Why so sensitive about Mohammed?

[soulcougher73]

You question all approaches and solutions but never proffer any yourself?

Put yourself on the line and suggest an approach to the rise of fundamentalist Islam and the totalitarianism of fundamentalist governments as are found in Iran.
Nuke all of the middle east.

Propose an approach for the Christian and other minorities in Egypt.
Get the fuck out where you are not wanted.

Propose an approach for Israel that is surrounded by hostile powers.
Move or see answer 1 or 2.

Propose an approach for Europe that is economically dependent on the region's oil and is facing a tremendous flow is Muslim immigration, an immigrant population that is refusing to become integrated with national ethos.
Kick out all muslims and attack the middle east and take their oil.

Propose an approach for India whose many faiths are considered sufficient apostasy to merit death.
See answer 3.

Propose an approach for Western liberalism that is facing a challenge by a very illiberal and intolerant dogma.
Kill all conservatives.

Propose an approach for the United States, and maybe even Canada.
This is boring now.

Oh i want to play.

 

[sze5003]

Wow that's a good idea glad to see some people are so ignorant on also glad I don't give a shit really lol

 

[PJABBER]

The acoustics? Aren't relevant?

I don't get it.

Anytime ponyboy posts you might as well whip out Google Translate and punch in Xhosa.

:awe:

 

[PJABBER]

Oh i want to play.

See your Answer #1.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

A quick google shows me lots of advanced universities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_and_colleges_in_Saudi_Arabia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Iran

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Jordan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Kuwait

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Turkey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_and_colleges_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Yemen

Of course there are lot's more
And I don't think India is in the Middle East

edit- oh and while your admiring those beautiful buildings in the pics, take notice of all the women

Yeah, women are welcomed as long as they are not doing too well.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ger-as-Iran-bans-women-from-universities.html

In Iran they are banning women from universities for two reasons. First, the women were outperforming the men and as everyone knows Mochhhhammmat (piitb) preached that women are nothing but subjects to the men so they can't have that and second, the women were getting uppity about staying at home with all of their six - inifinity children they can't afford to have.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

The acoustics? Aren't relevant?

I don't get it.

That's because you're religious.

Re-read your post that he quoted and then his and perhaps you'll understand it, it's not hard.

 

[Alaa]

There is an actual state that fights, kills, tortures, sweeps out humans from their homelands because it is called their holy land in an ancirnt scripture. This state is Israel and most of the western world is so sensitive that it should be there and be defended for a religous reason. I ask the same question : Why so sensitive about Israel ? After all it is in the same league as Mohammed, based on religion. Instead of angry mobs, it is protected by smart bombs and weapons as well world wide media.

Strange, really.

 

[DCal430]

People there still go outside and get involved.
Here you go on facebook

Please, their reaction is deplorable.

 

[DCal430]

Religion rots the mind, this is why they protest.

 

[DCal430]

Think not that it is only Muslims too, in Africa you have cases of Christians going wild and butchering innocent people too.

 

[DominionSeraph]

That was my stated assumption at the start, yes.

I think you need to learn what "stated" means, as you did no such thing.

Your quote:

Interestingly enough, I am of the mindset that any religion which is destroyed cannot have been a religion to a real god. Any god who allows a religion to be created to worship that god would not allow it to be destroyed - it would only make people think that god was not real.

While this does not prove any of the current religions are true, it does provide us a way of showing some of the ones which are not true.

Nowhere in here do you state that the god cares. You have an arbitrary positioning between religion and a "real god"; you have the god passively "allowing" something and then you illogically lever that into an apparent absolute obligation on the god's part to positively maintain every precondition for that thing's existence in perpetuity, along with forcing the thing; and you assign value to a state of affairs (a set of conditions that would make people believe the god is not real) without assigning the god the necessary value of caring about such a thing.


Your post is shit. Jeff7 didn't even come close to the number of assumptions you're making.

1. The god has to care about being directly worshipped in an organized fashion.

2. The god has to care that he cares.
- This is NOT a given. It does not necessarily follow from the mental state of valuing and holding a preference for an outcome that one must work to achieve it. It may generally follow in an evolutionally programmed human, but that hill-climbing algorithm taking desire and action into context with survivability has no necessary relationship to a god.
A god's mental pathways do not have to connect in a reverse-evolutionary way. Heck, if you go on to complete arbitrariness, we don't have to connect anything to anything! A god may be sovereign like that.

3. The god must have sufficient knowledge and reason to be able to construct a plan to achieve the effect he cares about and that he cares he cares about.

4. The god must connect this in value with (2).

5. The god must have sufficient power to put (3) into effect.

6. If the universe is not deterministic, or it is but the god not infallible, the god must have sufficient perception, knowledge, and reason to be able to handle any unforeseen circumstances that would cause an undesired outcome.

7. The god must connect this in value with (2).

8. And the god must have sufficient power to implement said fixes.

9. The god cannot have any system of combining values that, in conjunction with a set of held values + care of implementation of said values, would override (2).

(and there's probably 6000 other procedural requirements as well)

Now, to get to your absurd conclusion about religion we have to use:

A. For a god to be real it must fulfill 1-9 above.

At this point we have that a god would implement a religion and not allow it to fail. But it still doesn't hem in your weak "allows a religion to be created" -- to confine an undefined being into perpetuating something that they merely allow to happen would just be throwing together a bunch of specific make-believe to reach that conclusion.

And good luck separating a command to perpetuate a religion from a command to create it without using arbitrary characteristics. Because then we have this:

Any god who creates a religion for people to use to worship that god would not allow that religion to be destroyed.

Any eternal god who could not live with such a nonexistence of his religion would thus need an eternal religion. So, ho ho ho...

While this does not prove any of the current religions are true, it does provide us a way of showing some of the ones which are not true.