• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which is Islam's Main Goal: To Captivate, Convert or Kill Us?

Which is Islam's Main Goal: To Captivate, Convert or Kill Us?

  • Captivate

    Votes: 6 9.4%
  • Convert

    Votes: 24 37.5%
  • Kill

    Votes: 14 21.9%
  • None of the Above

    Votes: 27 42.2%
  • Other (Specify)

    Votes: 9 14.1%

  • Total voters
    64
Each one teach one.

Everyone should read from this website

Political Islam


Education.

Tell one other person to do the same.

This website is by Bill Warner. Who is Bill Warner? And why should he be recognized as an expert to educate us in Islam?
 
What about Dubai then? Kind of breaks with yout "theory"...

As long as you arent a liar with bad morals grounds, who talk behind peoples backs and so on, then you are an ok atheist, but most atheists and Christians(led astray) do all those things constantly, so clearly religious folks will hate you for being morons.

Actually Maximus, I didn't forward the theory Ahmed made the insinuation that a certain web site critical of Islam must therefore be a hater site due to it's location in New York. Now I wanted Ahmed to empirically clarify such an assumption. I don't know what you are on about in regards to Dubai, I can only assume that it is to demonstrate that you can be an atheist in Dubai. I'm sure you can. But I ask you this apart from being an atheist in private, can you honetly tell me that atheists can have organisations promoting atheism or apostasy?

I don't know what you where discussing in your last part or your argument. I cannot for the life of me understand how the crime of liable, or concepts of being nice person to other people; the golden rule, relate to my question...That is, whether or not Islam can tolerate the open organization and association of atheists. So lets not get bogged down in tangents.

Therefore the question I ask is this, in an Islamic country that uses Sharia law as it's legal system as opposed to a secular system, are atheists allowed to openly organize and promote atheism?

If the answer to this first question is no, then the second question is what are the punishments and thirdly what are the justifications for such restrictions, and lastly how could any such theological restrictions be rationalized when the west allows Muslims to practice their religion in non-muslim countries?
 
Last edited:
By the way, what is so special about New York? Does it have more Islam-haters per capital than any other city? Interesting theory indeed......

It doesnt have more Islam-haters than any other city, but it does like many of them.
 
Well that little explanation leaves atheists like myself feeling all warm and fuzzy. Theologically sanctioned oppression against non-believers. That's sweet isn't it?

Actually we do have Athiests here, But they do respect the religion, because they know if they got in any arguments about religions, They will lose.
 
Which is Islam's Main Goal: To Captivate, Convert or Kill Us?

From time to time I get indications there are people who believe the main goal of Islamic domination is to kill or convert us. I have long believed, however, that the true main goal is to captivate us.

This passage from a Front Page Magazine interview with Bill Warner, the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI) and spokesman for PoliticalIslam.com illustrates the idea well:



The goal, I believe is to captivate us and much of the tax money that goes now to Washington to pay for defense, for example, would instead go to Mecca.

That's how I see it. But what about you?

What do you think?

There is a difference between an ideology and that ideology's application. Islam, with all it's diversity, has no specific goals. Different sects have different goals based on their specific application of how they interpret the ideology. The vast majority of religions operate this way. It is always one's interpretation and application of the religion's belief system that causes the problem, not the religion itself. I am always amazed at how this eludes some, both when discussing Islam, Christianity, or, pretty much any other ideology.
 
Bkhad, your lack of tolerance for the Muslim faith is quite telling. Why are you so afraid?

That is what liberals are for and to throw the word racism around.

I wasn't aware that Islam was a monolithic entity.

Could anyone provide evidence that Islam is in fact such an entity with singular goals that all of the sects work towards?

Or is the OP just being stupid?

Moderator's Warning:
The three of you knock off the personal attacks and the baiting, or there will be further consequences. That goes for the rest of you, too.
 
Actually Maximus, I didn't forward the theory Ahmed made the insinuation that a certain web site critical of Islam must therefore be a hater site due to it's location in New York. Now I wanted Ahmed to empirically clarify such an assumption. I don't know what you are on about in regards to Dubai, I can only assume that it is to demonstrate that you can be an atheist in Dubai. I'm sure you can.

I was just thinking you connected success with "atheism" and used New York as an example that atheims brings success. So I mentioned Dubai on the opposite side of the specter, sure you are free to choose there, but most people in the UAE are religious.

But I ask you this apart from being an atheist in private, can you honetly tell me that atheists can have organisations promoting atheism or apostasy?

Cant have or can have? I assume "cant" is what you meant.. Sure they can, its a "free world", but promoting atheism and apostasy is kind of against general morals, its like promoting lying, stealing, backbiting and other unmoral activities. Is that something you want, or find ok? Would it be a good thing? Probably not.. isn't it more regular you would say that those who are very religious follows a BETTER moral codex? Yes, I know that Christians lie and backbite all the time, but those who are real Christians do not do that, those whom actually are religious.

I hate un-moral people, selfish backbiting liars who would kill for a bit of money. Thats a thing that I do not want in this world. Religion brings a moral code to a world without any moral. Moral code in my opinion is more important than "law".



I don't know what you where discussing in your last part or your argument. I cannot for the life of me understand how the crime of liable, or concepts of being nice person to other people; the golden rule, relate to my question...That is, whether or not Islam can tolerate the open organization and association of atheists. So lets not get bogged down in tangents.

Therefore the question I ask is this, in an Islamic country that uses Sharia law as it's legal system as opposed to a secular system, are atheists allowed to openly organize and promote atheism?

If the answer to this first question is no, then the second question is what are the punishments and thirdly what are the justifications for such restrictions, and lastly how could any such theological restrictions be rationalized when the west allows Muslims to practice their religion in non-muslim countries?

Actually I am just comparing atheists to religious people of all kinds. I realize there are variations between the religious people, but would you not generally say that religious people have a stronger and better moral code than those who arent? Isnt it lack of religion or lack of taking it serious that have led the world into moral decay?
 
I was just thinking you connected success with "atheism" and used New York as an example that atheims brings success. So I mentioned Dubai on the opposite side of the specter, sure you are free to choose there, but most people in the UAE are religious.



Cant have or can have? I assume "cant" is what you meant.. Sure they can, its a "free world", but promoting atheism and apostasy is kind of against general morals, its like promoting lying, stealing, backbiting and other unmoral activities. Is that something you want, or find ok? Would it be a good thing? Probably not.. isn't it more regular you would say that those who are very religious follows a BETTER moral codex? Yes, I know that Christians lie and backbite all the time, but those who are real Christians do not do that, those whom actually are religious.

I hate un-moral people, selfish backbiting liars who would kill for a bit of money. Thats a thing that I do not want in this world. Religion brings a moral code to a world without any moral. Moral code in my opinion is more important than "law".





Actually I am just comparing atheists to religious people of all kinds. I realize there are variations between the religious people, but would you not generally say that religious people have a stronger and better moral code than those who arent? Isnt it lack of religion or lack of taking it serious that have led the world into moral decay?

Do you know what atheism is Maximus? Atheism and morality are two separate things. Atheism does not advocate un-moral activities. Have you ever heard of the golden rule?

Yes, the Spanish Inquisitions, Church prosecutions of heretics, and the Crusades are all great examples of the higher moral code guiding men to make the virtuous choice.

Who are you to judge moral code? Are you saying that I am more likely to steal, murder, rape, lie, cheat and deceive just because I am an atheist? What a load of bullocks!

Maximus do you have anymore subjective thoughts on morality that completely ignore the empirical reality of what Atheism is, or the alternately the effectiveness of religion at making believers more moral.

So just to rephrase your premise: You are claiming that atheists like myself are more likely steal, murder, rape, lie, cheat and deceive compared to a believer. I await your well thought out and empirical statements to back up this assertion.
 
Last edited:
Do you know what atheism is Maximus? Atheism and morality are two separate things. Atheism does not advocate un-moral activities. Have you ever heard of the golden rule?

Yes, the Spanish Inquisitions, Church prosecutions of heretics, and the Crusades are all great examples of the higher moral code guiding men to make the virtuous choice.

Who are you to judge moral code? Are you saying that I am more likely to steal, murder, rape, lie, cheat and deceive just because I am an atheist? What a load of bullocks!

Maximus do you have anymore subjective thoughts on morality that completely ignore the empirical reality of what Atheism is, or the alternately the effectiveness of religion at making believers more moral.

So just to rephrase your premise: You are claiming that atheists like myself are more likely steal, murder, rape, lie, cheat and deceive compared to a believer. I await your well thought out and empirical statements to back up this assertion.

Ive never seen dedicated religious folks backbite others, they arent gay, nor do they lie or cheat. But all the people who are Christian only be heritage lie and backbite all the time, they constantly cheat, its their favorite activities.. As for atheists I would believe its about the same, possibly even worse, and a bigger chance of lying, backbiting, stealing, killing, cheating and other immoral behavior.

No offense, I am talking generally, not saying you specifically need to have low moral. Most gays are atheists or agnostics, yes?
 
We only seem to want to talk about "them" and what their doing.

We never want to talk about "us" and what we are doing, to "them".
So when are you converting to Islam? You're such an apologist, you might as well.
 
Doesn't matter what religion you are in, all followers of <insert religion here> want to convert all non-blievers. Weather they do it actively or not doesn't matter. They would still like it if you converted.

As far as Islam goes it depends on which sect your talking about.

You have the extremeists which would like to kill anyone that doesn't convert.

You have the semi-extremeists that don't care if you convert or not. But if you do convert then you are in it for life, because if you try to leave they will kill you.

Then you have those that would like you to convert but won't force you to and if you want to leave thats fine to.
 
So when are you converting to Islam? You're such an apologist, you might as well.

Moderator's Warning:
Knock off the trolling, American.
 
Ive never seen dedicated religious folks backbite others, they arent gay, nor do they lie or cheat. But all the people who are Christian only be heritage lie and backbite all the time, they constantly cheat, its their favorite activities.. As for atheists I would believe its about the same, possibly even worse, and a bigger chance of lying, backbiting, stealing, killing, cheating and other immoral behavior.

No offense, I am talking generally, not saying you specifically need to have low moral. Most gays are atheists or agnostics, yes?

I'm sorry Maximus, but when I ask for empirical evidence to back up your claims, I am not asking for more of your personal opinions. If you believe that religion promotes greater generosity, hospitality and empathy towards others, and that atheism reduces such moral traits, then I want to see empirical studies showing so.

Secondly, what has a persons sexuality got to do with the price of milk, let alone atheism? Are you trying to suggest that most of those 'out there' 'promiscuous' gays are mostly atheists? Have you got any empirical evidence to back this up? Thirdly, even if you did have evidence; what is wrong morally with homosexuals being 'out there' or having lots of casual sex? Or alternatively what is wrong with homosexuality? Because you seem to equate homosexuality with the same sort of moral problems as lying, cheating and stealing

So I yet again I await some sort of rational basis for the religion=greater morality theory.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry Maximus, but when I ask for empirical evidence to back up your claims, I am not asking for more of your personal opinions. If you believe that religion promotes greater generosity, hospitality and empathy towards others, and that atheism reduces such moral traits, then I want to see empirical studies showing so.

Secondly, what has a persons sexuality got to do with the price of milk, let alone atheism? Are you trying to suggest that most of those 'out there' 'promiscuous' gays are mostly atheists? Have you got any empirical evidence to back this up? Thirdly, even if you did have evidence; what is wrong morally with homosexuals being 'out there' or having lots of casual sex? Or alternatively what is wrong with homosexuality? Because you seem to equate homosexuality with the same sort of moral problems as lying, cheating and stealing

So I yet again I await some sort of rational basis for the religion=greater morality theory.

Is this a scientific discussion now? I was just exchanging opinions about religion and morality as related and asking if you didnt agree...

No offense really if you are gay, but gay sex is just about the dirtiest thing in the world, well ahead of anal sex between man and woman, which should also be illegal and discouraged. Poo and ****(and mouths connected with poo) just dont belong together.

To be brutally honest.


Religious folks follow a moral code which atheists not necessarily follows, even though some of them do.
 
The idea of a religion having a goal is absurd.
People have goals.
Authors can have a goal in writing a book. And people can develop goals. But the idea of Islam having a goal is retarded.. A book can not have goals.
 
Is this a scientific discussion now? I was just exchanging opinions about religion and morality as related and asking if you didnt agree...

No offense really if you are gay, but gay sex is just about the dirtiest thing in the world, well ahead of anal sex between man and woman, which should also be illegal and discouraged. Poo and ****(and mouths connected with poo) just dont belong together.

To be brutally honest.


Religious folks follow a moral code which atheists not necessarily follows, even though some of them do.

Sorry but your claims were in relation to reality. These claims were not just hypotheticals or metaphysical, you were suggesting that in the real world that certain people act in certain way due to whether or not they believe in god. The conversation is no longer theoretical, but rather aplied......

You made claims about observations you have seen in the real world. Once you cross that line, it is no longer opinion but rather you are making claims which can be asserted or refuted. It's that simple........

So please don't play 'I was only making opinion', when your observations where based on your experience. That is the physical and real, and not the metaphysical of theoretical.

Secondly, you have not explained why sodomy is the equivalent of cheating, lying or stealing. You have mentioned a phobia of things 'dirty', but you have failed to connect the dots by explaining why something is immoral when it is dirty.....

So Maximus, are all of the people that do dirty jobs immoral, because they have to deal with dirty situations? Or do those people provide society with a certain amount utility, while sodomy doesn't?

If you talk about experiences or what you have seen, we are no longer talking about the theoretical, but rather the real, natural and measurable world. So yes science does come into this, if you are making claims about this world as opposed to the theoretical or hypothetical; empirical forms of debate enter into the equation. Otherwise I might as well say that I believe the sky is green......

Lastly you confuse my empirical analysis of your argument with Freudian defensiveness... Why do you assume that anyone that challenges your un-substantiated claims about homosexuals is therefore gay?

Basically I have challenged your claims about homosexuality, and the best you can do is talk about dirtiness or suggest that I am gay....... I am still waiting for empirical defense of your claims about the real world as opposed to dodging of the issue.

But hay opinions are cool.... Did I tell you that moon cheese tends to make people nicer compared to non-moon cheese eating people?????? Ohhhhhh it's not a claim Maximus, its just an opinion.........

Do you understand the difference between personal and subjective, versus objective/causative/probative?

So why does atheism make people more immoral or less likely to have a moral code than a religious person?

And why is sodomy immoral because it is dirty? That is, why do you compare anal sex to cheating, theft, lying or greed?

I await your ENLIGHTENED answer.
 
I thought you were into Shamanism and such?

If you want to know my "religious" views, I do not really have any. I take a lot from Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, etc. on how to live life as a good human being. The sad thing is that I am more "christ-like" than most Christians I encounter.

So, in summary, I have no belief in a divine being. I believe that I am here and I will make the most of it. My mission is to have a positive impact on as many lives as possible. That's my heaven.
 
No offense really if you are gay, but gay sex is just about the dirtiest thing in the world, well ahead of anal sex between man and woman, which should also be illegal and discouraged. Poo and ****(and mouths connected with poo) just dont belong together.

To be brutally honest.

Again, this is just a ton of opinion. I disagree with you. If two consenting individuals want to participate in anal intercourse, then I have no problem with that. Making sexual acts illegal is a joke.

Religious folks follow a moral code which atheists not necessarily follows, even though some of them do.

Morality is a human construct. Anyone can obtain morals, religious affiliation is irrelevant.
 
The idea of a religion having a goal is absurd.
People have goals.
Authors can have a goal in writing a book. And people can develop goals. But the idea of Islam having a goal is retarded.. A book can not have goals.

You do know that Muslims are obliged, "to make the whole galaxy subservient to almighty Allah. Allah has created all living beings in order to obey him and worship him,” don't you?

Omar Bakri wants followers to convert aliens | The Sun |News
 
Back
Top Bottom