Atheists more intelligent than the religious?

WHAT?

:roflmao:

A better question is why doesn't the USA give Jews a homeland from its own land? Seeing as it IS the Palestinians' land.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm forced to agree with the above.

It's okay if you want to adhere to your beliefs and uphold the traditions of your ethnicity, but it's not okay (and this applies to anyone) if you perceive critical arguments against religion as insulting attacks toward islam and arabs and therefore lash back on that basis. It makes no sense to feel as though it is your religious and/or ethnic duty to defend the ways of your people, however illogical they may be, especially when you don't sincerely believe them and practice those ways yourself.

Believing in gods and defending violence isn't a good thing, when that loyalty is forced. Forget what your parents told you. Forget what your teachers told you. And forget what "your people" told you. You guys have brains. Use them.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I use mine. And violence is neither good nor bad.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Boy, what paranoia it takes to be a secular state. No wonder you need to blow off Muslims steam every once in while to relieve the pressure.

Which country is this, again?

 

Which is why capitalism is superior to violent mob rule *ahem* democracy.

 

Not saying it is. But defending violence in the name of your religion *is* bad, when that loyalty is forced instead of genuine. Some people in this thread are defending potentially dangerous muslim ideas purely because their parents are muslims or they come from muslim countries, while they themselves behave and sound in ways that don't even agree with muslim ideals. Maybe you don't think it's good or bad in moral terms, but chaining yourself to an ideology that you don't even agree with, purely because you feel it to be an inherited duty, is unhealthy for your intellectual development.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Right, well I agree with you, but what about genuine loyalty? Violence is neither good nor bad; it can be used to shape a society, in which case it is bad in the interest of liberty but good in the interest of the collective. I don't like people who use these absolutes; there are different cultures, not "backward" or "forward"

Free market capitalism is the absolute best way for everybody to be happy, however.

 

You really shouldn't jump to any conclusions about what I believe and why.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

My country is only just recovering from colonisation so I know what the wealth of those high GDP countries means.

It means billions of people got screwed so some guys could feel rich and successful/

I don't support violence as a rule but I'd be a fool to judge anyone who did not want to become the next Iraq or the next Vietnam or the next Japan or the next Palestine. If you think that is "extreme" tough shit. When you're being strafed from the air and watching your neighborhoods blow up you preach peace.

 

Well this is where we reach an impasse. Do you really believe that there are no backward and forward cultures? I mean, what about the stone aged people who roamed the land and ran about open clearings beating each other with clubs and spears? They had no written language. They had no permanent settlements. They were lucky to live to forty years of age, and they probably raped women all the time because they were so unsophisticated that no laws existed to stop them from behaving cruelly and impulsively. They probably killed the children of the women they stole, just like male gorillas when they aust a silverback from its pack. How can you honestly believe that such a culture isn't backwards? It's behind in every possible way: intellectually, technologically, linguistically, and behaviorally. Those aren't subjective evaluations. That culture isn't merely different. That culture is *unprogressed.*

Some cultures choosing to remain unprogressed today doesn't change that about them.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Whether or not a culture is backwards or forwards cannot be measured by how "tolerant" or "free" they are, because this makes the assumption that freedom or tolerance are desirable.

If we are to measure the advanced state of a culture, we ought to measure productivity, efficiency, and technological sophistication.

Otherwise a sophisticated culture like Nazi Germany would be painted as "backwards" when, in fact, it was very innovative in many aspects.

 

When did I say that? Let me quote Gandhi on this, he was such a great writer.

Reporter: What do you think of western civilisation?

Gandhi: It would be a very good idea

 

If the way we treat each other is, in your mind, of less value to an evaluation of a culture's quality than productivity and technology are, then you are simply not of the same species as I, and that explains why we will never agree on this issue. :m:

 

Doesn't really work considering souls have never been shown to exist. You too have no soul, hence you are soulless and deluded.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I suppose, but you still make a mistake: the way we treat each other, treating each other well, doesn't mean we have to be tolerant.

Hitler likely advocated a strong sense of brotherhood and friendship among the Aryans.

 

There was a time I felt everyone equally intelligent, regardless of religion. Then I came to this forum and realised almost all people are stupid, the atheists are just slightly less stupid.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

“How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.”

- Adolf Hitler

 

It's funny really. I think it's taken a lot of propaganda over literally millenia to pound this story into Muslim subconscious.

For Muslims when they attack and looted monasteries in Egypt, Spain, France - that's called "preserving" ancient knowledge.

For Muslims when Xians attack Muslim nations it's called a crusade. And was evil. When Muslims attacked Spain in a crusade - that's liberation.

Muslims attack and defeat Persia forming the Arab Empire and the first Arab Emperor - that's was all defensive (even though most cities in Arabia were founded by Persians, somehow for the nomads they were "defending" themselves.

it literally goes on and on like this.

When the Taliban blew up the 2500 year Buddhist statues. That was the European's fault. Crazy isn't it? But that's the truth.

The European Renaissance, that was based solely on Islam, couldn't have happened without Islam. Hell, Roman aqueducts, the Greek Parthenon, the Great Pyramids - them were all only possible because of Islam too :bugeye:
Zero, invented by Muslims :bugeye:
Islam equates to pure Peace :bugeye:

Electricity, physics, modern medicine, television, planes, trains, automobiles, all of it is only possible due to Islam.


Now, try to live life with your head buried THAT deep in shit, you'll start to understand where these crazy posts come from.

 

No Norse there is no reason to think in terms of the palestinians, we live in a black and white world, only binary positions are acknowledged here. So you see in the same way that Sam can only think in terms of the world of Islam all else either being imperialists, colonialists and atheists, I now see her way of thinking, I see that this is correct therefore to state that in this world of binary positions Jews have just as much right to soil as anyone else, so its there land now let the Palestinians go and live in Jordan.

Michael

No Michael. Islam may have done some good in the past but so what? The West has done good in the past and presently but its irrelevant to Sam any positive benefits that comes from the West. Why should we think in terms of what good may have come from Islam? Sam cannot see anything good about atheists, secular society and western civilization. Why should anyone who is not of her tribe have any consideration since we are all football players representing our perspective teams.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

*waves team colors*

 

Hve you noticed that you are identifying the atheistic, or secular, or whatever term it is this paragraph, by their evil behavior

And then using that behavior to argue the evil of the atheism, secularism, whatever?

Israel is a strongly theistic state, and its evils are evils of theistic governance. The Americans who are bombing children and driving over Muslims in bulldozers are the strongly theistic Americans - loudly and stridently so. The suicide bombers and other mass murderers in Pakistan and elsewhere are theists, killing their theistic neighbors. The evils and tragedies of the Middle East, central Asia, etc, overwhelmingly involve various gangs of Abrahamic theists, and the influence of atheistic people is nowhere to be seen except maybe in Tibet, with the Chinese.

Although as China is a long-lived and successful society, and you deny that possibility among the atheistic, maybe not in Tibet either.

Most of the wealth accumulated by the high GDP countries came from dealing with each other.

Much as the oppressed would like to think their oppression of overwhelming significance, in most cases the oppressor source country would have made even more money by better dealings with them. Nobody benefited from plantation slavery in the US, for example - the plantation owners were trapped in a sub-optimal equilibrium, and it cost them (among other things) the Civil War.

That's one of the tragic features of this stuff - the benefits as delivered are so petty and insignificant, compared with the benefits to be had otherwise.

 

Israel is a strongly Jewish state, but since they do not follow Jewish laws it cannot be considered a theistic state, moreover it was established and is being run by atheists. Note that the religious party is a minority in the givernment.

Of course it does, there is a distinct difference between how these high GDP countries treat each other and treat other states. But the wealth that has led to their "progress" for want of a better word was built on the backs of the Third World.