I am Agnostic with a Science bias.

Hell yeah.

I'm mystified... What does that have to do with Islam?

Hell yeah.

I'm mystified... What does that have to do with Islam?

Equally stupid beliefs?

(Note: Just being a dick)

Hey, that's MY job buddy.

I read that as "White Flower' then the second take was 'White Plower''...I got it on the third.

I read that as "White Flower' then the second take was 'White Plower''...I got it on the third.

dirty hippy!

What I object to are the self-righteous throngs that claim that their god is better than all others, or at the very least that other gods are inferior to theirs.
It's about the stupidest thing an otherwise intelligent person can do.

I object to self righteous atheists who call me a fool for believing in God.
I never push my beliefs onto anyone but apparently it's okay for people to do it to me, because I'm just a stupid little sheep.

Atheists really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I don't believe in God and that makes me smarter than you!!!"

I saw an older black gentleman the other day who was dressed like a pimp and sporting a hitler moustache.

It was very odd.

Atheists really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I don't believe in God and that makes me smarter than you!!!"

A few other variations:
The religious really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I believe in God and that makes me smarter than you!!!"
People really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I believe I am smarter than you!!!"

slightly random anecdote:
I went to a christian thing the first week at this new school.
That was fun. They said they just hang out and chat, doesn't matter what religion you are...

...half an hour in and they pulled out the fucking Bibles.

Atheists really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I don't believe in God and that makes me smarter than you!!!"

A few other variations:
The religious really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I believe in God and that makes me smarter than you!!!"
People really often times are total tools. "Look at me, I believe I am smarter than you!!!"

Really? I can't think of too many religious persons that considered their religious beliefs to be proof of their superior intellect.

Weird.

You're right I lied. I was trying to sneak that one past, but you caught me. Religious people are in fact all humble and down to earth people. They have no feelings of superiority based on their beliefs, and they readily concede that their beliefs might not actually be any smarter than the beliefs of anyone else. That's actually just an atheist myth designed to justify the atheists' aggressive approaches to handling the otherwise easygoing religious crowd.

PS - Fuck Islam!

I suppose I can only base my opinion on my own experiences.

My parents weren't religious and never went to church, but neighbors and relatives took me to Sunday school when I was a child. For second through sixth grade I attended a private elementary school that was Lutheran. Each day began with like a half hour of learning why God is so nice and all that, and every Wednesday we went to the attached church for like a half hour of worship.

In Jr. high cousins took me to a Baptist church on Sundays, and I went there too on Thursday nights for youth group, which was like organized games of dodge ball with a half hour or so of bible study thrown in the mix. During my childhood through teen years I have attended Methodist, Baptist, and Lutheran services. Certainly I met some real assholes along the way, but I can't remember ever having met anyone who gave me the feeling that they felt superior to the non religious. One of my best friend's parents are Missionaries, and his family is the most caring, accepting family I've ever met. They still treat me like I'm the specialest person ever, even though I tattooed a giant Baphomet on their son's back.

Myself, I'm Agnostic, and I don't care who your God is. I also don't care if you believe there is no God. In my experience I've never witnessed Christian persons attack Atheism the way I've personally experienced Atheist friends vehemently attack religion. I've never experienced religious persons use their belief in a supreme being as proof of their superior intelligence, but I see Atheists use their Atheism as a display of how obscenely intelligent they are all the time.

So, when it comes to religion or lack of it I prefer to live and let live... But, if your religion (not some "interpretation" of it) explicitly says that if you can't convert me then it's time to kill me, then sorry buddy... You gotta go. 

So yeah, fuck Islam.

http://deadspin.com/234596/stephen-a-smith-voice-of-reason-in-a-world-of-insanity

So, when it comes to religion or lack of it I prefer to live and let live... But, if your religion (not some "interpretation" of it) explicitly says that if you can't convert me then it's time to kill me, then sorry buddy... You gotta go. 

So yeah, fuck Islam.

I can see my suggestion that it's only the emphasis of this part of the religion that is dangerous has had no impact whatsoever.
Internet discussions are depressing. I have to cut back.

I understand that it's your belief that Islam itself is not dangerous, it's certain radical fringe groups that emphasize the kill the infidels part that's dangerous, and that condemning Islam as a whole is a knee-jerk reaction. After all, Christianity has had it's radical fringe groups ala Fred Phelps, Jim Jones, David Koresh, etc.

My counterpoint is the kill the infidel part of Islam isn't some radical interpretation of it, it's a core part of their religious dogma regardless of whether American Muslims actively practice that part of the religion or not, and it may only be a matter of time before they too are convinced that they're slackers at their religion if they don't follow what their religious books tell them to do. If it weren't for Allah and Muhammad instructing their followers to either convert everyone to their religion or kill them I would have no problem with their religion.

I don't understand what's so difficult to understand (from either of our stances). Is there something I'm missing?

Cause the koran does not actually say to kill people that dont convert. Does not say to kill people who are not islamic either...unless you snip the verses and take them into a new context.

that would be my best guess as to what you are missing.

Bah! Your complete denial of facts and ignorance of evidence have defeated me!

I simply can not contend with such invincibility to logic and reason.

What facts ? I have not seen anybody post anything but sniped quotes.

So either post up full quotes that state what you claim  or stfu.

Here you go douchebag, an entire chapter from the Koran where it's nothing but instructions on how to fight the non-believers and kill them if they won't submit to the one true religion, Islam.

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=HolKora.sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=8&division=div1

Now, amaze me with your denial.

No.

Non-Believers are those who dont believe in God. That passage has nothing to do with Isalm. Try alt + f ' Islam' you wont get a hit.

and this is the problem ... Interpretation of the words. Islam is the problem for you because you choose to interpret Islam that way.

Islam is not the problem here. ( unless, of course, you dont believe in god. )

Okay... I was merely looking for amazing, not astounding.

You might want to get your head looked at again after that beating you took.

For real.

I think you know you just got your ass kicked...by me.

I think what we're seeing here is that Krsna is a fundamentalist. Or at least that's his impression of what religion is all about.
Like all other Qur'an-interpreting literalist fundamentalists, you'd make a very dangerous Imam, Krsna. If you were a Muslim I believe you might fit right in with Osama hisself.

Luckily most Muslims don't agree with your radical views of the "proper" way to interpret scripture.
In fact most modern religious scholars tend to adopt more of a context-based interpretation where passages written in response to great battles (like the Qur'an's 8th Sura), dietary laws (like those of the Tanakh's Deuteronomy), the historical genocides (like those of the Tanakh's Exodus and Leviticus), and phantasmagorical hallucinations (like those in the New Testament's Revelation of St. John) are not treated as literal instructions, but are instead considered metaphorical instructions at best and historical curios at worst.

I think you know you just got your ass kicked...by me.

No. You are delusional. Curtly disagreeing and then spouting off nonsense does not constitute an ass kicking, it constitutes willful douchebaggery.

I think what we're seeing here is that Krsna is a fundamentalist. Or at least that's his impression of what religion is all about.
Like all other Qur'an-interpreting literalist fundamentalists, you'd make a very dangerous Imam, Krsna. If you were a Muslim I believe you might fit right in with Osama hisself.

Luckily most Muslims don't agree with your radical views of the "proper" way to interpret scripture.
In fact most modern religious scholars tend to adopt more of a context-based interpretation where passages written in response to great battles (like the Qur'an's 8th Sura), dietary laws (like those of the Tanakh's Deuteronomy), the historical genocides (like those of the Tanakh's Exodus and Leviticus), and phantasmagorical hallucinations (like those in the New Testament's Revelation of St. John) are not treated as literal instructions, but are instead considered metaphorical instructions at best and historical curios at worst.

I suppose I might be fundamentalist at heart, but that's what Christianity and Judaism instruct one to do, and certainly Islam as well. You're taught that God's intelligence and plan are way beyond our earthly understanding, and all we need to concern ourselves with is following his instructions he's relayed to us in His Word, whichever holy book your religion has decided that is.

The only place I've ever seen religious "scholars" discuss the Bible and the Old Testament as anything other than God's Word to be taken as fact spoken directly from God Himself, is on the History Channel. 

I don't think you really understand religion. To the true believer a passage isn't a puzzle meant to be interpreted, it's to be taken literally. The very religious feel it's their duty to follow God's word, not to second guess Him.

Have you had any first hand experience with religion Doormouse?

I have actually.
But look I think we've found the essential point on which we disagree here. So there's some progress.
We're just coming at it from two different angles.
You're taking a literalist approach whereas I'm taking the figurative approach.
I assume it has to do with the religious systems we each know best.
If we look at Islam literally, then there are definite and distinct problems with it. I'd argue that the same goes for Christianity, although that's more in regard to the dismantling of science than the dismantling of human life. If we look at Islam figuratively I see very few if any problems with it.

In other words: Fuck Islamic Fundamentalism! I stand by that completely.

The only place I've ever seen religious "scholars" discuss the Bible and the Old Testament as anything other than God's Word to be taken as fact spoken directly from God Himself, is on the History Channel. 

I think it depends on the denomination with Christianity.  Some denominations are pretty insane about Biblical inerrancy - the Baptists, for example.  Some of the doctrine of the Church of Christ is based on reading individual verses out of context - you don't need context if the Bible is without error, I suppose.  On the other hand, some denominations hold to Biblical infallibility - basically that what the Bible says about faith is good, true, and useful, but references about historical/scientific things aren't necessarily true or accurate but that's not relevant since it's intended as a book for spiritual practice, not a history or science textbook.  

I don't think most Christians could explain the difference, though.      

I went to a pretty liberal Presbyterian church when I was a teenager.  We did discuss a lot of things being myth - Adam & Eve, for instance.  Of course, my youth group was led by a Princeton Seminary grad & an MIT phd, which I don't think is representative of most.

In other words: Fuck Islamic Fundamentalism! I stand by that completely.

I can certainly agree with that.

I don't think you really understand religion. To the true believer a passage isn't a puzzle meant to be interpreted, it's to be taken literally. The very religious feel it's their duty to follow God's word, not to second guess Him.

Exactly. Religion is a delusion. By its very nature the more religious a person is, the less hesitation they'll have about doing things written in their holy books.

I read some of the chapter krsna posted. I didn't pore over every word carefully, but read enough about, "whatever you do to 'the blind', it's on Allah, and not you, so go for it!" to get the fucking point. As for it being only the most fundamental/radical Muslims being dangerous, um... so what? Haven't we been repeatedly shown that there are enough of them to be a serious threat?

The most diehard followers of anything are the most dangerous people there are in any society. People with a cause, people with a passionate belief in whatever, for better or for worse, these are the people who get shit done. The danger to the less passionately convinced increases the more accepted the diehards are by the general public.