situations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Maybe suicide bombing is hilarious. I mean, read this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ll-survive.html One thing that education do is raise kids from total ignorance, so they are less dumb than a pair of rocks. In this sense, you can blame religion less than ignorance. Ignorance more a cause of terrorism than religion. But religion and ignorance reinforce each another, so I guest we will never know. In many places of the world, a madrass is all you can get. A place where they will teach you to read. Then tell you to read the quran, and is mostly the only thing you will do there. They will raise you, to read a stupid boring book. Is like bitcoin mining. Tei fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
I don't think taking ISIS at their word is probably the best course of action. Next thing you'll believe the Pope when he says he cares about the plight of the world's poor while sitting on a throne worth more than a devout catholic will make in their lifetime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:You keep arguing against something I've never said. I never said they were two separate things, I'm saying that the fact that they are intertwined is bad. I'm arguing that we ought not intertwine them and that the intertwining is what has led to these bad political, social, and yes even economic situations. No you unbelievably thick person who thinks he's smart, I mean they're inseparable. There is no dividing line. All sorts of things you call 'cultural' are if you take a look at them based on the same poo poo as religion. There is no difference between them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:No you unbelievably thick person who thinks he's smart, I mean they're inseparable. There is no dividing line. All sorts of things you call 'cultural' are if you take a look at them based on the same poo poo as religion. There is no difference between them. I'm pretty sure I went to great lengths to say that faith based thinking is bad and is a part of religion and religious thinking and we should do away with respecting said religious thinking, faith, and yes, "religion". You're getting so mad because I'm not writing a huge disclaimer about the intertwining of religion into policy and into culture when I think everyone pretty much understands that it is a part of culture. I'm merely saying its a lovely part of culture we're better off with and would have been better off with a long time ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Why are you convinced they're not secondary for ISIS? Because they spend an inordinate amount of time and effort rooting out out heretical elements, to the point of attempting to genocide the Yazidi and wrecking UNESCO world heritage sites because of idolatry, have set up a state grounded in explicitly religious language and custom to the extent that they call themselves the 'Islamic State' and have attracted thousands of fighters from all over the world by advertising themselves as the truest representatives of Islam. We can be cynical about their true intentions but from what I can tell about the life of people like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi he seems to have been pretty serious about his religion and I would presume a lot of the rank and file really do think they're fighting for Islam. quote:Just a total loving coincidence they're all Catholics and fight protestants, they certainly never used such terminology when fighting each other, obviously. I'm not denying all religious elements, I'm saying the religious elements in the Troubles and the IRA aren't in the same ballpark as a lot of islamist groups like ISIS, with their stated aim of establishing a worldwide revived Caliphate, get rid of the heretics and create an Islamist utopia, it is a less religiously informed conflict, maybe that makes them a bit less willing to blow themselves up? I've already recognized that religion plays an important role, the most important role in defining identity in Ireland, I live here for fucks sake, but as I said religion is primarily a crude indicator of the more important question of whether or not they're Irish or British. Perceptions of Irish nationalism as entirely sectarian is extremely narrow anyway, even the most hardcore Catholic nationalists tend to recognize the contributions of Protestants to the country and the nationalist movements, some of the most important figures among the IRA pantheon include people like Wolfe Tone, Robert Emmet, Charles Stewart Parnell and Edward FitzGerald. Have a song about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmPbC1rYYOA
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I'm pretty sure I went to great lengths to say that faith based thinking is bad and is a part of religion and religious thinking and we should do away with respecting said religious thinking, faith, and yes, "religion". You're getting so mad because I'm not writing a huge disclaimer about the intertwining of religion into policy and into culture when I think everyone pretty much understands that it is a part of culture. I'm merely saying its a lovely part of culture we're better off with and would have been better off with a long time ago. No, again, read this very slowly: It is not separable. It is not intertwined in that way. It is blended. It is not seperable. you yourself probably believe all kinds of poo poo that, if you actually looked it, would qualify as religious. khwarezm posted:Because they spend an inordinate amount of time and effort rooting out out heretical elements, to the point of attempting to genocide the Yazidi and wrecking UNESCO world heritage sites because of idolatry, have set up a state grounded in explicitly religious language and custom to the extent that they call themselves the 'Islamic State' and have attracted thousands of fighters from all over the world by advertising themselves as the truest representatives of Islam. Have you read the interviews with their fighters where they know gently caress-all about Islam? quote:I'm not denying all religious elements, I'm saying the religious elements in the Troubles and the IRA aren't in the same ballpark as a lot of islamist groups like ISIS, with their stated aim of establishing a worldwide revived Caliphate, get rid of the heretics and create an Islamist utopia, it is a less religiously informed conflict, maybe that makes them a bit less willing to blow themselves up? I've already recognized that religion plays an important role, the most important role in defining identity in Ireland, I live here for fucks sake, but as I said religion is primarily a crude indicator of the more important question of whether or not they're Irish or British. Again, wasn't the point of the conversation. quote:Perceptions of Irish nationalism as entirely sectarian is extremely narrow anyway, even the most hardcore Catholic nationalists tend to recognize the contributions of Protestants to the country and the nationalist movements, some of the most important figures among the IRA pantheon include people like Wolfe Tone, Robert Emmet, Charles Stewart Parnell and Edward FitzGerald. Again, wasn't even the point of the conversation. Do you get the point of the conversation was a claim that religious people made suicide attacks, while non-religious people didn't, because religious people believe in the afterlife?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Faith-based thinking is something humans do, that's why we create religions and superstitions about literally anything, including bizarre poo poo hanging a horseshoe above the door and avoiding black cats. You think religion causes faith-based thinking but its the other way around, and atheist regimes haven't shown themselves to be much better at avoiding magical thinking than religious ones. Say what you want about the Iranian government, but they never precipitated a famine because someone decided food crops would work together in class solidarity and not compete for resources and ordered everyone to plant the whole country's crop superdensely without bothering to check against reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:You're right, but that doesn't mean in contemporary society that its still true. Banning homosexuality was a relic of Orthodox teachings and Lysenko was a cult of personality that was ultimately a failure because of the scientific ramifications of his junk science and pipe dream promises. It was self correcting. Religious ideology is not. Banning homosexuality was done because it was considered to be some combination of (depending on the country): a choice, a mental disease, or associated with pedophilia. In the Soviet Union it had precisely nothing to do with the Russian Orthodox Church. There were worries about its impact on population growth, especially if social tolerance of homosexuality caused it to somehow spread. As for Lysenkoism, it was not a "cult of personality" that was destroyed by its own bad science - it rose because the prime political leader liked it (partially for ideological reasons) and fell because its political patron was dead and no longer able to force everyone to abide by it or else. You're making a critical mistake: you're assuming that religion and faith is the only kind of irrationality in all the world, and therefore anyone who is truly not religious must necessarily be a totally rational being who makes every decision without the slightest hint of irrationality. Moreover, since you're working from that basic assumption, you (and others, like Tei) rationalize anything that would seem to contradict that with a "no true atheist" fallacy - since y'all have started from the core assumption that all atheists are perfectly rational, any irrational behavior from an atheist must simply prove that they somehow weren't actually a real atheist, which leads to absurdities like declaring political ideologies to be religions or claiming that all suicide attacks are ultimately driven by belief in an afterlife no matter what. Zanzibar Ham posted:Wait what? I lived here practically all my life and have never had an Israeli authority not regard me as Jewish. I've always been secular. Probably you were either born there, immigrated as a very young child and converted while you were still too young to get the full lifestyle probing, or are just lucky enough to be halakhically Jewish by blood. A huge number of self-identified Jews worldwide aren't considered "Jewish" by Israeli rabbinical courts for various reasons and would need to convert in order to be recognized as Jewish anywhere in Israel besides the border authorities, and the Israeli rabbinical courts are tremendous assholes about conversion, sometimes going so far as to retroactively revoke someone's Jewishness because their lifestyle (or even their mother's lifestyle) isn't Jewish enough, or blacklisting foreign rabbis and refusing to recognize any conversion or proof of Jewishness offered by those rabbis. Most American Jews, as well as a majority of the former-Soviet Jews who immigrated to Israel, aren't considered to be halakhically Jewish by blood and are therefore forced to convert - even if they're quite happy to be non-religious and secular, certain important functions (particularly marriage) are handled exclusively by religious authorities with no non-religious civil variant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:No, again, read this very slowly: It is not separable. It is not intertwined in that way. It is blended. It is not seperable. you yourself probably believe all kinds of poo poo that, if you actually looked it, would qualify as religious. I'm saying its totally separable. If American Atheists became the ruling political party of the US, they wouldn't be "blending" in religious overtures. Its entirely possible to separate faith based rationalization from actual secular policy. Historically its been intertwined, but it doesn't have to be. Especially in the US, there were huge arguments about even including references to faith because of the issues it can and has brought up. It doesn't matter if they know a lot about Islam or not, they're on the team calling themselves the Islamic State. They'd fighting for some modicum of faith, which is bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Banning homosexuality was done because it was considered to be some combination of (depending on the country): a choice, a mental disease, or associated with pedophilia. In the Soviet Union it had precisely nothing to do with the Russian Orthodox Church. There were worries about its impact on population growth, especially if social tolerance of homosexuality caused it to somehow spread. As for Lysenkoism, it was not a "cult of personality" that was destroyed by its own bad science - it rose because the prime political leader liked it (partially for ideological reasons) and fell because its political patron was dead and no longer able to force everyone to abide by it or else. I've made no such claim, you're confusing Tei's posts for mine. I've merely said that faith based ideas are bad and that treating faith as noble results in a higher likelihood of poor faith ideas being spread. That doesn't mean that it can't come about other ways, just that I'm identifying one way that I KNOW doesn't work, so we should stop going down that path. Atheists can be dumbasses too and be taken in by bad arguments, absolutely. No denying that. I'm merely saying that treating religion and faith as a noble and honorable thing simply gives cover to those that are using it to do even worse things or justify even worse policy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Probably you were either born there, immigrated as a very young child and converted while you were still too young to get the full lifestyle probing, or are just lucky enough to be halakhically Jewish by blood. A huge number of self-identified Jews worldwide aren't considered "Jewish" by Israeli rabbinical courts for various reasons and would need to convert in order to be recognized as Jewish anywhere in Israel besides the border authorities, and the Israeli rabbinical courts are tremendous assholes about conversion, sometimes going so far as to retroactively revoke someone's Jewishness because their lifestyle (or even their mother's lifestyle) isn't Jewish enough, or blacklisting foreign rabbis and refusing to recognize any conversion or proof of Jewishness offered by those rabbis. Most American Jews, as well as a majority of the former-Soviet Jews who immigrated to Israel, aren't considered to be halakhically Jewish by blood and are therefore forced to convert - even if they're quite happy to be non-religious and secular, certain important functions (particularly marriage) are handled exclusively by religious authorities with no non-religious civil variant. Okay, but your original claim implied that all unobservant Jews are considered non-Jewish, which is demonstrably false.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I'm saying its totally separable. I know you are. you're wrong, easily and demonstrably wrong. quote:If American Atheists became the ruling political party of the US, they wouldn't be "blending" in religious overtures. Its entirely possible to separate faith based rationalization from actual secular policy. Historically its been intertwined, but it doesn't have to be. Especially in the US, there were huge arguments about even including Why are you suddenly talking about policy and not culture? And I'm sure that you, with your level of thinking, have a ton of faith-based ideas yourself, they're just not 'religion' so you don't question them. quote:It doesn't matter if they know a lot about Islam or not, they're on the team calling themselves the Islamic State. They'd fighting for some modicum of faith, which is bad. Doens't matter if they're not actually religious, because otherwise you'd have to think about that and that would be hard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
As an ex atheist I hope I was never this bad. You seem to be asserting that religion is always toxic. I want to point out that while the "nones" are growing the majority of the world's population find solace in their faith. We don't go up blowing up s***, not even a majority of us. Not even a small minority really, its a tiny tiny minority. I'm sorry that religion hasn't been kind to you. My first contact with Christianity was through a chick tracts so you could imagine that my experiences with it were pretty hostile growing up. I would say I was deeply hurt by Christianity. But then I guess you could say the Holy Spirit found me. I wasn't expecting it to happen. If you'd asked me a few years ago if I would ever become a Christian I would have laughed in your face. But there's power here there's a power that can't really be explained adequately. To me it seems that imprinted on all of us is a notion of God or gods. Once I discovered that First Baptist Church of Jacksonville is not all of Christianity, that there are many many people of faith that are weird and artistic and open minded and caring and willing to sacrifice expecting nothing in return. Upon learning That you can be a person of faith and not be a right wing authoritarian jackass, that there was a deep need within my soul for faith, Upon learning that theology could be liberating and not just dominating, That the gospel really is the good news, the choice for my spiritual path became clear. Other people's spiritual paths take them elsewhere and that's ok. Not only are there very different ways to be a Christian, there are many different ways to be a good person, there are many different ways to be rational and thoughtful and wise. Right now what I'm seeing from some of the edge Lord atheists in this thread, is a sort of sanctimony that I usually see from fundamentalist assholes. I started this thread to deal with a very heartbreaking human tragedy, and backlash against people who have nothing, who did nothing to deserve this treatment. Why you think this is a good time to pontificate on the evils of the Islamic faith shows an intense insensitivity to the feelings of others.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
I don't consider myself an atheist, not by the definition of most self-declared atheists, at least. I don't care about God and don't really give a passing thought to his existence in either direction at all in my day to day life. What really sticks in my craw, particularly with criticism of Islam, is that it usually comes from an incredible position of ignorance. There are many, many legitimate criticisms made of, for example, the Roman Catholic Church that are actually specific, direct, and display a level of knowledge about how it operates. A lot of actually good athiests, and many Catholics themselves, make these criticisms. The idea that they are beyond reproach, are sitting on a huge portion of the entire wealth of the world, in both economic and cultural terms (the amount of artwork they have, often stolen, is insane - way worse than even the greatest excesses of the British Empire) etc. When it comes to Islam however, it's usually "Well they're a religion, so I guess they're bad". Even worse is when they make claims that are not actually substantiated by Islamic doctrine and are actually practices that pre-date Islam and are found in populations that would never likely have had any contact with even the proto-Islamic forebearers (i.e. FGM). It's the rhetorical and intellectual equivalent of that stoned guy in the party who totally has a profound insight into how War Is Bad, Man. Wow, real deep - I'm pretty sure with insight like that you'll be a huge contributor to the concerted effort for world peace - when can I be invited to the Nobel Peace Prize party coming your way? Meanwhile many actual people who are knowledgeable about Islam and have legitimate criticism of it are often ignored because they're part of some Monolithic Islamic Whole that can't be trusted to know how it really operates - they're in too deep.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I don't consider myself an atheist, not by the definition of most self-declared atheists, at least. I don't care about God and don't really give a passing thought to his existence in either direction at all in my day to day life. A good post. What really gets me is that by treating Islam (or any religion) like that it buys into the view of religion as this super-important powerful force with supernatural powers to make people irrational. The irrationality that leads to religion is part of human nature and is almost assuredly functional, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:29 |
|
|
Obdicut posted:
Second, assuming it does, so what? Most people don't know much about their religions, but that doesn't mean they aren't sincere about their belief. That they are uninformed is a nice idea that they are straying away from some platonic ideal, but do we if that really makes a bit of difference in the end? Al Baghdadi seems well informed given his background and education, while the authorities in countries ranging from Iran to Saudi Arabia to Sudan are also, I presume, well informed about Islam but it doesn't stop them from regularly performing gross human rights violations in its name. quote:Again, wasn't the point of the conversation. And you claimed that the IRA proved that wrong by not launching suicide terrorist attacks, to which I pointed out that it is way less truly religious in nature compared to groups that do, like ISIS. Ddraig posted:Meanwhile many actual people who are knowledgeable about Islam and have legitimate criticism of it are often ignored because they're part of some Monolithic Islamic Whole that can't be trusted to know how it really operates - they're in too deep. The interesting thing to me was that I saw a lot of criticism directed at her from my other leftist (mostly christian) friends, because she was perceived to be concentrating too much on Islam and being excessively harsh and uncompromising in her rhetoric. The thing is the language she seemed to use didn't seem like it would get any eyes batted at her if she was talking about Christianity or Judaism, and I would have thought that since she was speaking from a background of experience it made sense that she would talk mostly about Islamism. Incidents like that make me wonder when legitimate criticism, even from people of Muslim backgrounds, can be voiced because I get this overriding impression that well-intentioned leftists are the ones too willing to throw critics of Islam from Muslim backgrounds under the bus compared to somebody like Bill Maher and talking to people from Secular or Ex-Muslim backgrounds they sometimes say that as well. E; Here's the video, she had on her blog, excuse the dumb title and dear god don't read the comments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ZiZdz5nao khwarezm fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 19:39
|
|