jump to last post 1-42 of 42 discussions (749 posts)

Atheists and agnostics, what will you do What WILL you do?

  1. aka-dj profile image78
    aka-djposted 2 years ago

    It seems that Islam is on the rise in just about every nation around the globe.
    They are pushing their agenda onto any and every government that is TOLERANT, and using the freedom (and laws) in those countries to gain more and more control.

    The UK is a prime example, where political will is weak (at best) to curb the "takeover".

    What will you do, whenPush comes to shove" and your life is on the line (should it get to that)?

    It will be, "convert (to Islam) or die"!,
    Or, if you are lucky, pay "protection money".

    1. HowardBThiname profile image91
      HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      As an atheist - I can say with certainty that I would pretend to convert.

      This would pose no dilemma for me. See, atheists come from a different perspective - that of not believing in a deity, so there is no internal conflict from pretending to belong to one religion or another. They are all just as meaningless to us.

      I can see how a proponent of the Christian or Jewish faith might feel conflicted if forced to convert or die - but that conflict is not present in atheists.

      The same question was put to millions during the Christian Crusades and the Inquisitions. Convert or die. Part of the reason we are atheists is because we've seen, or studied, the harm caused by organized religions.

      I certainly hope we never get to the hypothetical presented in your OP, but if we do - I envision most atheists following suit. Kind of a silly thing to sacrifice one's life on religious principals.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Are you a guy? As a woman, conversion is a pretty repugnant option. If it was simply saying 'sure there is one one god and Mohammed is his prophet' I'd see little reason to sacrifice my life for a few words. But, throw in a burka and I'll throw a fit.

        1. HowardBThiname profile image91
          HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I see your point, but the question didn't give us any leeway. Death was the only alternative. Is wearing or not wearing a burka worth your life?

          Things change from the inside out. If you wore the burka - you might be able to try and influence a change - in time.

          If you chose to die immediately - you would never get that chance.

          With the first option - you might have the ability to help turn things around. With the second option - you're defeated before you even start.

          1. 0
            Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I see your point. I probably would swallow my self righteous indignation to save my life. And then fight surreptitiously.

            1. HowardBThiname profile image91
              HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              ...and in that decision you would become the mental victor.

        2. cjhunsinger profile image70
          cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          For the theist that will die for his belief, for the principles that he lives by, he has my respect. For the atheist who is absent in conviction and principles and devoid of character, who would mouth the words of a belief is not of any substance and is not worthy of respect. There is no value to his words and such a person is not to be trusted. To live to be what others define you as, is a shallow and meaningless life.

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            WOW.
            http://verbalvictory.pl/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Facebook-Like-Button-small-e1347962780928.png

          2. Righteous Atheist profile image61
            Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Interesting personal attack. No wonder you theists need to kill anyone that does not agree with you. Killing each other for your irrational beliefs gets your respect huh? I find that a disturbing character trait.

            1. cjhunsinger profile image70
              cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I am in my 8th decade of life. I have held to an Atheistic philosophy for 65 of those years and counting. I am a combat vet, the Atheist in the foxhole. As you speak of what you do not know you degrade the value and reasoned truth of Atheistic thought. You have no argument sir as you have no integrity and no knowledge of what you speak.

              1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Ah - more personal attacks. Why the need to verbally abuse me?

          3. HowardBThiname profile image91
            HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            CJ, you said:

            "For the theist that will die for his belief, for the principles that he lives by, he has my respect. For the atheist who is absent in conviction and principles and devoid of character, who would mouth the words of a belief is not of any substance and is not worthy of respect. There is no value to his words and such a person is not to be trusted. To live to be what others define you as, is a shallow and meaningless life."

            That might just be the shallowest comment I've read on these forums for a long time. How do you equate an atheist not caring enough about religion to die standing against one - with being "absent in conviction and principles and devoid of character,?"

            Your argument is that an atheist should take a stand on a religious topic when - to a real atheist - religion means nothing. Were an atheist to take the stand you think he/she should, the atheist in question is most likely not a true atheist - but, instead, someone who is angry at religion for not accepting him/her as he/she is. 

            Your position is tenuous at best.

            Why would an atheist sacrifice himself on the altar of religion?

            1. cjhunsinger profile image70
              cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I have been gone for a couple of days and it seems that I have some dissenters, always, sometimes--interesting.
              It is amazing what people will read into what is not there simply because they want to. At no point did I say that an Atheist should take a stand 'for' a theistic belief. If he proclaims Atheism as a principle then he should stand on that principle and not cower and submit when challenged. To do so negates the principle and the individual.
              To, "religion means nothing---." Theistic belief better mean something due to the fact that 96% of the people on earth are moved and controlled by theistic doctrine. To ignore this is to embrace ignorance as a philosophy of life.
              I am an Atheist, but I do not feel the need to condemn the theist to justify my position, nor do I need to belittle his commitment to his principle. Of what value is it to take a position and then acquiesce?
              I would ask, that you are such an ardent atheist,  of what value is Atheism? How does it benefit Man.? What is the philosophy of Atheism? Is it more than just a statement? How does one govern under an Atheistic philosophy. Is there a political philosophy that corresponds to Atheism? Should people not have a right to believe in a god? Should this be punishable by law?
              I look forward to an intelligent response.

              1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Atheism would never exist if not for theism. It has no real value because it should not even exist as a concept. There should be no need for atheism, but unfortunately, it does exist. So, instead of asking what value it has, ask what value theism has, instead. Then, we find why atheism has to exist, because theism has no value and usually does more harm than good.



                It removes the shackles of slavery to the ignorance and hatred espoused by theism.



                None, it is simply a lack of belief in theism.



                It is, perhaps, to a theist, a very powerful statement, one they will not take kindly to.



                You mean, how does one govern under a lack of theism? Easy, it's called secularism.



                Secularism?



                People have the right to believe whatever they want, as long as those beliefs are kept behind closed doors and not out in the public.



                No, it should be addressed with education.

              2. HowardBThiname profile image91
                HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                you said"
                "At no point did I say that an Atheist should take a stand 'for' a theistic belief. If he proclaims Atheism as a principle then he should stand on that principle and not cower and submit when challenged. To do so negates the principle and the individual. "

                I have no need to "proclaim atheism as a principle." Atheism is simply the absence of belief in supernatural/religious tenets. It's not something to proclaim. It's not a way of life. It's not a defining cause. It's a lack of spiritual belief - that's all.  When so-called atheists start insisting that other atheists behave in a manner that pleases them - they cross into making atheism a cult of their own making.

                "To, "religion means nothing---." Theistic belief better mean something due to the fact that 96% of the people on earth are moved and controlled by theistic doctrine. To ignore this is to embrace ignorance as a philosophy of life. "

                I have no need to take on the yoke of responsibility for those who have spiritual beliefs. That does not mean I'm ignorant of the stats - it just means - I'm not pushing against them. Since religion means nothing to me - pretending to convert - to save my life - is the only smart thing to do. Only those with a cross to bear - will die for something they claim not to even believe.

                "I would ask, that you are such an ardent atheist,  of what value is Atheism? How does it benefit Man.? What is the philosophy of Atheism? Is it more than just a statement? How does one govern under an Atheistic philosophy. Is there a political philosophy that corresponds to Atheism? Should people not have a right to believe in a god? Should this be punishable by law? "

                I am not an "ardent" atheist for the reasons I just explained to you. There is no atheistic philosophy. That would be a belief in "something." Of course people have a right to believe in a god/gods, whatever. Atheists realize that the beliefs of others are just that - the beliefs of others.

                Can another's belief harm you? In the case of the hypothetical of this thread - only if you find moral objection in pretending to convert to save your life.

                What does dying achieve for an atheist?

                Nothing.

                1. cjhunsinger profile image70
                  cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this
                  1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                    Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Lets hope no one is depending on you also. No doubt you would murder your offspring rather than have them be "cowardly" and not die for your principals. wink

                  2. HowardBThiname profile image91
                    HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Did you delete your post???

          4. EncephaloiDead profile image60
            EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Well said. smile

          5. Che Rogers profile image61
            Che Rogersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Is it not a shallow life to kill someone for not being apart of your religion? Is it not shallow to kill in the name of "your god" if this god is all powerful and can punish or kill people themselves? Is it not shallow to think the creator or "God" is bigger than man made religion? I question anyone's sanity when they claim an all loving God asks them to kill another human being for not acknowledging their cultural version of God. In fact the story of Abraham being asked to sacrifice his son to prove his love for God is a perfect example of the blind faith lunacy that the ruling class indoctrinates in the minds of the peasants. Religion is a way to control masses not to actually teach true spirituality. If it taught true spirituality you wouldn't find christians,  muslims, jews killing and conquering people in the name of their loving god. You will know a person or a group of people by their fruits or works. Not by what religion they claim.  Which is why you find good athiests and bad athiest. Good muslims and bad muslims. It's the actions and heart of a man that we should judge them by not what they say they believe.

      2. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        So much for arguing for or against anything then.

        All the "debates" here on Hubpages, (and likely elsewhere has all been a lot of hot, wasted air).

        I will keep this in mind in future discussions.

        Thanks for your honest reply!

        1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
          Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          How many Christians have converted rather than be burned at the stake? I wonder....... Thanks for reminding us how disgusting religion is.

          Well done. wink

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Typical NON-answer.

            Do you actually HAVE an answer?

            1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
              Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Sorry - did you not understand?

              Thanks for reminding us how scary and offensive religions are. wink

              1. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I see. It seems you would shout at the Muslims that their religion is disgusting.(just before they shoot).

                1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                  Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Not sure I would be daft enough to do that. I would probably do what you are doing - hide my identity or go online and pretend to be bravely defending against a perceived threat, while actually stirring up hatred and ill will like a good Christian should. I would continue to pay my taxes and use the hired killers my government employs to do the dirty work. My, how very brave you are. lol

                  Of course I could always shoot them myself - that seems to be the best way to spread an ideology according to you - right? That is how Christianity was spread after all.

                  Islam = Christianity of 200 years ago. Hopefully we will pull their teeth the same as we pulled yours.

                  1. Che Rogers profile image61
                    Che Rogersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    You ain't lying man. Many don't take the time to study the origins of their religions yet jump right to the fire and brimstone to get people to follow their message of "love". Love our God or burn mentality. Christianity was spread for political reasons by a non christian emperor (Constantine). Shortly after there were mass crusades forcing people to convert to the government's religion or be persecuted or die. Muslims did the same which is why these two have spread all over the globe so fast. It was the conquerors religions. When they traveled to lands and conquered it they forced the indigenous people to convert to "their religion". The same mentality love my god or die. So many converted in fear of their death and their families death. Generations later many had no clue why their ancestors changed religions they just blindly followed because it was now custom to do so. What many christians, muslims, jews, buddhist, Hindus don't know is much of their practices and teachings stemmed from Africa (cradle of civilization). Of course this isn't what they will teach you in a eurpope minded government but proof is all over their ideologies and teachings which use ancient egyptian symbols and practices in their secret societies AND monetary systems. Pyramids, eye of heru, ancient chemistry,  ancient mathematics, sacred geometry. For those who know this have truly seeker knowledge without bias.  Those who don't are still sleep to the game.

            2. Link10103 profile image79
              Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The underlying point to that comment was you wouldnt have to choose between the 2 if religion did not exist/have such a stranglehold on society as it does today. When you think about it, it is absolutely insane to choose to kill somebody because they do not believe in the same imaginary person as you do.

              It could also be implied from RA's comment that he would choose to convert, just so he can continue to annoy people who ask religious questions to atheists. Lol.

              1. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                If only you were right.

                I see examples such as this that has me worried.
                http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/05/24 … t-convert/

                Maybe it's just me. hmm

                1. HowardBThiname profile image91
                  HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  It's not just you - we still have atrocities being committed in the names of various deities. I'm aware of the story you posted and I find it repugnant. I hope something happens to save that woman.

                  But, it's happening on the flip side of the coin as well.

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Ant … _Act,_2014

                  You seem to be an good and honest person. I think most of the posters here are as well.

                  As a non-believer, my motto is to speak out against harmful acts wherever and whenever I see them occurring. It's a little simpler for me because I don't have to uphold one religion while denigrating another.

                  But - I will give you one thing - despite the link I posted - in today's world, radical Islam is a larger threat than is radical Christianity. That's just a fact and it should be said and not swept under any politically correct rug.

                  The problem is that there are millions of good (moderate) Muslims - just as there are millions of good Christians. This is not a case of one bad apple spoiling the entire bushel. Let's just throw out the bad apples when we find them and not blame the rest of the apples.

                  That's my take on the situation. It's easy to become fearful and concerned when we hear only the bad news.

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Sensible and well-balanced reply.   Let's see more like this. smile

                2. jonnycomelately profile image85
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Fox News certainly knows how to get its readers.   A bit of sensationalism works wonders for the profits.

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    You recon Fox news made it up then?

                3. Che Rogers profile image61
                  Che Rogersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  The problem is you are getting your knowledge from fox news lol. Wake up. It's propaganda. The American government has done way worse atrocities to innocent people to include every minority group it's come in contact with yet christians here in america never do a damn thing about it. In fact fox news won't report things like operation mk ultra. Or operation fast and furious. Or the active eugenics program going on in america. Or how poor communities in america get no education so they can fill up privately owned prisons systems. You know why this isn't being reported because the same people who own the news own the privately owned prison systems. Religion is just to keep the poor from uprising by teaching them they need to be submissive even if their leaders are corrupt. I'm tired of hearing people who are content with being blind speak the loudest in this country.  They only get their info from biased sources or the same sources and never search for truth only what keeps them feeling comfortable. There is no true growth in comfort. Wake the fuck up

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Two false assumptions

                    1 > I did not, do not rely on Fox, CNN or other crap news sites.

                    2 > I don't live in the USA.

                    Perhaps you ought to do a little checking before you tell me off! hmm

        2. HowardBThiname profile image91
          HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I find many things are worth standing up for - or against - but this question was posed strictly to atheists - and since we are not vested in religion, it would be silly for us to not to pretend to convert when facing the business end of a rifle.

          1. jonnycomelately profile image85
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Or being strung up and strangled slowly to death; or decapitated by an anonymous person in a mask.
            Such wonderful representations of belief in a god, at the expense of basic decent humanity.
            Little surprise that I am atheist!

            (Ed: Referring to the methods and reasons for punishment, not Howard's position, of course.)

        3. AshtonFirefly profile image83
          AshtonFireflyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Sorry but wasn't his response (he would convert) a legit response to your question, "what will you do?" He said what he would do. How is this not a proper response to the OP? You didn't mention an argument for or against anything.

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            ??

            1. AshtonFirefly profile image83
              AshtonFireflyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              This is what you said in response to Howardisthename's first reply:

              "So much for arguing for or against anything then.

              All the "debates" here on Hubpages, (and likely elsewhere has all been a lot of hot, wasted air).

              I will keep this in mind in future discussions.

              Thanks for your honest reply!"

              I was referring to his response and your reaction to it.

              I'm not sure what part of my response you were confused about, since you said only "??"

              1. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                My "point" was, though he answered the question, (as you rightly point out), my argument was, why make so much "noise" arguing against religion in these forums, and then jus capitulate by pretending to convert?

                Sure, go ahead and (pretend) convert, but, in the same stroke of the proverbial pen, you betray your own worldview. IE, it's not worth dying for.

                This ought to illustrate what I mean, if you are truly agains religion.
                http://s13.postimg.org/3zx6t1j37/last_great_act_of_defiance.jpg

                1. HowardBThiname profile image91
                  HowardBThinameposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Perhaps you've mistaken me for someone else but I don't make a lot of "noise arguing against religion."

                  Religion is not for me, but I'm a live-and-let-live kind of guy. Pretending to convert to save my own skin does not "betray my worldview" anymore than paying income taxes (which I'm also against) betrays my worldview.

                  For an atheist - pretend conversion is just one more government thing we'd have to comply with. Since we're not believers, it would not impact us in a moral/ethical way as it might impact you.

                  In a like manner - when I'm in a group that holds a group prayer - I don't defiantly keep my head up when the person is praying. I respectfully bow my head like any other. I don't buy into the mumbo-jumbo but I understand that it's the respectful thing to do. I'm confident in my lack of belief and I don't have to make a show of it - or prove myself to anyone.

                  Religion means nothing to me so it's not a hill I choose to die on.

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Well, you are correct. We haven't had discussions before.

                    My post, though replying to you, was more of a general nature. i have had many discussions with very vocal atheists. They seem to have avoided this thread.

                    Thanks for contributing.

                  2. Che Rogers profile image61
                    Che Rogersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    We will all die for something the question is what will we live for? Do we live for equality, peace, love, justice, honesty? Or do we live for (groups) who promote inequality, war, hate, injustice and deceit?  I'm tired of people using religion to get away with hate, murder, treating others unfairly. Stop hiding behind your man made God and religion and be a good person because it's the right thing to do. The bible teaches that slavery is good, killing your disobedient child is ok, a women who is raped can be bought by her raper as his punishement, that "chosen" people can take land already inhabited by people. How is this love? How is this righteousness or peace? Stop being a contradiction in the world where we use hate to promote love. We use war to promote peace and lies to promote truth.  Let's start calling things for what they really are. Religion is a waste of time if it is used to spread hate, war and intolerance.

                2. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Sure it's brave to be a mouse giving the finger to a hawk, but that mouse will be dead and most likely will be eaten alive. Evolution will take care of stupid behaviour. Evolution will also take care of the person who won't pretend to convert with a gun pointed to his head. There is a line in which bravery becomes stupidity.

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    ....while the second mouse escapes the hawk who has a (mouse) mouthful!  wink

      3. cjhunsinger profile image70
        cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        -----------Atheists do come from a different perspective, but that is certainly not to say that Atheists are without strength of character and integrity. It would seem that you are however, and I find, as an Atheist, it extremely insulting and naive, not to mention presumptuous, of you to include me in your circle of fear.
        I do not think that you know what an Atheist is or is not and as you demonstrate such a lack of back bone, I would seriously doubt that you are an Atheist or anything that requires any degree of personal strength.
        People will fight for many things and, as an Atheist in a fox hole in Vietnam, I fought for my country and my integrity as an American. Nothing would change should an invading force enter this country, should they be atheists or a god toting hoard. Look up the word integrity and the words strength of conviction, backbone and character. Live for something or you die for nothing.

    2. junkseller profile image90
      junksellerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I'd say the same thing to them that I would say to you: your Looney Tunes cartoon is cute, but I'm not interested.

      1. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        It might be OK to do that online, but I doubt it would go down too well in the real world.

        Hope it would work for you.

    3. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      A Good day to you, DJ. I hope you are enjoying this weekend. Here is the States, as you know, it is the unofficial start of summer and I look forward to a fire in the barbie on Monday. smile

      I find it interesting that the global growth rate of Islam in the next fifteen years or so is expected to be lower than the past two decades. Naturally, as Muslims migrate to and become citizens of various nations, they will participate more and more in the affairs of their new home countries just as you did, I imagine, in Australia. That is one reason why I am rather surprised to see the OP statement characterize such normal assimilation as “pushing their agenda” or “using the freedom (and laws) in those countries to gain more and more control.” It certainly makes me wonder. If you participate in Australian elections, I doubt that you look upon your right to vote as “pushing your agenda.” Rather, you are just exercising your freedom as well as “more and more control” over your own destiny according to the law. Surely, you can not be suggesting that Muslims should not yearn for the same freedoms you have enjoyed since you arrived. Perhaps I presume too much.

      About 60% of the world’s Muslims are concentrated in the nearby Asia-Pacific region, yet in Australia, less than two percent of the population is Muslim and that ratio is not expected to be more than 2.8% by 2030. {1}

      In addition, I do not see the Muslim “takeover” in the UK that you speak of. The Muslim population in the UK in 2030 is projected to reach about 5.6 million or about 8.2 % of the total population. That certainly is not a “takeover” to me. {2}

      The OP statement grows even more alarming with the claim, “It will be, ‘convert (to Islam) or die’! Or, if you are lucky, pay ‘protection money.’” Such an absurd notion is not even remotely possible but it is a handy device for anyone who is Islamophobic and wishes to sow seeds of fear and distrust instead of a making a Christlike gesture of love and acceptance to our fellow man. 

      I know that a lot of people have their own reasons for exaggerating their fears of Islam but I notice not one has been shared with us here in this thread.

      Enjoy your weekend, DJ, and the onset of winter. I intend to make the best of my summer months while I can.
      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
      {1} http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/the- … opulation/
      {2} http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/tabl … y-country/

      1. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Hi Quill.
        You are entering summer, but we still have exited ours. We should be huddled around heaters, but we are in all but shorts and t-shirts (still). As I said to my wife last week, "if this is global warming, I want more of it".

        Another story that illustrates my OP below. I know it might sound a bit far fetched, but I think it's prudent to expect the worst, and be prepared than to sleep in apathy, and be taken by surprise.

        http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/ … 4Gvl62SxtM

        Have a beer on me at your barbie! big_smile

        1. Quilligrapher profile image90
          Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Hello again, DJ.

          Thanks for the link to IsraelNationalNews.Com. It is informative and just like you said “a bit far fetched.”

          I do not buy into such fanaticism. First, I look carefully at who is talking. Abu Waleed is not the voice of Islam any more than the Westboro Baptist Church speaks for Christianity. The article is correct in criticizing this divisive message and not all of Islam. Mr. Waleed is an Islamic cult personality whose lectures are refuted by Islamic scholars.

          “Who is Abu Waleed? Abu Waleed is someone who is majhool, does not possess Islamic credentials, is not authorized to transmit religious knowledge…May Allah protect Muslims from this man and his likes.” {1}

          Looking at the first sentence of the second paragraph of your link, this extremist “cited sources in the hadith (Islamic teachings outside of the Koran).” He is not even quoting from the work of Mohammed. The Qur'an that that guides millions of reasonable Muslims teaches respect for peaceful non-believers and does not condone bullying and humiliation as a tactics to convert Christians and Jews to their religion. I find the entire notion absurd. Being prepared for the worst, as you say, should not include having an exaggerated fear of all Muslims but an understanding that individual extremists like Mr. Waleed exist in the world. In the same fashion, Boko Haram does not represent the Islamic faith no more than the cruelty of Christopher Columbus represented all Italian or Spanish Catholics.

          Well, DJ, I am off to prepare for tomorrow. I will definitely tip a few in your honour.
          http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
          {1}
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3kYYSWoFrA#t=23

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            The only thing I wish to say to this is that though the (vast) majority of Muslims are (or may be) moderate, or even harmless, yet the Koran is full of material that calls for and justifies atrocities in the name of advancement of the religion.

            It all comes down to the interpreter presenting the teachings. These same radicals are rarely if ever censored, much less removed from office for preaching such (hate).

            In Australia, we have had the justice system remove them, but not once the Islamic community.

            1. Zelkiiro profile image85
              Zelkiiroposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              According to Deuteronomy 17:2-6, killing non-believers is a-okay!

              2 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
              3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
              4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:
              5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
              6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

              According to Exodus 22:20, same deal.

              20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

              ...And Deuteronomy 13:6-9...

              6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
              7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
              8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
              9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

              And before you start with the "OLD TESTAMENT DOESN'T COUNT" nonsense, let's see what Jesus had to say in Matthew 5:17-19...

              17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
              18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
              19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

              Let's see you fallaciously argue your way out of this one.

              1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Good one!   I like it!

              2. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Fallaciously argue my way out?
                Are you SERIOUS?

                Without even batting an eyelid, we are (as Christians) living in the New Testament Era.

                Do you know what that is?

                Do you even know what a Testament IS, without looking it up in wikipedia, or Google?

                1. Zelkiiro profile image85
                  Zelkiiroposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Yeah, I know what it is. It's that thing Jesus just said will always be mandatory until "Heaven and Earth pass." And it looks like Earth is still here, so you'd better stop wearing those denim pants with that cotton shirt.

                  1. 0
                    Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Bad example, Z.  Denim IS cotton.  smile

                  2. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, and it affects you too.
                    You either have grace, or you have law.

                    I live under grace, you, under law. That's why you quote it.

                    I suppose a call to repentance will be promptly rejected by you! sad

            2. Quilligrapher profile image90
              Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              [Bold font added for emphasis.]
              Hi there, DJ. I hope you had a marvelous weekend too.

              I guess the one thing that disturbs me the most is the obvious double standard that destroys the premise in your last post. I am scratching my hairless dome wondering how an informed person, especially a Christian, can, in good faith, criticize Islam because the Qu’ran contains violence. The Bible, as we all know, is also filled with verses containing violent directives and images. 

              Scary stuff when you ask why Jesus needs to wield a sword. Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but with a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household.”  (Matthew 10:34-36)

              Dare I say it is a bit lame to express a fear of Islam and, at the same time, ignore the verses in the Bible that also call “for and justifies atrocities in the name of advancement of the religion.”

              One of my favorites goes, "Woe to the world for temptation! ...And if your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire."  (Matthew 18:8-10)

              Clearly there are plenty of gruesome verses from all religions. One only needs to connect the dots to realize the violent, threatening God of Christians and Jews is the same violent, threatening God worshiped by Muslims and the tomes of all three religions contain merciless violence.

              Then you wrote:
              “It all comes down to the interpreter presenting the teachings. These same radicals are rarely if ever censored, much less removed from office for preaching such (hate).

              Ah ha! This is a very good point, DJ. It will be interesting, I believe, to examine the radical claims preaching hate and fear found in the OP statement, specifically, “The UK is a prime example, where political will is weak (at best) to curb the ‘takeover’ [by Islam.]”  This claim is false and incendiary. However, I see no evidence of self censorship. The author makes no effort to correct it, to withdraw it, or to attempt to justify it. Rather, it is left to stand as a false statement about a “takeover” that does not exist and the speaker remains silent. How profound are your words, “radicals are rarely if ever censored,” particularly when they are applied to the groundless and false statements in the OP statement of this thread.

              While we both may have a lot of enemies, I do not think religion is one of them. It is reasonable to say your “push” will never come to “shove,” your life will never be on the line and you will never be told to "convert (to Islam) or die." Unfortunately, unfounded fear and distrust of Islam is the only durable message contained in this thread. That said, I respect your right to fear Islam no matter how tenuous and weak the reasons.

              Best regards, DJ, I have to run. It seems I may have toasted you too often yesterday and I am paying the price today. big_smile
              http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

        2. Che Rogers profile image61
          Che Rogersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Another biased source of news. The same Israeli news that covers up the mass murders Israeli government does on innocent Palestinians and paints a picture that the Palestinians are evil and unreasonable. You do understand the group of so called Israelite that occupy that land are there unlawfully? You do realize Palestinians have been there since the beginning and had these wicked fake jews take their land? If you know your history true hebrews were Melinated people. They weren't white. In fact moses a hebrew was born in africa and was able to blend in with egyptians who were also african and couldn't tell the difference. It should be a law that if anyone wants to convert to any religion they need to pass a history course on religions and world history. Not the European version though lol.

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Where did you get that information?

    4. MelissaBarrett profile image61
      MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      They would be entirely too busy with the screaming protesting zealots lining up to curry favor with their God by being the first to die to worry about little ole me.... and since the screaming protesting zealots are usually the first to point out that everyone who isn't.... well a screaming protesting zealot... isn't a Christian, they should prove excellent cannon fodder while keeping us moderate Christians protected.

      Since we are the more rational -hence the no screaming and protesting- we would work covertly to undermine the new regime. Since they are also screaming protesting zealots, they probably also lack the same reasoning skills as OUR screaming protesting zealots... so it should be easy.

      As such, the moderates let the zealots take out each other... clean up the stragglers... Gay marriage is legalized, Science is taught in schools, we stop invading other countries...

      It becomes a liberal utopia, everyone loves each other... and we all live happily ever after.

      Where do I sign up?

    5. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I have lived around Muslims all my life and they are not different to any other religious people.  I don't judge religions followed by millions by atrocities committed by a few. Just as I do not expect to be judged as an athiest by the actions of Stalin or Mao Zedong.

    6. Zion Moulder profile image61
      Zion Moulderposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I'd never pretend to convert to any religion to satisfy religious zealots. I would rather die than give up my religious liberties. I don't think this situation is unique with Islam. Look at the United States and Christianity. Our very education is influenced by what does and doesn't coincide with the Holy Bible. Thanks to Christian lobbyists and politicians, the future generations of the U.S. will be ignorant to science that has already been widely accepted in other portions of the world. I don't have anything against religion until people try to shove it down my throat by means of legislation and blunt advertising.

      1. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Kinda like we have to accept gay marriage?

        1. jonnycomelately profile image85
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Like what two persons with complete integrity and full consent wish to do in their private lives, like making a commitment to each other, then it is none of your business, Sir. 

          They might easily live together in love and caring for each other, better than many heterosexual persons manage.  They may (and in many cases really do) prove valuable members of their community, dependable, honest, sincere, no problem to anyone else.

          Yet I guess you, aka-dj, have a god that would disapprove of such things.

        2. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Are you being forced into a gay marriage?

        3. Righteous Atheist profile image61
          Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          How funny. lol Guess you are in the Islamist camp on this one? wink

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Islamist?

            The Bible predates Islam by a few centuries, so I'm siding with God's word.

            1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
              Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              So - yes - you agree with the Islamists that gays should be killed. And - that is what the bible says after all. How odd that you are scared of them as well.

            2. MelissaBarrett profile image61
              MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Technically.... it's the same God.

              1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Ok Melissa. So maybe there should be a new university degree course in Beliefology. Would that be technically correct?  Or only politically correct?

                1. MelissaBarrett profile image61
                  MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  LOL...

                  Just saying that Islam, Christianity and Judaism all come from the same source. It's the same God. Its not a political thing or a belief thing, it's a history thing.

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Agreed.

                2. Zion Moulder profile image61
                  Zion Moulderposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Wouldn't that be theology?

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Well, to determine which is correct we need to split infinitives....
                    Like  which is the (god-only-knows)  ology that fits in the grand order of things?  But in the strange mind which argues over beliefs there seems to be little order ad infinitum.

                    Sorry, this turns out to be all goggledegook, but it's the best I can do on my Android, lying in bed at 5.30 am.

              2. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Technically..... NO it's not.

                I see you are either ignorant of the differences, or you have fallen for the maedia hype/propaganda.

                Either way, you have negated the claim (if you ever made it, like most atheists here) of reason and critical thinking!

                1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                  EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So, Christianity and Islam are not based on the Abrahamic God? This is what you're saying?

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    I didn't think I was ambiguous about it! hmm

                2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                  Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Hi there, DJ. ^5 It is nice to see your thread is still active after eight days.

                  In spite of your objection, Melissa is correct when she states, “Islam, Christianity and Judaism all come from the same source. It's the same God. It’s not a political thing or a belief thing, it's a history thing.”

                  The traditions and beliefs of Muslims, Christians, and Jews all lead back to the Biblical Prophet Abraham. All three religions worship the God of Abraham and Abraham worshiped only one God!

                  Not having a sound intellectual reply is usually the reason for attacking and ridiculing others just because they see life from a different angle. In a discussion among adults, it should not be necessary to use inane personal attacks. Particularly, one devoid of logic, reason, and critical thinking such as this:
                  “I see you are either ignorant of the differences, or you have fallen for the maedia [sic] hype/propaganda.
                  Either way, you have negated the claim (if you ever made it, like most atheists here) of reason and critical thinking!


                  Believing that anyone who disagrees with me is ignorant may give me a false sense of superiority but it is actually a rather ignorant belief.

                  Melissa’s statement is widely accepted by historians and biblical scholars including Miroslav Volf, professor of theology at Yale Divinity School. In an interview published in Christianity Today he said,
                  “If somebody postulates the existence of more than one god, I would have to say we don't worship the same god. If somebody says that God is basically one with the world, I would also have to say we don't worship the same god. What binds Muslims and Christians, and what is central to my argument, is that God is one, that God is distinct from the world, and that the one God has created everything that is not God. There is a radical divide between creature and creator. This is a fundamental monotheistic belief. Muslims, Christians, and Jews share that belief. Therefore, they believe in the same God.” {1}

                  It is sad to see this thread deteriorate from attacking Muslims to attacking anyone who disagrees with the OP’s fears and beliefs. I would rather see the OP elevate the thread to a reasonable exchange of ideas between adults. 

                  I am wondering, DJ, if it can be done.
                  http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
                  {1} http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/201 … paging=off

                  1. oceansnsunsets profile image87
                    oceansnsunsetsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Its true their Father Abraham is something that the 3 different groups have in common.  There was a God at that point in time, and any true God is still in existence.  Logic shows us that God can't have also morphed in actuality like the 3 groups since have.  They are often very diametrically opposed to each other.  Since God didn't change, we have to ask what did change?  Or what got away from the revelation as he was giving it to man? 

                    The diametrcially opposed views are not a problem for God, who knows the truth of himself and his revelation to mankind that has been heeded, ignored, or distorted beyond recognition, etc.

                  2. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Thanks for your tone Quill. It's refreshing to interact with you, more so than some others here.

                    Despite your pleasantry though, you also seem to have false information.
                    I'm not sure if that's deliberate on your part, or ignorance. Or, perhaps you are part of the deceived.

                    Here are a few sites that collate the differences between the God of the Bible, "Jehovah" (Jews), God the Father (Christian) and Allah, (Islam). The ONLY thing they have in common, is that each is claimed as "The ONE God".

                    If after reading you still think that He is one and the same, then it is a sad day for real communication.

                    http://www.truth-that-matters.com/differences.htm
                    http://www.erguncaner.com/home/resource … _Allah.pdf
                    http://commanetwork.com/is-allah-of-the … the-bible/
                    http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/god.htm

                    I guess I wouldn't expect you to read each one all the way through, but I do expect you will get the gist of just how huge the differences are.

                    BTW, I sincerely hope you have recovered from your indulgences in my behalf.

        4. Zion Moulder profile image61
          Zion Moulderposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          No one has to accept gay marriage. Simply allowing gays to marry isn't accepting gay marriage, but tolerating it. I don't know where you'd get that idea.

    7. Frank Menchise profile image17
      Frank Menchiseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The atheists and the agnostic can only put forward their beliefs and theories of how religious things should have been, in order to avoid what is happening today.
      It is up to the politician of the world to decide what to do and how to react to Islam. I hope they wakeup and see that they are not the sheep that have to be slaughtered in sacrifice to the Islam God? Once your head is on the chopping block it might be too late to react.
      You might react to the way that I am putting my case, but that is how it looks like from the world news.

    8. Rich Emanon profile image60
      Rich Emanonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      How exactly would something of such magnitude come to fruition globally?

  2. 0
    Emile Rposted 2 years ago

    It's a scary proposition. I've read that over half of French citizens are Islamic. I've wondered how that will play out when those citizens come of age. Not certain what i would do if faced with such as the scenario you present.

    1. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Hi there, Ms. Emile R.,

      Over half of French citizens are NOT Muslim. Your source intentionally misled you. In 2010, Muslims comprised only 7.5% of the population of France. Projections by the Pew Research Center put this ratio at about 10.3% in 2030. {1}

      In the next fifteen years, the Muslim population in all of Europe is NOT expected to exceed 8%. .

      I honestly do not see where this is scary. Most Muslims are loving, caring, and family-centric people. The only problem I see is that their food is too spicy. big_smile
      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
      {1} http://www.pewforum.org/2011/01/27/tabl … -country/#

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Quil
        You are right of course.
        The premise of this forum is wrong as most muslims are peaceful.
        I am multi faith and would much prefer the muslims or jews to run things rather than bigoted atheists who are desperately trying to legalise infanticide and beastiality. Even the craziest terrorists are not aiming that low!
        I personally find middle eastern food most palatable!

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I personally find bigotry most un-palatable.

        2. Quilligrapher profile image90
          Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Hello, Oztinato. Welcome to the discussion, Thank you so much for directing your comment to me. 

          Atheists, more so than those with strong religious beliefs, tend to rely on facts when reaching conclusion. To be honest with you, comparing atheists to terrorists does not sound like a position based on any facts at all.

          Nor are atheists known to support legalizing bestiality so this too seems void of any factual understanding of reality.

          Thanks for commenting, Oztinato.
          http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            QUILL
            you need to research the new cutting edge atheist trends started by people like Peter Singer and Richard Dawkins. They have thousands of followers trying hard to legalise these social monstrosities.

            1. jonnycomelately profile image85
              jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              And you, Oztinato, need to research the reasons and thinking behind the opinions of those two persons, Singer and Dawkins. 

              All I have seen you do is start from your position of biased thinking, then paint them with ridicule.

              Whether they are "right" or "wrong" in any of their opinions, they are entitled to them, just as you are entitled to yours.

              What are you trying to do?  Convert all of us readers to your opinions?  I am not siding with either Singer or Dawkins on this occasion.... just asking for deeper thinking and rational thought on your part.

              (But maybe your religious bias prevents you from having a broader mind... is that the case?}

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                JCL
                this is just another personal attack in your response.
                The idea is to criticise the idea not a specific Hubber.

  3. Charles Dennis profile image60
    Charles Dennisposted 2 years ago

    the ability of man to control himself in whatever plight he found himself,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, never you give up,.....

  4. Rebecca Furtado profile image75
    Rebecca Furtadoposted 2 years ago

    Sex is spiritual . Yet Christians define the act of sexual knowledge as sin. This creates a dichotomy that should go the way of the dinosaurs. Sex is so complex. In a world where we understand the how inter-related all aspects of human are we need to get a grip. Sex is complex but sexually morality is not. It should occur between consenting adults in a manner that does not spread disease or cause unwanted pregnancies. On a personal level it should not violate the agreements between you and your partner . If monogamy is a standard of your relationship then you should not violate that standard. If you find yourself inclined to do so then you should seek release from your monogamous partner.

    Christians have a hard time with the shades of grey of human sexuality. Even the definition of what sex is varies. Some people engage in fetishes that feed their sexual need without another person. Is that sex? If your in a committed relationship is that cheating. It all gets very complex. Is sex even necessary for couples trying to establish domestic life together or raise children? For some it is a necessity for other not.

    God created us a gloriously different beings with the capacity to co create to some degree our own destiny. Needless to say this means we do not need the views of patriarchal ancient societies whom male God was competing with fertility cults  to define what we do in our bedrooms today Nor do we need the less the rational religious view of the sexually repressed to tell us what we can and can not do as adults with our sex lives.

    1. aka-dj profile image78
      aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Wrong thread, me thinks!

    2. jonnycomelately profile image85
      jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Rebecca, this comment is full of good sense.  However, it seems you have posted it here in this discussion in error.   Did you intend it for another discussions that's running concurrently?

      Nevertheless, some points in your comment are relevant to this discussion.  There are sexually repressed individuals in both camps.  They tend to be the most zealous and religiously intolerant, trying to push their particular religious ideas onto everyone else.  "Ordinary" folk are content to live quietly and respectfully, side by side in the street, sharing in community life regardless of which faith people belong to.

      In my working life, medical assistance was offered to the needy, regardless of religion.  We are all human, with similar feelings, emotions, desires and basic requirements for life.

  5. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    So if I don't want to be religious, would I pretend to covert to avoid being killed.  Yes, probably.  Why do you ask? I mean there is a very long history of all sorts of people feigning a different belief system to avoid bad things happening to them. 

    All of which is moot because it is almost certainly not going to happen in the US or UK.  It is up there with getting ebola or being hit by a meteor in my risk assessment.

    1. Rebecca Furtado profile image75
      Rebecca Furtadoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      This whole thread is rather silly. This would make for good fiction. A man finds God when he is trying to run from forced conversion. Or a man finds his humanity.

      1. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Sadly, there are many Christians in various countries who are facing this "silly" reality.
        Perhaps they have a different perspective to you.

        No doubt you are nowhere close to such "silly" scenarios.
        But, thanks for posting.

  6. aka-dj profile image78
    aka-djposted 2 years ago

    Just an added bit of info, for those care to take two minutes to read it.

    http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/May27/271.html

  7. aka-dj profile image78
    aka-djposted 2 years ago

    OK, let's downgrade the OP from "death" threats, to just "freedom" threats.

    Watch this video, and see how wonderful Islam is to it's own people, within their own (Islamic) countries.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJCrWmtpNrM

    Then come back and tell us all how terrible Christianity has been to YOU, today.

    1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
      Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Tell us how terrible Islam has been to YOU today aka. wink

      1. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        For once you actually got the point!
        Well done.
        I am free from it's (negative) influence, thanks to the (non Muslim, non-sharia law) country in which I live.

        1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
          Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Odd that you hate the Islamists so much in that case. Why is that? Because their religion might be correct and they say you are burning in hell for following a false religion? wink

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You are such a legend in your own mind!lol lol lol

            Don't you tire of copy & pasting the same ole same ole?
            I guess not, it's all you got.
            Still lol lol lol in fact I'm just about ROFL.

            1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
              Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Don't see an answer to my question, but I seem to have hit a nerve. This is why you hate them? Because you fear their version of The Nonsense may be the correct one and you will be burning in hell for choosing the wrong version? How scary for you. sad

              1. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Ye, you hit a nerve alright.
                My ticklish spot. ha ha ha.

                1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                  Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So there is absolutely no chance at all that they are correct? Despite your argument that it is not possible to know anything? How odd. wink

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Are we getting anywhere close to a useful posts from you?

                    Please hurry, I'm starting to turn blue.

    2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
      EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Here's an Islamic website that talks about the hypocrisy of Christians who slam Islam:

      "Augustine’s frightening idea that all must be compelled to “conform” to the “true Christian faith” has unleashed centuries of unparalleled bloodshed. Indeed, Christians have suffered more under the rule of Christian civilization than under pre- Christian Roman rule or any other rule in history. Millions were tortured and slaughtered in the name of Christianity during the periods of the Arian, Donatist and Albigensian heresies, to say nothing of the various Inquisitions, or the Crusades, when the European armies were saying, as they slaughtered both Christian and Muslim Arabs: “Kill them all, God will know his own.”

      http://www.islam101.com/terror/mythViolence.htm

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Well, sure. Past mistakes do justify current ones.

        Oh. Not.

        1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          No idea what you're talking about.

      2. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for that, BUT, I must ask you,
        Why does everyone bring up the past, and bring it into the present?

        It was what it was, (then), but it is NOT now.
        Yet, the (corresponding) Muslim atrocities, or should I say human rights violations I speak of are TODAY.

        Is it OK to repeat history under a new (well, not so new) banner?

        1. JMcFarland profile image91
          JMcFarlandposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          When discussing Christianity and Islam, however, it is important to consider both the past and the present.  Islam started about 500 years after Christianity started.  What was Christianity doing 500 years ago?  Burning heretics at the stake.  Killing people who disagreed with dogmas and theologies.  Spreading the message through violence, for the most part and keeping a strangle hold on their power by whatever means necessary.  Islam is simply 500 years behind.  Its day will come.  Christianity had to be dragged kicking and screaming out of the dark ages and had to evolve or die in the age of enlightenment.  Sooner or later, Islam will have to do the same, or it will die out in the modern world.  Christianity still has its fundamentalists that are dangerous to the overall message.  Islam has the same.  Looking at the picture of history, I'm not sure how you can claim they are so different and one is far worse than the other.

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Welcome back. I heard you were away for a time (moving, or something).

            As much as I understand what you are trying to say, I have two issues with what you said.

            The Christian message has never called for, nor condoned any of the atrocities that the "church" committed in the past. (Additionally, I was intending the OP to speak about what is happening TODAY, and it's implications to society, if not curbed).

            Secondly, The Ishmael connection is a genealogical one, and not a spiritual one. Ishmael didn't hand down the Torah through his bloodline. Mohammed (is said to have) received a "new" revelation. He did so during an era of polytheism.

            We will see how it all plays out. God will fulfil His plans on humanity, in His time.
            All our discourses are interesting, but meaningless, in the overall scheme of things.

            1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
              EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              A sermon in lieu of an answer. lol

          2. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            JMcF
            Your specious argument is convoluted and pointless. It just doesnt make rational sense. Can you rephrase it using logic?

            1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
              Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              She made a very logical argument. Perhaps you should try addressing the facts and logical conclusion  instead of rhetoric designed to inflame. Little wonder your religion causes so many conflicts. sad

            2. cjhunsinger profile image70
              cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              History and logic was used, it is you who fail to grasp it. This speaks well to the intellectual blindness caused by the worship of things that reasonably do not exist.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Its easy: if someone says "because T-Rex was a vicious killer that means all chickens today must be vicious killers" we would laugh and see the lack of sensible logic in it. However if someone else says "religions were bad thousands of years ago so that means all religions are bad now" it is applauded as "logic".
                I really shouldn't have to waste my time explaining the "bleeding obvious" as John Cleese once said.

                1. Link10103 profile image79
                  Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So comparing the bloody history of Christianity's past and how the religion evolved to the eerily similar bloody actions of todays Islam and how it too will eventually have to evolve, somehow means that all religions are bad today because they were once bad in the past.

                  Do you actually read what is said to you, or do you just simply take whatever comes out of your cheeks down below?

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    I don't mind having a discussion if we could just untangle the convoluted logic present in this Hub.
                    I am certainly not saying all religions are bad today.
                    Also, I won't reply to crass personal attacks and insults but I will report them immediately.

                2. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                  Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Obviously you have never owned chickens. wink

        2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Christians are murdering Muslims today, you know this.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            EncephD
            Please! SOME Christians are killing SOME Muslims. SOME atheists are also KILLING some children and want to kill a whole lot more.
            If we use the term SOME instead of IMPLYING ALL we will all get along better.

            1. jonnycomelately profile image85
              jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              A specious argument indeed!  Who?! is killing children?

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Read the newspapers. The latest atheist fad is putting the unwanted infant into a washing machine and switching it on. Also a person you may not have heard of as yet (PETER SINGER) and his thousands of devout followers are itching to start the next phase: legal infanticide.
                Deja Vu?

                1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I agree that those apparent depraved ideas put up as Singer's of the 19th century, are totally unacceptable in today's age, as they should have been in the middle 1800s.   

                  But I suggest, (not being well versed in those aspects of public thinking at that time in history), that Singer might have been pandering to public sentiment of the time.  By "public" sentiment, I must say public male sentiment.   It seems it was only males making such judgments and decisions in those year, no women involved.

                  If, as you suggest, there are lots of people willing to continue thinking along the lines of Singer today, then they are very much in the wrong.   Society expects and deserves much better attitudes and intelligent thinking today.

                  I would caution, however, your expressions casting generalised bigotry towards "atheists," or any predetermined group on the basis of prejudice.  In the same way that right now people with a Muslim faith are being targeted in retribution against fundamentalist fanatics.   This is the way lynch mob tactics take hold.  Whole communities of people are singled out for retribution based upon the opinions of just a few individuals, then the mass media fans the flames and, before you know it, many lives have been upset and squashed into oblivion. 

                  Single out specific areas where  hatred is being stirred up.  Bring perpetrators to task and make sure they are dealt with appropriately and according to the law of the Land.   But don't join in with those who would destroy the world which we regard as so precious.   Be careful what you wish for.

                2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                  Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Hello, Oz. It is nice to see your most recent posts. However, they lead me to make a simple request.

                  It was certainly appropriate for Johnny to ask, “who is killing children.” Within the realm of intelligent adult discussions, it is customary for the person making claims to cite sources when requested, particularly when the claims are not widely accepted by the audience. A response like “read the newspapers” not only violates discussion etiquette but implies the claim lacks a credible source.   

                  Therefore, for my benefit, please indicate a valid source that reveals putting unwanted infants into washing machines is a factual “fad” among atheists. Without such a source, there is no reason for me or anyone else to believe it is true.

                  I thank you, Mr. Oztinato, for your input. I am looking forward to learning more from you on this topic.
                  http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

          2. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            To All
            I have clearly said SOME atheists, not all.
            I have now repeated info about Peter Singer and his thousands of followers so many times it is impossible to accept that nobody here yet knows who he is. A nineteenth century scoundrel?? I don't think so.
            Quill
            I don't accept that I am to start collating the many incidences of the "baby in the washing machine" deaths when it can be Googled so easily.
            I note that you have not responded to my point about Peter Singer and his thousands of followers.

            1. Aime F profile image84
              Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Okay, I've googled "baby in washing machine deaths" and come up with seven incidents over the past five years. From all over the world. One was accidental (though obviously incredibly negligent). I hardly consider that a fad and I see absolutely nothing about religion mentioned at all, so you might have to expand on your sources a little bit if you want people to know what the hell you're talking about.

            2. Link10103 profile image79
              Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I can't imagine why you are so fixated on Singer. He has thousands of followers? Christianity has millions...

              If you can't grasp the point of that, i will elaborate. The abhorrent ways of Christianity in the past have been morally outlawed in today's society. If they hadn't, the religion would have died off long ago. To generalize all atheists are out to murder babies and dethrone religion is like generalizing all Christians as being psychopathic child murders due to beating their kid to death in an exorcism.
              And although I have yet to hear of any fad, let alone an atheist one, tossing unwanted babies into washing machines (have heard of more than a few exorcism related baby deaths however), Singer and his followers will have to adapt or "die" in today's society. Considering how most people you talk to in regards to Singer have absolutely no idea who he is, i am assuming he hasn't adapted yet.

              It also doesn't matter how many times you separate anything, if you make a claim, you back it up. It's not hard to bookmark and copy/paste links to support your claims, yet I haven't once seen you do that when bringing Singer up.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Perhaps we should send Peter Singer to Africa to preach his besatiality theories there.
                Maybe that will finally turn Ebola into an airborne flu virus.

                The Singer info is so easy to find; I admit I have often referred to it due to the ongoing denial in these debates about his/followers role in modern atheist thought.

                1. Link10103 profile image79
                  Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  When you go off topic, you dont really pull any punches do you?

                  I'll bite, how exactly does preaching bestiality to Africans turn Ebola into an airborne virus?

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    By  increasing the chances of interspecies virus mutation by exactly100%. In other words an abberant atheist  philosophy is just as dangerous, if not more so in this case, as terrorism.

                  2. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    PS 
                    that is, my points although enigmatic are entirely on the topic.

  8. Sed-me profile image83
    Sed-meposted 2 years ago

    I somehow missed this thread. Thank you to the OP, it is terribly interesting.

    1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
      Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Just responding to another preacher huh? wink

      1. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        roll
        At what point does an ordinary troll become a stalker?
        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

        1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
          Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I see you are working on it.

          Thanks for your input. Always welcome and appropriately taken on board.

        2. Oztinato profile image82
          Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I note with fascination the total lack of response to my valid points regarding Singer, his thousands of followers, and their clear parallels to extremist thought.

          1. Link10103 profile image79
            Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Your valid points that you haven't once provided any sources to. Might explain the lack of responses...

            There might also be the "slight" possibility that you cannot be taken seriously, since you seem hell bent on generalizing atheists by stalking a guy named Peter Singer and bringing him up every chance you get, who most of the atheists you talk to on here have never heard of.

            1. Oztinato profile image82
              Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Its quite clear that the majority of atheists here like to pretend that Singer AND his thousands of adherents dont exist. In actual fact the extremist ideas of such atheists accurately depict the current direction of modern atheism. The incredible hypocrisy of such denials is truly astounding.

              1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Never heard of him myself. Guess you are easily astounded huh? Most believers seem to be. wink

              2. jonnycomelately profile image85
                jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                How many "atheists" contribute to these HubPages?   Who has done a survey of their thoughts?   

                Even if Peter Singer has a-theistic views, it does not mean he is either a typical atheist, or that many a-theist people agree with him.  From what little I have read about him and what he has written/said, I would see him at least as a courageous man.   He has stated some of his thoughts and ideas and principles.   He would know the sort of public response his views might cause.... yet he stated them anyway. 

                Maybe those who might be most against Peter Singer the ones who secretly agree with him yet publicly deride him.

              3. Jomine Jose profile image78
                Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Who is this Singer. When I searched in net I got a Peter Singer from Australia and a cursory look at his ethics didn't bring much that is repugnant to theists.  He is against abortion and euthanasia.
                Is it a different Singer?

                1. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  OMG. OMG. OMG.
                  This lack of response to the facts reinforces what I am saying: there is a bizarre culture of denial amongst atheists on this topic.
                  I am begining to take a psychological interest in this denial phenomena. It seems to resemble a kind of mass hypnosis.

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    OMG. OMG. OMG.
                    This lack of response to the facts reinforces what I am saying: there is a bizarre culture of denial amongst Christian's on this topic.
                    I am begining to take a psychological interest in this denial phenomena. It seems to resemble a kind of mass hypnosis.



                    I guess all all Christian are Westboro baptists? Are you in denial? OMG. OMG. OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!

                2. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this
                  1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                    Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Now can you tell me what is "objectionable"? I don't agree with many of his views and I am hearing about him for the first time unlike Dawkins or Harris. So is this the guy with thousands of followers?

              4. 0
                Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Much like condemning all Christians because of the Westboro Baptist Church or condemning all Muslims because of ISIS. Complete and utter ignorance.

              5. Link10103 profile image79
                Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Thousands of Singer followers versus millions of Christians worldwide.

                And somehow atheists are the problem.

  9. James E Allen profile image60
    James E Allenposted 2 years ago

    I would never convert.  If ISIS thinks they're intimidating everyone, they've got another think coming.  I'm not afraid.  Sure, I could be caught off-guard; I'm not claiming invincibility. I could wake up with three of them standing over me, AK-47's pointed at me.  And yes, I acknowledge the fact that I will probably die before I have a chance to take one of them with me.  But I'll sure as hell try! XD

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Don't be ridiculous, If someone tells you to convert or die, you say yes sir, they don't know what goes on in your head while you are alive, but they do if you are dead.

      1. Sed-me profile image83
        Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        1) Do you really think it would be that simple? You'd have to adapt to their way of life. You think there would be no follow up? Just "say yes and we'll get out of your hair"? You would be expected to follow a Muslims way of life. It's not like America where when you get away from the bad guy, you run to the nearest police station and your life is restored.

        2) I just remembered this was a thread for Atheists so I will not continue on my with my points... sorry for intruding. smile

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Sure, if you live in a Muslim state you may be ordered to pray five times a day, but that's better than being dead. You can still think anything you want for as long as you can. You can be a Christian or an atheist in your mind while praying 5 times a day. It's better than being dead and you have not done your God any disservice because he knows you are a Christian trying to stay alive in a Muslim word. The only way anyone can control your thought is by killing you.

          And thanks for not commenting in the atheists forum, I'll remember to return the favour.

          1. Sed-me profile image83
            Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Im SURE you already have.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              With a gun to your and your families head would you tell them that you are converting?

              1. Sed-me profile image83
                Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You literally JUST reprimanded me for posting here. Now you want to include me in on the conversation? Ai, yi, yi.

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  No, look back. You reprimanded yourself after you posted and continued posting and when asked a specific question which is an invitation to express your thoughts you turn your head.

                  I'll ask again, gun to families head do you tell them you are converting?

                  1. Sed-me profile image83
                    Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, I apologized, then you reprimanded me. It bugged me quite a bit, I don't mind telling you. (Maybe you were being sincere and I didn't realize it.)

                    I have thought of these exact situations most of my life, having read Foxes Book of Martyrs and been involved in Voice of the Martyrs and my only answer is, I pray to God I would be strong enough not to sacrifice my convictions. Mt 10:33 comes to mind, "But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven." But it's not b/c I fear He would disown me as much as I would despise myself for failing the lover and creator of my soul. I already know everything you're going to say, and I know how you would refute my responses, so I'm going to skip to the end and apologize once again for not being the specific poster the OP was aiming his comment towards. Let me exit gracefully, please.

  10. Sed-me profile image83
    Sed-meposted 2 years ago

    I will now click "unfollow" and leave you two to enjoy each other's company.

    1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
      Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      OK - thanks for the reminder.

      ciao

  11. aguasilver profile image88
    aguasilverposted 2 years ago

    Or mass awareness of reality, denied by those who care not to think of the answers?

    1. Jomine Jose profile image78
      Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      What is the this "mass awareness" of reality?
      Does reality is contingent on awareness?
      Which are the questions?

      1. aguasilver profile image88
        aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Over 60% of the world believe in God, that seems to be a mass awareness.

        You would need to redefine your second question, it makes no grammatical sense, but assuming I interpret it correctly; until a person recognises a spiritual dimension to life, they are obviously unaware of the spiritual nature of the existence we all share.

        What are the questions?

        Well for me the main question is what happens when we die, that seems a major question to be answered, if one is spiritually aware, for it has eternal consequences.

        1. Link10103 profile image79
          Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          One has to wonder how much of that % were told since childhood to believe in such and such god or else they would suffer eternally.
          Could be mass awareness, or mass indoctrination.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Not very many.  Less than half the world's population believes in ANY god, let alone God, the Christian diety.  Just over half the believers are Christian, which puts the percentage at around 25%, assuming that all those professing belief actually believe; a rather forlorn hope.

            1. aguasilver profile image88
              aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              http://www.adherents.com/images/rel_pie.gif

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks Agua for the facts. As you have probably noticed there are many Hubbers here who turn a blind eye to facts even if presented as clearly as you have done.

                1. Link10103 profile image79
                  Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  You should take a page from Agua's book from now on then. That graph could be nonsense for all I know, but it's certainly more than you seem to have presented. Ever.

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Thats a personal attack!! U oh.

                2. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Facts, how many facts that are in the bible do you turn a blind eye to?

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Thats another personal attack! Now let me find that button....ah there it is CLICK

              2. Sed-me profile image83
                Sed-meposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Can that be right?! I find that shocking that Judaism is such a minute amount.

                1. Righteous Atheist profile image61
                  Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Judaism has never been spread by violence and coercion. Not even an evangelical religion like yours. Violence and coercion - as the OP points out quite clearly - is the best way to gain lots of followers, which is what both major political religions do.

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Currently the atheist states Russia, China and North Korea are responsible for most of the worlds human rights abuses.
                    Also, current Western atheist trends such as the stated policy of infanticide will in the future easily overtake all the atrocities and violence ever committed in the entire history of mankind: all in the name of free speech, freedom of the individual and science!

              3. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Wow, it certainly is amazing how many people in the world reject Christianity. Only one in three say they are Christians. How many of those actually follow Christianity? 1-2%?

                1. aguasilver profile image88
                  aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  When I asked I received a figure of 3%, which seems about right by my experience, however Yeshua did state that the way to perdition is wide and many will take it, whereas the gate into eternity with God is narrow, and few will find it, so maybe 3% is correct.

                  It could be 100% if only folk would stop rejecting a relationship with Yeshua, but it seems most prefer to 'do their own thing'.

                  There is much confusion with numeric success in our temporal world, mainly because most do not understand Gods concepts.

                  When we select seed from our crops, we chose the best examples of the produce to seed from, we consume, sell or discard the produce that is less than best, in proportion to the quality.

                  It's foolishness to presume that just because most folk may choose not to seek a relationship with God, that God is losing to the enemy, it's rather that He is sifting the wheat from the chaff.

                  God seeks a relationship; to associate with those who to seek to extend His Kingdom among lost humans, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, setting the captives free and releasing the bonded.

                  Religion as we see it was a diversion created by the enemy to keep people in religious bondage and away from relationship with their Creator.

                  1. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                    EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Seems rather insignificant, actually. But, it certainly does reflect quite brilliantly on the myriad of philosophical worldviews people wish to follow. But, that's what has happened over the centuries, people have followed various worldviews, all 'snapshots' of the way they lived back then. There were more primitive religions and gods whom were widely worshiped with devout loyalty long before the creation of Yeshua.

                    I'm sure those folks found their ways to their perdition, as well.



                    Why would that even be a concern? It matters not. What matters is that you believe in your philosophy and what is held as truth within it, you hold. What other people choose to follow and hold as truth is their concern, not ours.

                    You see, they aren't really rejecting a relationship with Yeshua, they are embracing a relationship with their god as you are with yours. All would be good with the world if we simply kept it that way and not demand people share our truths when they already have their own. That's what causes fights and division, the very thing those world philosophies are supposed to deter.



                    And, they are perfectly free not to understand your God's concepts, in the same way you are free not to understand their God's concepts. Seems fair.



                    Those could very easily be seen as fighting words considering you are now invoking a clause of superiority, in that it is superior to believe in your God and inferior to believe in others. Their God is nor your enemy and they are not losing to an enemy, they are gaining from their own gods as you are from yours.



                    Their gods seek similar relationships. If however, you wish to "extend His Kingdom", then be prepared for a fight, because what you are considering would be looked upon as an invasion of their philosophical worldview and they would see you as a conqueror, not a friend.

                    Why not instead, just work together with them in "feeding the hungry, healing the sick, setting the captives free and releasing the bonded" and not worry about whose god is superior. Wouldn't that be better for everyone?



                    That should be no problem for you at all, it does not affect in the least. Why worry about it, you're going to His Kingdom, aren't you? No worries, then. smile

          2. aguasilver profile image88
            aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I would warrant a high percentage of folk are taught wrongly from birth, in any religion or non religion, that's human nature, we (normally) teach children what to think, not how to think.

            I was fortunate, my parents taught me basic human decency (which I ignored for much of my life) but no 'hell and damnation' because they were (at best when I was young) token 'Christians' who never actually displayed any 'faith' except in emergencies, so rather like the majority of believers in any god.

            However, we humans grow up, and ironically those who have had the most 'religious' upbringing often become the most ardent secularists, so mass indoctrination has a limited ability to ensnare folk, as witnessed in Germany, where Hitler befuddled a whole generation, and where his policies are now banned completely, likewise Stalin and Russia, China and Mao.

            No I refer to spiritual awakening, awareness, acceptance, a realization that we (personally) know that there is more than 'this' and start searching for whatever that is.

            My path led me to the darker side of spirituality, and (again ironically) it was the understanding that there were 'dark forces', 'evil spirits' and occult powers, that led me eventually to Yeshua and my defection to His 'team'.

            My children have been taught to think, should one of them decide to be secular, that would be their choice, but a choice made after having been exposed to different cultures and beliefs and encouraged to explore all avenues.

        2. jonnycomelately profile image85
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          In reality, what happens to our bodies when we  die?
          The same as for any other complex heap of once-living matter.  The carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, together with innumerable other chemical compounds, are eaten by other organisms.  The resulting chemical soup gets gradually re-incorporate, after floating around for an indefinite time, thus perpetuating umpteen life-cycles of millions
          We know this even as lay-persons.  Science can show us the results of research which can inspire us with the "wonders of the living world."
          The "spiritual world" you and others so often speak of, means different things to different people.  Not something we can all agree upon.
          The world after death goes by the name, "Nothing."

          1. aguasilver profile image88
            aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Mostly agree with your comment, except the last line, that's an opinion which cannot be based upon evidence or even experience, but apart from that yes, we are chemical solutions that physically dispel on death.

            Spirit however is an (as yet) unknown factor.

            We all have to await the outcome of death, not the physical reality, but the spiritual one.

            1. jonnycomelately profile image85
              jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Respectful of  your opinion, I have to disagree

              Consciousness depends upon their being differentiated objects to be conscious of.....  Objects are finite, of this world.   Without the differentiation (contrast) then we can have no consciousness.

              To gain that consciousness we need/use our "senses."  Normally we refer to our 5 senses.  Those senses feed sensory stimuli to our central nervous system, the latter being able to analyze and interpret the sensations.   Without the senses, there can be no consciousness.   Is there any record of a person having lost ALL sensation, i.e., sight, hearing, touch, smell, taste, who has claimed to have been conscious during such loss?   No. 

              During general anesthetic all sense organs are asleep, not functioning.   We are unconscious.  We experience no thing.  Nothing.   We will only know that we have been under anesthetic if and when we wake up.  We are then conscious.  We can now experience some thing.   Something.

              When we are dead, we will never know consciousness again, because consciousness requires the activity of a central nervous system, and such a system can only eventuate from a biological growth, sequentially, involving sensory nerves dictating to living cells when and where to divide.  A dead brain cannot become alive again.  (I am talking here of a brain which has become totally dead tissue, without any hope of being revived.)   We will never know that we are dead, because we never wake up to make such a realisation.   We will not know ANY thing.  There IS nothing.  You cannot "know" nothing.

              1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Grand

              2. aguasilver profile image88
                aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Johnny, you avoid or dismiss the spiritual aspect of our existence.

                In the spirit world much is able to be known, as evidenced by any observation of a so called 'psychic' giving a 'reading'.

                God knows all things, in the spirit, likewise the enemy has access to much information in the spirit, albeit an alien evil spirit, but our thoughts, actions and words are recorded, so when a psychic says they have a 'message' from great uncle Arthur, they are being fed lines from the enemy (as God does not do party tricks).

                When I was on the opposing team, I would 'receive' information about 'victims', pretty accurate info also, sufficient to entrap them into engaging the enemy in more encounters.

                When I defected to Yeshua, I knew (and was made aware) that I would need to drop divination and mind reading, which I did immediately, as I then knew it was from the enemy, but Jehovah gave me the gift of discernment and words of knowledge instead.

                What's the difference?

                Simply put with the enemy I was fed info that enabled me to ensnare my victims, personal stuff that allowed me to manipulate, intimidate and deceive them.

                With discernment, the Holy Spirit only provides insight and words that will allow one to speak into a situation and release freedom or healing into someones life.

                One has no idea what their situation may be, know nothing about the recipient, and normally have no idea why you were led to state whatever one stated.

                Many times people have told me that what I said confirmed or clarified an issue for them, when the fact is I have no idea what they refer to.

                Believers (ministers) become a conduit for Gods words, probably because the person being ministered to has not yet learned how to hear what God says, and therefore cannot know what to do.

                Nobody alive can securely state that "When we are dead, we will never know consciousness again" because by the time we could possibly know the answer, we are unable to communicate any true communication back to living beings.

                I warrant that our 'consciousness' may well be different and unlike our earthly consciousness, and in fact I believe it will be superior and more complete, in fact we will have an awareness of what ALL this was about.

                But for you to state what you have is folly, for although you may have satisfied yourself (or been convinced by spiritual entities) that death equals oblivion, from my experience of spiritual forces outside of our physical realm, both good and evil, I know that this life is just a short prelude to our return to spiritual eternity.

                You are entitled to your opinion, but it's a dangerous opinion to stake your eternity upon.

                1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Indeed it is, Aguasilver!

                  1. aguasilver profile image88
                    aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Then you are a brave man.

        3. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          That my friend is a logical fallacy. It's rather like say that 100% of ISIS members think we should all live under sharia law therefore we should.

          1. aguasilver profile image88
            aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Not so Rad, nobody is saying we should behead you for your stance, just that when a vast majority of people believe in a higher spiritual aspect of existence, we can reasonably claim that MOST people have the capacity to experience spiritual awareness.

            Like with ISIS, if sufficient folk oppose their belief, any system can be stopped.

            Defunct beliefs (or lack of them) are destroyed relatively quickly (in eternal terms).

            See other replies for instances.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Actually the Quran says to kill non-believers or hold them as ransom.

              All people have the ability to have spiritual experiences because, well, we are all human. But that doesn't mean that any Gods exist, it simply means we have evolved to have the ability to feel we are a part of something larger.

              1. aguasilver profile image88
                aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Rad, I gave up on the Quran years ago, it's a deception of the enemy.

                No Christian is going to behead you.... period.

                "feel we are a part of something larger"

                ...and what would that be, in your opinion?

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Your words were "nobody is saying we should behead you for your stance", which is not true as Muslims are somebodies.

                  A feeling that we are apart of something larger, is just that a feeling. I can close my eye and pretend and feel like a pro basketball player, but that's just a feeling I'd have isn't it?

                  1. aguasilver profile image88
                    aguasilverposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    "Muslims are somebodies."

                    Agreed, but I do not speak for Muslims, and we seem to be devoid of Muslims on these forums, so they cannot speak for themselves.

                    "I can close my eye and pretend and feel like a pro basketball player, but that's just a feeling I'd have isn't it?"

                    Yes, and will remain just a feeling until you make the effort to become a 'pro basketball player' ..... or part of something larger.

        4. Jomine Jose profile image78
          Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          A few centuries before over 90%  believed earth was flat, was that mass awareness too?
          By mass do you mean majority opinion?


          Is reality dependent on awareness?
          What is "spiritual"? After searching through the net and dictionaries I could only make out that the word has no particular meaning or mean only human nature/mind. So what is this "spiritual nature of existence"?

          When we die the organization of our brain disintegrate and we cease to exist. It has the same eternal consequences as dissembling a computer does.

        5. Righteous Atheist profile image61
          Righteous Atheistposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          This is hilarious given the OP of this thread. lol lol

          I suggest doing some reading on how these irrational beliefs were and still are being spread by violence and coercion.

          Love the "McDonalds Argument" though. Lots of people eat it therefore it is good. lol lol

        6. EncephaloiDead profile image60
          EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Mass awareness? Hardly.

          There are close to 8 billion people on the planet with about 25% of them Christians. Centuries ago, there were nowhere near as many people, but probably a higher percentage were Christian. Given the discrepancy between then and now in terms of population and those who are Christian, there is a clear decline in Christianity.

          Not only that, but many folks call themselves Christians, but have very little if anything to do with Christianity. In a poll survey in the UK a couple of years ago, about 40% of those who called themselves Christians gave the reason they believed to be a Christian was simply to be a good person. This is a clear decline in Christianity.

          Soon, Christianity might be as common as unicorns and leprechauns, or the dodo.

  12. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    There you go again with personal attacks. The Singer denial phenomena is an ugly ugly thing.

    1. JMcFarland profile image91
      JMcFarlandposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      provide an example of a personal attack on this thread.

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Try the "stalking Peter Singer" personal attack. Its become an entire theme! How ridiculous and desperate. How pathetic
        Try the "troll theme". Another baseless personal attack.
        Talk about drivel!

        1. JMcFarland profile image91
          JMcFarlandposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          so you can't actually provide any examples, and have to go by "themes" - which by their very definition cannot be personal attacks against YOU, if they're criticisms of what you're SAYING not who you are.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Just read the last few posts here and its easy to see the actual individual attacks regarding these themes by specific people. No one can deny it except an atheist as they see it as "free speeech".

        2. Link10103 profile image79
          Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          See, now this comment borders on personal attacks more than any of the other comments.

          I do think it's sad how you don't seem to know how to talk with people properly, which is odd coming from an antisocial person such as myself. Being an atheist has nothing to do with disagreeing with you since you seem 100% incapable of backing up anything you say, even in your own hub that I was a part of.

          Conspiracy theorist comes to mind...

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Right, telling the truth about the obvious direction of atheist personal attacks is a personal attack!! I call that a "convoulted backflip" of anti logic.

      2. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        PS
        I am of course assuming that atheist hubbers will of course see calling someone an obsessive stalking troll as not a personal attack!!

  13. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    Now the whole point about using the name of Peter Singer is to abbreviate the well known ideas developed by recent atheism on this extermeist thought. It is aso a quick litmus test:
    When I meet a new hubber who CLAIMS to be of a certain ethical persuasion I will immediatelly test them on the topic of Singer, be they alleged Christian or atheist. Their response instantly tells me how knowledgable they are and what their true ethical persuasion is.
    For example, and not meaning any offence to Mowton, I can instantly understand that she is not widely read at all on this topic. Another example, again without implying any personal attack, Quill's attitude to this topic is one indriectly reversed to what appears to be his stated ethics. In other words he seems not to care about one way or the other and will not directly respond to any question about Peter Singer but yet I sense he is "putting out" that he is a theist.
    Those other hubbers of the atheist persuasion who never respond directly to the topic but choose instead to attack me personally are what I see as obvious supporters of extremist atheism.
    In this way I can guage the who's who and make my own personal informed logical judgement about who the REAL trolls are, who the plainly uneducated are and who are direct supporters etc.
    Those who are offended by "nothing" have other motives: usually the social media motive of attempting to isolate others by convenient false camradiere,and actually avoiding the logical points I make.

    1. Link10103 profile image79
      Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      So apparently asking you to back up your claims with facts and sources as to properly address your topic is not only counted as personal attacks, but is somehow avoiding your topic altogether.

      You are indeed a funny individual.

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Heres a couple of posts by Link and cjhunsinger
        The one by Link follows up on the bizarre theme of "stalking Peter Singer" started by Quill etc.
        I normally dont have the time to fish through the atheist trough but I have a day off from a very busy work schedule.
        cjhunsingerposted 6 days ago
        Oztinato
        I have read some trash on this site, but you have won the prize, as the greatest contributor. Your words are rubbish and you, with such false and hateful accusations should be censored.
        Your valid points that you haven't once provided any sources to. Might explain the lack of responses...
        Link
        There might also be the "slight" possibility that you cannot be taken seriously, since you seem hell bent on generalizing atheists by stalking a guy named Peter Singer and bringing him up every chance you get, who most of the atheists you talk to on here have never heard of.

        1. Link10103 profile image79
          Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          There is a much better and cleaner way to quote past comments. Read the paragraph above the text box when you are posting a comment to see how.

          Also, what exactly is the point you are making, aside from the fact that in at least 6 days you have yet to back anything you say up? It's one thing to be well informed about the actions of someone, but constantly bringing up the same person in almost all if not every single conversation you seem to have in an attempt to demonize atheists borders on obession/stalking.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            LINK
            as I totally expected you have not commented on either your own ridicuolus personal attack regarding the laughable "stalking of Peter Singer" or the other drivel. This speaks VOLUMES.
            I have presented logical facts and arguments that satisy myself completely.

            1. Link10103 profile image79
              Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              ....I literally just explained my reasoning for the comment of mine you quoted. You aren't reading any of these comments are you?

              As for CJ's comment, i could tell you his exact reasoning, but it isn't my place to speak for him. See if he comes back so he can do it himself.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                That was an explanation?? All I saw was an evasive denial.

                1. Link10103 profile image79
                  Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Then you should go back to school for some basic reading comprehension classes. Where in that explanation did I deny anything?

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Ok does that mean you admit that you have attacked me personally on this Hub for claiming I am "stalking"........

            2. jonnycomelately profile image85
              jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Your arguments satisfy yourself, obviously.  But who else?

              Your idea that individual's responses here allow you to assess people's personalities, is somewhat fallatious I feel.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Not personality but motivation and ethics seperate to stated ethics. At least you JCL honestly express direct views.

  14. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    To have the normal strong objections to the murder of children the same way
    people react to ISIS. Not "o its free speech no biggie yawn"

    1. Aime F profile image84
      Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Oh. Can you provide a link to where Peter Singer/"his followers" have committed infanticide? Or where they're making a real push to make it legal? All I've seen is his philosophy on it, and while I may disagree with it, I can't find any evidence to suggest that it's anything more than that. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Really? The links are all there to follow.
        I cant keep doing basic homework for atheists who don't know their stuff or pretend not to know.

        1. Aime F profile image84
          Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I know my stuff, but I don't know YOUR stuff. You're talking about something quite contrived and no matter how many times you say "follow the links", the links don't tell everyone else what you want them to. That's why I specifically wanted to see what YOU read so I can understand why you've come to the conclusions that you have. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here by assuming that there is some evidence you've based these opinions on... but if you keep refusing to provide any then there's no point in having a discussion.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            We are reading the same things but as usual there is some kind of atheist blind spot to the truth.

            1. Aime F profile image84
              Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I think it's far more likely that you're just making stuff up.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Its called creative scientific reasoning or WRITING.

  15. anweshablogs profile image79
    anweshablogsposted 2 years ago

    Converting to Islam is like getting a lengthy death sentence....I would prefer a quicker one.

  16. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    I cant keep doing everyones basic homework as it leads to intellectual laziness, and it isnt my role
    Atheists should know their own subject by now.

  17. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    I cant keep doing everyones basic homework as it leads to intellectual laziness, and it isnt my role
    Atheists should know their own subject by now.

    1. Aime F profile image84
      Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      So you don't have any then. Thought so.

      For someone who is so intent on convincing everyone that this is an important issue, you sure are hesitant to provide any sort of evidence to back it up. Talk about intellectual laziness!

      1. Link10103 profile image79
        Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        That is his MO basically, even on his own hub.

      2. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I have already provided the Peter Singer link to Wiki which also has numerous other links,
        Please read the Hub!! This is what I mean about "doing homework"...

    2. Jomine Jose profile image78
      Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
      Theos is god.
      Atheism has nothing to do with morality nor there is only one type of atheism.
      Of course you don't want to hear it but it is good to know that it is only your mistaken belief in the existence of a god that prevents you from killing your fellow humans.

      1. 0
        SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Out of curiosity, what prevents you from killing your fellow humans?

        1. Link10103 profile image79
          Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Too messy for my personal liking.

          And since I don't particularly wish to be killed, I have no desire to kill someone else who most likely feels then same way.

          My two cents and all, being an agnostic atheist

          1. 0
            SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Notifications are slow for some reason.  Thanks for answering, honestly, I suppose.

        2. jonnycomelately profile image85
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I am a-theist.  I do not kill my fellow man/woman.  What prevents me from doing so?    I don't know!  Ask that god of yours what makes some christian people kill their fellow men.  He should know.

          1. 0
            SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Well, at least you said you do not know why you don't kill.  Probably the most honest answer one could get.

        3. Aime F profile image84
          Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          It's called morality and it has nothing to do with religion.

          1. 0
            SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Where do your morals come from?

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              From humanity, if yours come from some place else you should check them. Slavery is immoral.

            2. Aime F profile image84
              Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Well, unfortunately I can't give a factual answer as it's still one of those highly debated questions.

              In my opinion, there are certain morals that are inherent and we have them simply because we are human beings (not murdering, stealing, etc.). It makes sense that we not do things to alienate ourselves or harm our own species.

              To a lesser extent I think some morals come from culture/social norms. For example, female circumcision is seen as immoral here in North America, but in other parts of the world it's not. Male circumcision is seen as immoral by many in Europe but it's an accepted practice in the States (though less than it once was).

              I think given the fact that humanity is split up into all sorts of different religions and belief systems and yet we have universal morals, it's safe to say that they are not specific to any particular religion. Though there are some things that you might argue are immoral based on your religion (homosexuality, for example), you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that thinks killing or stealing (under normal circumstances) is moral.

              1. 0
                SirDentposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                A well thought out answer.  Will try and study it more tomorrow evening and give a response.

                1. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  There is no doubt in the scientific evidence that morals evolved out of early religions. These morals and ethcis were codified into laws. Yes they Evolved and are still evolving.

              2. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Explain that to the jihadist muslim who thinks killing an American will get him his 72 virgins.  Explain it is immoral; that he is immoral for doing it, but do be prepared to meet your god shortly afterwards.

                And then explain to America that it is immoral to steal while you watch the closed circuit TV in the security room of any department store.  Shoplifting is a major problem to our businesses; someone isn't finding it immoral at all.

                1. Aime F profile image84
                  Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Well I certainly didn't mean to imply that every single person had morals. I was speaking generally.

                2. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  No, ethics evolved out of early religion and is still evolving. Ethics were imposed on society by enlightened religious leaders and later codified into laws.
                  There is no logic in pointing out the failures along this long EVOLUTIONARY road.
                  There is also no use in mistaking human failings such as greed, politics and power for religion: it serves no scientific purpose to do so and it gets us nowhere fast.

        4. Jomine Jose profile image78
          Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Human nature.
          Do you routinely want to kill your fellow humans? That's a disease seen in psychopaths.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            JJ
            then why do many atheists want to do it?? I have often said it was sociopathic/psychopathic; and here you are agreeing.

            1. Jomine Jose profile image78
              Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The same reason christians are prone to violence and lying - human nature.

              Yes, and as more christians are behind the bars we can show that psychopaths are more in christianity and an absence or presence of belief in god is not changing human nature.

      2. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Atheism has graduated a long time ago into a fully blown philosophy that is trying to change laws and play with human lives. It is naive to think the one word dictionary meaning of atheism is the be all and end all. Read the Wiki definition or the EncyloBritannica

        1. Jomine Jose profile image78
          Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The definitions are from wiki.

  18. Link10103 profile image79
    Link10103posted 2 years ago

    Guess my answer wasn't honest.

    Drat.

  19. Aime F profile image84
    Aime Fposted 2 years ago

    Okay, I read your hub and I can see now that you're clearly just a big fan of making huge generalizations and pooping on atheists. Something tells me you won't be happy until we all admit to our baby hating, animal fornicating, morally deficient ways.

    PS. You might want to go back a bit and read about the early Christian explorers in the Americas. If you think atheists have been the biggest threat to Indigenous people you have completely lost your mind.

    1. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Firstly you have made a personal attack re "losing...mind". Reported!
      Secondly I am not simply putting down all atheists, just the many thousands online who either directly support such things or indirectly support them by classing them as free speech and not loudly objecting in the same way they would about ISIS extremist thought.

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Every atheist I've seen has loudly objected to the things you have listed.

      2. Aime F profile image84
        Aime Fposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Of course you did.

        I will say, again, that everyone who has read up on the infanticide thing on this forum has said they object to it, yet you're still talking about it and implying that it's not good enough because we're not signing petitions or calling for Peter Singer's head. I will also ask you, again, what you want us to do other than express that we object to it?

        Yes, there are atheists with questionable ideas about ethics, just as there are religious folk with questionable ideas about ethics. I'm not about to take accountability for the people who hold those views just because they have the same ideas as I do on a completely different topic.

  20. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    Its still evolving. The West itself has only recently changed such laws.
    Look at the atheist North Korean state and objectively compare whats going on there. Be honest and talk about the atheist regimes.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      No, thanks. I live in a secular country that doesn't hold on to the ethics of 3000 year old goat herders who kept slaves and disrespected women.

      Still evolving? Here is a place that get's laws and ethics from the book you hold sacred and you admit it needs to evolve.

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I am assuming you are in the US? which is classed as a JudeoChristian democracy.

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          You are assuming incorrectly. BTW, it's not a JudeoChristian democracy, it's a Federal presidential constitutional republic.

        2. cjhunsinger profile image70
          cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Oztinato

          You should devote some time to the reading of the US Constitution. Please provide me the information or source of this abortion that America is classified as a Judeo-Christian democracy.

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            It's funny and sad at the same time. The term Judeo-Christian democracy is an oxymoron.

            1. Oztinato profile image82
              Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              OK I will do some of your homework for you . Here is the dictionary defintion of oxymoron (a term which has nothing to do at all with the valid points I have made).
              oxymoron
              noun
              noun: oxymoron; plural noun: oxymorons
              a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                LOL, not getting it eh? I'll give you a hint. Is the Judeo-Christian faith a form of democracy? No it has a supreme leader who will always be in charge. So putting Judeo-Christian with democracy is a oxymoron. It's rather like saying that we have a dictator democracy.

  21. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    TIME OUT
    There has been no honest comparison by any atheist as yet with the atheist goverments records of human rights abuses. Instead we see the clear tendency to point out the lesser failings of theist states.
    Lets hear the atheist defence of North Korea for example. Silence of course on that glaring contradiction of logic!

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      You expect us to defend the ruling family of North Korea? Find me a democratic country of Atheists that we can draw a comparison to. BTW, we don't even know if the ruling family are atheists, it's just what they have mandated for their people because they know that it's human nature to worship something and these nuts want the worship for themselves.

      Now, do you support Zambia's (and the other 75 countries) laws against homosexuality?

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        of course I dont support laws against gays.

        North Korea is a large atheist state supported by another large atheist state China, which in turn is supported by another large atheist state Russia: between them all we have a huge problem with human rights abuses. Atheism fails to build onto the wisdom of the ancients and pretends it can start again with no evolution behind it.
        In other words atheism has failed dismally to produce an enlightened compassionate philosophy.
        I have previously argued on other Hubs that the current form of atheism rapidly Devolves and/or becomes unworkable anarchy and/or crumbles into a tyrannical state like North Korea.

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Should I point to great religious states as demonstration as to how well they treat minorities? Again, I live in a secular country, brought to you by… Prayer is not mandatory brought to you by the good people of...

    2. cjhunsinger profile image70
      cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Oztinato

      An Atheist, such as myself, cannot and would not ever try or defend the State of North Korea, as I do not see this State as Atheistic.  Kim Jung-un is, no less, a deified dictator, as are all of his ilk. This is not Atheism. That one deifies a mystical being or one of human character,  is all  the same, theism.
      I think perhaps, America,  with the Bill of Rights is a good example of an Atheistic State. With a freedom of religion, a freedom from a religious mandate is not only implied, but enforced, as there cannot be  a State religion. In North Korea the State is the State religion, and Jong-un the god.
      Is this logic loud enough for you  or would you like me to continue?

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Here we are back to the convoluted logic: by some amazing "logic" the atheist state of North Korea is now a theist state!!
        That is mind boggling.
        The only possible explanation along those lines is that North Korea is an atheist religion (which many atheists deny online).

  22. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    What about Sodom and Gomorrah?

    1. Jomine Jose profile image78
      Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      That is just one fiction in the book of fictions.

  23. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    What about the Cynics of Ancient Greece?

    1. Jomine Jose profile image78
      Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      It was a philosophy - For the Cynics, the purpose of life was to live in virtue, in agreement with nature. As reasoning creatures, people could gain happiness by rigorous training and by living in a way which was natural for humans, rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame.
      Nothing to do with theism/atheism.  But christians did copy from them.
      The very few atheists we encounter in history either gave everything to sensual pleasures or were ascetics(majority). None of them mentions infanticide nor bestiality. But religions did, in Sparta forexample. Cynicism was an athenian phenomenon and came into existence only after the peloponnesian war. 
      By the way, bestiality is a sexual perversion and most humans can't do it regardless of their belief in god. But your post imply that but for god you would, would you?

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I can only keep referring the atheists here to Freud's book "totem and taboo" which clearly explains the roots of the desire to kill in humans (usually the young and helpless)  in both wayward bogus religions and in atheism.

        1. Link10103 profile image79
          Link10103posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I dont suppose you recall what section of the book clearly talks about that, considering that I keep seeing only the parts about the totems prohibiting incest before I need to buy something to read further

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Freud goes on to say that our distant pre-human ancestors were dominated by very large vicious males who killed male infants before they could become sexual competitors, in much the same way lions do.
            Eventually young males would escape before being killed and stage a group overthrow of the dominant large male and take back the females, including their own siblings!
            The Oedipus complex was created under this ancient circumstance.
            The point is, it was primordial sexual rivalry that lead to infanticide. Freud argues that it was this that led to child sacrifice in later religions.
            If you contemplate on this, the actions of JC to end such human sacrifice are addressing themselves to an extremely deep subconscious level. (Even Christians themselves say His sacrifice is still a mystery because they don't fully understand it due to a lack of scientific knowledge. Not that an intellectual understanding is necessary for this strange story to affect one subconsciously.)
            This symbolic or subconscious act of JC had enormous influence when it spread to the other parts of the globe who practiced even worse types of human sacrifice of children. They were instantly converted by the message and symbols, particularly the symbolic image of blood which had deep spiritual significance to them, but also of course to the incredible amount of infanticide that was going on. This has to be seen as proof of the prophetic.
            Therefore it was JC who was largely responsible for changing an ancient destructive primitive subconscious urge. In many lands He changed people from animals to true humans.
            Why God didn't throw a big switch and change these things suddenly thousands of years ago is also a bit of a mystery itself. Only the Hindus come close to answering that difficult question.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              That's disturbing.
              Oh, I'll tell you why…. because he doesn't exist.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                As I said, this mystery has been solved by the Hindu religion.
                As I have said before I cant keep doing your homework for you. Seek and you will find not sit on your couch and keep your horse blinkers on.

                1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  What is that solution?  Hindus have more conundrums that cannot be solved.

        2. Jomine Jose profile image78
          Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Then I can only ask you to read some modern psychology books instead of outdated ones.

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Modern psychology is largely based on Freuds theories. There has yet to be written a more thorough and scientific explanation to the phenomena of infanticide.
            To be fair Freud wrote it to also explain Biblical urges to kill in past times

            1. Jomine Jose profile image78
              Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Freud has been replaced and supplanted. Infanticide can have very reasons including inability to determine paternity.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I have already gone into this many times.
                The end result is that the court decide individual cases.

                1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Court??

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes. Genuine law cases about specific cases not trailer trash drowning babies in washing machines.

  24. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    I have often praised REAL atheism which shares compassion for the weak.
    God knows the heart. There can be good correct atheists who are better than hypocritical religious people whose hearts harbour the opposite of what they preach. Equally an atheist who loses their compassion while claiming noble motives is just as vile.

  25. aka-dj profile image78
    aka-djposted 2 years ago

    I've been AWOL for a while, and the thread has deteriorated to way off topic.

    This is coming (your) way. Probably in most countries around the world.

    Things are looking pretty grim for the human population.

    Oh, and that "magic book of fairy tales" has been predicting these events for around 2000+ years. I guess a lot of you haven't been keeping abreast of it all.

    BTW, GOOD "LUCK", with educating humanity out of this kind of insanity.

    http://d3dyqb2m69ozbp.cloudfront.net/wp … 9/sot1.jpg

    PS. I chose not to copy this as an [img] link, in case some of you will find it too confronting, though it's not graphic/gory.

    1. Jomine Jose profile image78
      Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/125639

      No it was exalting the same for 2000+ years.

      Some 400 years before you could get a similar picture, only there would have been a cross instead of a black mask. Since that was changed, this could also be...

      1. aka-dj profile image78
        aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah! Jesus taught His disciples to behead unbelievers!

        The foolish ignorance of some is astounding, but, hey, what else is new around here! hmm

        1. Jomine Jose profile image78
          Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          You forgot the old law which jesus approved?
          You forgot the inquisition his followers approved?
          Quran teaches the samw violence or tolerance as bible.
          Well honesty is never part of christian arsenal, what is new here?

          1. aka-dj profile image78
            aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            As opposed to atheists, who can't help but be true, right?

            No need to answer, I got it.  tongue

            Maybe you ought to publish a hub or two! I'd like to read it/them. big_smile

            1. Jomine Jose profile image78
              Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              You can read it from my blog. There is a link to my website in my profile page. Just change the .in to .net.

              Christians are true when it comes to other people's religion but not theirs. When it comes to their own they are the most dishonest.  See the picture link, the same was practiced by christians to spread their religion but you would never even acknowledge it. You would never acknowledge that jesus( the character by one of the authors) actually approved the old law. Christians could find the speck in others eyes but not the log in their own.
              PS: As already pointed out the god of OT snd NT are the same unless the older one died in between or a regime change occured in heaven!

              1. aka-dj profile image78
                aka-djposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Your extrapolation is flawed.

                Please get a clear understanding of the meanings of "OT, & NT ",

                That should clear things up for you.
                Although, based on your apparent bias, I'm not too sure.

                1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  roll
                  There is no extrapolation,  christians claim the jewish god as the same as their own.

              2. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                JJ
                even the most basic analysis of JC clearly shows his message was Love.
                How on earth can you or anyone keep getting that wrong!!!

                1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Even the most basic analysis of gospels clearly shows they are fabricatons and conrain multiple contradictions.
                  1) jc and ot god are the same
                  2) he whipped the temple merchants
                  3) he said not a letter of the ild law should be changed.
                  4) he called his opponents vipers and promised them eternal hell
                  none of which is a sign of love.

          2. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            When a person lumps all of one group, say Christians, sterotypically together they are practicing bigotry.
            A deep analysis shows some people in a particular category fail but this does not mean all are the same.
            I note again the denials on this very hub to the failures of the atheist state of modern north Korea and the inevitable implications this has for criticism of alleged religious practices.
            The problems in reality are power politics

            1. Jomine Jose profile image78
              Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Thats news! You were saying that all atheists should be classified as Singer followers.


              Is it different from all atheists are followers of singer or muslims are terrorists?
              There is no "atheist bible" while there is a Christian bible which all christians claim to follow.

              Isn't not bigotry?
              Atheism is not a religion. You can as well say that aunicornism or ayetism is causing all these. You people are proposing a Loch Ness monster, god, which you cannot substantiate.  Atheists are those people who say there is no such monster. There is no other philosophy nor group.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                The Hub record clearly shows I have not classed all atheists as Singers followers
                Thats a ridiculous assertion. Do your homework.

                1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I have no intention of reading YOUR hubs as a homework.  I am talking about the arguments you made in this forum that atheists do infanticide and bestiality.

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    The record shows I have said SOME atheists. Hence my use of the term homework.
                    If you dont read the posts I wont respond.
                    Goodbye!

              2. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Read wiki re the thousands of organised atheist groups.

                1. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Did you also read that the thousands "groups" follow Singer or do or support infanticide or bestiality?
                  Do YOUR homework. The groups are like "Charles Dickens club" or 'Manchester United fans' not like a Christian group with a central book and god experience to share. There is no atheistic experience to share.

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Ive followed that up literally years ago and of course they are organising together regarding infanticide.
                    Also if you look at atheist north korea the leaders ae happy as atheists to share common atheist based beliefs.

            2. jonnycomelately profile image85
              jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Please take what you say here about different christian groups and apply the same principles to people who are atheist.  Be consistent and try not to be so blatantly biased.

        2. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The OT tells us to kill promiscuous girls and that was supposedly the same God that is Jesus.

  26. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    As I said its homework

    1. Jomine Jose profile image78
      Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      As I said that was your guesswork.

  27. Che Rogers profile image61
    Che Rogersposted 2 years ago

    More fear mongering. Fear only causes physical and mental illness. It also causes people to make poor decisions. Bring good to the world. Bring love and peace to the world. Be the change your want to see in the world and there is nothing to fear. A side note, christians have done the same type of persecution on nonbelievers. Religion is used for political conquests by the ruling classes. The other 99% is brain washed into believing the nonsense. To kill or hate anyone who isn't apart of your religion. A total contradiction to love and compassion.

    1. jonnycomelately profile image85
      jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Thank you Che - the voice of compassion and honesty.

    2. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Of course if you read my posts which you
      havnt, you would see I place SOME atheists and SOME christians in the same category.

      1. Che Rogers profile image61
        Che Rogersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Who are you referring to?

      2. Jomine Jose profile image78
        Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        The "some" is a new addition.

        OZTINATO; quote ; "they have been here for milleniums because atheists have been promoting them for milleniums."

        1. jonnycomelately profile image85
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Were there atheists 1000, 2000 years ago? !!!!

          1. Jomine Jose profile image78
            Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            That was a quote from Ozinato. He said he was using "some" atheists,  I quoted to show that it was not the case.

  28. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago

    I have always claimed that some NOT ALL atheists are included.
    How on earth anyone can keep getting this wrong is incomprehensible.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      As SOME atheists and SOME Christians are doing the evil, shouldn't you be attacking the Christians as the larger target?  More of them in this country, you know.

      1. Oztinato profile image82
        Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I have targeted hypocrites on both sides.
        I spend more time on atheists to correct the hideous imbalance on Hubpages against theists.
        Also atheism has taken a nose dive as a credible alternative due the many reasons I have cited.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Odd - I've never seen you criticizing Christians for infanticide...




          And of course the perceived "imbalance" is more important than actually DOING something about it (such as reporting such activities to police).




          Really?  As the number of professing Christians dwindles all over the developed world you claim atheism has taken a nose dive?  You really need to research your claims a little better.
          "And the proportion of Europeans and Americans who are Christian has dropped from 95% in 1910 to 76% in 2010 in Europe as a whole, and from 96% to 86% in the Americas as a whole."  (I would add that most of the Americas are not "developed" nations...it seems to be the backwards, third world countries, that are keeping Christianity alive.

          http://www.pewforum.org/2011/12/19/glob … nity-exec/

          1. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            PS the atheist nose dive is in ethical standards.

            1. Oztinato profile image82
              Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              PPS so you havnt read my posts about Freud and his analysis of ancient infanticide. Some but not all ancient religions and corrupt people practiced human sacrifice.
              Now Singer and co want to start it again!

              1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Oztinato, I suggest that unless you are well qualified in psychology or similar disciplines, you lay off commenting on the works of Freud.  As I understand it, though have absolutely no qualifications or background in psychology or psychiatry, he was very forward in his thinking and theories for that time in history, but there has been a lot of advancement in science since that time.   Without up-to-date study and qualification I doubt your views about him would carry much weight.

                Also, WHY do you keep bringing up those subjects of infanticide and child sacrifice?  Those things have nothing to do with my atheist feelings or reasoning.  They are abhorrent to anyone with even an ounce of humanity in these modern times.  So.... can you please drop those subjects?  Leave them where they belong --- certainly not here in this discussion.

                1. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Read the posts
                  Its a litmus test.
                  I am still waiting for Quills response to the topic.
                  Also its a good topic to remind atheists of why theists are so against modern atheism.
                  Freud is still highly respected and laid the foundations of psychology. By using his evolution based interpretation I was hoping atheists would approve
                  He was also an atheist

            2. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Sure thing.  As Christian groups all over the country try their best to discriminate against select groups that don't live as the Christians think they should.  They're losing all over, but they still try - my state governor is suing (again) even though the state laws discriminating against gays have lost every time.

              No, it is most often the religious "moral" right that is drug, kicking and screaming, into the future as society grows and develops superior ethics.  Drug by the secular segment that recognizes religion does not produce quality morality but instead uses their size and strength to persecute at every opportunity.

              1. Oztinato profile image82
                Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Some religious people cant accept gays but many atheists cant accept a six month old babies right to live. Which is the lesser if these two evils? I bet a cappucino you wont answer that.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Yeah, I know.  You've claimed infanticide by both Christians and atheists too many times now, without a shred of proof, for anyone to believe it.

                  So...discrimination is the worse evil between that and making false claims of infanticide.

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image85
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    If anyone, he or she, cannot accept a 6-month old babies right to live, it has nothing to do with being atheist.   It might be a cultural connection;  it might be straight forward crime.   It might be associated with a traditional religion.   Whatever it's cause, it most certainly is not linked, per see, with atheist understanding.

                  2. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    You owe me a cappucino

                2. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Yeah, I know.  You've made the claim at least a dozen times that Christians and atheists practice infanticide, but have never produced a shred of proof.

                  So...between the two, discrimination based on private sex lives and making false claims, I choose the discrimination as the worse evil.

                3. Jomine Jose profile image78
                  Jomine Joseposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  The only atheist, you could find who "advocate" infanticide, was Singer and he confine the age to below one month.
                  Many, you mean like "many" christians who kill instead of just preach?
                  And infanticide was practiced by human cultures even before atheism.
                  If some atheists practice infanticide (you have not provided any proof yet), more christians practice the same. That simply means that there is no relationship between a/theism and infanticide and even if there is, it is that atheism actually reduces the incidence of infanticide and theism promotes it, the opposite of what you claim.

                  1. Oztinato profile image82
                    Oztinatoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    I have repeatedly spoke about Singers thousands of avid followers.
                    In other posts elsewhere which you were party to I also named other names.
                    Try googling "after birth abortion"