Muslim Experience in America

**S.A.M.** · 08-17-08, 07:12 PM

For reference, see history of the Carvakas and Buddhism in India.

**Mr.Spock** · 08-17-08, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Atheism has been prevalent at many times in history. However as a social system, it tends to individualism and hence has a tendency to collapse on itself. It can only be sustained as a part of a theist society.

You mean this -->

?

more like this

smile

Ah yes, that poor fellow. Its amazing the things people imagine about some poor sod in some place they never go to.

**Mr.Spock** · 08-17-08, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Ah yes, that poor fellow. Its amazing the things people imagine about some poor sod in some place they never go to.

he looked happy to me. i dont know what you are complaining about.

**S.A.M.** · 08-17-08, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by Mr.Spock

he looked happy to me. i dont know what you are complaining about.

Happy? Yeah, as happy as someone who is not very right in the upper storey can look after repeated beatings in police custody that leave them unable to function normally can look. Its a good thing he has family to look after him. Protesting against atrocities is the only thing he does.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...adicalism.html

**Mr.Spock** · 08-17-08, 07:22 PM

its amazing how muslims never attend in any violent activity. they are always persecuted, abused, mistreated.

a bunch of saints.

**Michael** · 08-17-08, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Atheism has been prevalent at many times in history. However as a social system, it tends to individualism and hence has a tendency to collapse on itself. It can only be sustained as a part of a theist society.

This may be true. But, we're also at an interesting time in human development.

In a gloabalized world, which religions will be the most successful? What makes for a successful society? Is it one where about 20% of the population is atheistic? Classical Greece questioned their Gods, but, the common person didn't stop believing. Maybe there is an optimal balance between atheism and theism that produces the best society? Maybe this is the key ingredient missing in Islamic societies? The reason why they are not flourishing?

**S.A.M.** · 08-17-08, 08:20 PM

Islamic societies stopped flourishing when they moved away from Islamic values.

**~~Gustav~~** · 08-18-08, 01:30 AM

false
societies thrives when utilizing values that tend to be universal
co-opting these as uniquely islamic is......frau......disin......hmm....misguided!

/wags

**~~Gustav~~** · 08-18-08, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

For reference, see history of the Carvakas and Buddhism in India.

a reference
got more?

**Sock puppet path** · 08-18-08, 01:58 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Islamic societies stopped flourishing when they moved away from Islamic values.

That's a myth, Islamic societies stopped flourishing when (like any empire) they lost the ability to effectively wage war. The loot stream that greased the machinery for 900 years dried up.

**~~Gustav~~** · 08-18-08, 02:39 AM

Originally Posted by Sock puppet path

That's a myth, Islamic societies stopped flourishing when (like any empire) they lost the ability to effectively wage war. The loot stream that greased the machinery for 900 years dried up.

false!
this here loot stream flows with the ease of a well oiled pipeline

**Sock puppet path** · 08-18-08, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by Gustav

false!
this here loot stream flows with the ease of a well oiled pipeline

Now yeah but there was a lapse of several centuries.

**S.A.M.** · 08-18-08, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by Gustav

false
societies thrives when utilizing values that tend to be universal
co-opting these as uniquely islamic is......frau......disin......hmm....misguided!

/wags

I'll go with that, its why individualism fails as a social system. Individuals can only thrive when the social system is established and functional.

**Buffalo Roam** · 08-18-08, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

I'll go with that, its why individualism fails as a social system. Individuals can only thrive when the social system is established and functional.

Much like the Catholic Church in the dark ages, the Quran is written in a language that is not readable by the mass of the adherents to Islam, so they are dependent on their Imam, and Ayatollah's, and those seem to be self appointed.

Having a state, were the average Moslem is dependent on some one else for translating the Quran to them does not lead to a society for and of the individual.

It lead to a state, of theocracy, were things are selectively spoon feed to the individual, to control his actions and views, and exploit that monopoly.

Who speaks for Islam? More and more Muslims do. As they compete with one another for the support of their fellow believers, there is debate even over the criteria by which they ought to be measured: scholarly insight, personal piety, political efficacy or other grounds.

Hojjatoleslam, Ayatollah, ayatollah al-'ozma, marja, Theocracy Replaces Monarchy - The Turban for the Crown, and the warlord of Islam look to expand their own power base and interpret the Quran for their own best interest.

So much like the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, they fight among each other for power, in internal warfare, and are controlled by those who interpret the Quran with the same absolute theism, that the Catholic Church did until the Reformation.

**S.A.M.** · 08-18-08, 08:50 AM

Actually, the Quran is very easy to read; all you have to do is learn the language. Its not some code or something. But randomly reading one line here and there will tell you nothing.

And if you're going to copy paste from other sites, at least be honest enough to post a link or give some indication that its not your own writing

http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/whospeaks.htm

Otherwise its called plagiarism.

**Buffalo Roam** · 08-18-08, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Actually, the Quran is very easy to read; all you have to do is learn the language. Its not some code or something. But randomly reading one line here and there will tell you nothing.

And if you're going to copy paste from other sites, at least be honest enough to post a link or give some indication that its not your own writing

http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/whospeaks.htm

Otherwise its called plagiarism.

Can't respond so change the focus.

So the Quran is easy to read?

the earliest copies of the Qur'an were written without vowels and ..... so far as the punctuation, titles, and divisions of chapters are concerned.........

Muhammad admitted to have also received revelations directly from Satan. Known as the "Satanic verses," al-Tabari records in his History under "Muhammad at Mecca" that "Satan Cast a False Revelation on the Messenger of God's Tongue." Muhammad's admission that, "I have fabricated things against Allah and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken." confirms that Muhammad was demon possessed.

Received revelations for Shatan, so how can his writing be considered Holy?

**S.A.M.** · 08-18-08, 09:03 AM

Yeah, its a phonetic language. Do you have didactic marks in English?

Tabari was born 200 years after Muhammed.

And plagiarism is not allowed on sciforums. You should know that academic websites can track their material and it is illegal to post material without giving due credit. They use it to find students who copy paste from websites. Besides which, it is simply dishonest to pass off other people's work as your own.

**Buffalo Roam** · 08-18-08, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by S.A.M.

Yeah, its a phonetic language. Do you have didactic marks in English?

Tabari was born 200 years after Muhammed.

And plagiarism is not allowed on sciforums. You should know that academic websites can track their material and it is illegal to post material without giving due credit. They use it to find students who copy paste from websites.

So because you can't meet the question, you change the focus.

Again you have just admitted defeat on the subject.