• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Atheist VS anti Christian

RAMOSS said:
I suspect it is the 'open atheists'. I know a number of people who are 'in the closet' that are atheists that are from the south, and in highly conservative areas. I suspect that the ones 'in the closet' are Republican or conservatives because of their social situation.
Click to expand...

You're probably right, but as a sidenote it always irked me when atheists compare the suppression of their philosophy with the suppression of someone's identity. How often do they think about atheism, once or twice a day? How often does opposition to it impact their life? Rarely
 
Chagos said:
Let me guess, you're one of that faction that thinks if you have the last word, you win.

I've responded to the OP, I've answered your subsequent question (better still, you've actually answered it yourself) and if you now want to keep responding just so as to have the last word, be my guest and enjoy your "victory". :roll:
Click to expand...
You are wrong, you answered my question with a question, when asked again, you insult. Where did I make a false equivalency? You claimed you answered it, what post #?

Let me guess, you are one of those persons, how boring, not to mention predictable.
 
Slingshot Bob said:
Is it just me or has anyone noticed that some "Atheist" tend to denigrate Christianity but defend Islam?
Click to expand...
Honestly, no. Do you have any specific examples? It’s worth noting that challenging specific actions by Christians isn’t necessarily denigrating Christianity and defending Muslims when they’re generically tarred with the same brush as extremists isn’t defending Islam.

Slingshot Bob said:
A true atheist would not defend either religion, ergo, anti Christian.
Click to expand...
A “true atheist” simple doesn’t believe in any god or gods. Nothing about atheism implies or requires either attacking or defending any religion. Most atheists are content for religious people to get on with their lives (as long as they’re not harming anyone) and don’t make any noise about it at all (which means you’ll never notice them as atheist at all of course).
 
HonestJoe said:
Honestly, no. Do you have any specific examples? It’s worth noting that challenging specific actions by Christians isn’t necessarily denigrating Christianity and defending Muslims when they’re generically tarred with the same brush as extremists isn’t defending Islam.

A “true atheist” simple doesn’t believe in any god or gods. Nothing about atheism implies or requires either attacking or defending any religion. Most atheists are content for religious people to get on with their lives (as long as they’re not harming anyone) and don’t make any noise about it at all (which means you’ll never notice them as atheist at all of course).
Click to expand...
Specific examples? Not here, that I have seen yet, I posted quite a bit on another forum and several posters took every opportunity to ridicule and mock Christian beliefs, but never Islam.

Perhaps Atheist is the wrong word, I should have used Anti-theist.
 
Slingshot Bob said:
Specific examples? Not here, that I have seen yet, I posted quite a bit on another forum and several posters took every opportunity to ridicule and mock Christian beliefs, but never Islam.

Perhaps Atheist is the wrong word, I should have used Anti-theist.
Click to expand...
Yes, you should have. :) Anti-theists are fairly ignorant and blinkered in general so expecting any kind of consistency from them is unrealistic.

I suspect you’ll have been encountering westerners, mostly Americans, meaning 99% of the religious activity they’ll have encountered in their lives will have been Christian so that will naturally be the focus of their attentions and objections. Also, never mentioning Islam is very different to defending Islam as you said in your OP. The former can (and mostly will) be based on simple ignorance and self-interest, only the latter would require active differentiation.
 
HonestJoe said:
Honestly, no. Do you have any specific examples? It’s worth noting that challenging specific actions by Christians isn’t necessarily denigrating Christianity and defending Muslims when they’re generically tarred with the same brush as extremists isn’t defending Islam.
Click to expand...

The biggest challenge in discussing whether or not the teachings of Islam encourage and promote militant jihad is that people (many on this forum) refuse to look at the subject matter and the evidence alone. They want to equate doing so with profiling all 1.5 billion people. They refuse to discuss the "ism" as a stand-alone subject, although I agree there is a fine line between defining the "ism", and making a blanket assumption about its followers.

A “true atheist” simple doesn’t believe in any god or gods. Nothing about atheism implies or requires either attacking or defending any religion. Most atheists are content for religious people to get on with their lives (as long as they’re not harming anyone) and don’t make any noise about it at all (which means you’ll never notice them as atheist at all of course).
Click to expand...

And there you have it. Have you noticed any threads criticizing Shintoism? Neither have I. That's because they're not killing anyone (that I know of). Because I lived in a mostly Muslim country and met many fine people who are Muslim, I decided to read the Qur'an after 9/11 so I could defend Islam with first-hand knowledge of what it teaches. Unfortunately, those good intentions didn't survive the first couple of pages of Sura 2. I was gob-smacked at "God's" extremely negative view of infidels. I persisted and read the whole thing (I can read a little Arabic, but it's a painful process). It only got worse. And that doesn't even count the hadiths. The Muslims who kill, and those who support them (and how can we know the heart of each person?) get their encouragement and marching orders from Islamic literature and from the example set by Mohamed and the first Muslims. Remember, they created an empire within 100 years of Mohamed's death. Does this automatically indict all Muslims? The answer to that has to be no. We can't allow ourselves to go there, but neither can we ignore the source of jihad.
 
stevecanuck said:
The biggest challenge in discussing whether or not the teachings of Islam encourage and promote militant jihad is that people (many on this forum) refuse to look at the subject matter and the evidence alone. They want to equate doing so with profiling all 1.5 billion people. They refuse to discuss the "ism" as a stand-alone subject, although I agree there is a fine line between defining the "ism", and making a blanket assumption about its followers.
Click to expand...

The problem is, it's the fanatics and the radicals who are often following the letter of the law when it comes to their religion. All Muslims get their ideas from the same sources. The more liberal they become in their theology, the more of their holy books that they ignore and find a way to rationalize their way around. It's why there are so many different denominations and sects of religion, because different people want different things and ignore different parts. Then they pretend that everyone else is wrong and only they are right. I think we have every right to look at a religion like Islam, particularly Islam as it exists in the Middle East and other Muslim-majority countries, and be very nervous about it. They are often the people who take what it says in the Qur'an and the Suras literally. Unfortunately, we're also finding that they can often talk more moderate Muslims into the same kind of religious craziness they have. That potentially makes all Muslims walking time bombs.

And there you have it. Have you noticed any threads criticizing Shintoism? Neither have I. That's because they're not killing anyone (that I know of). Because I lived in a mostly Muslim country and met many fine people who are Muslim, I decided to read the Qur'an after 9/11 so I could defend Islam with first-hand knowledge of what it teaches. Unfortunately, those good intentions didn't survive the first couple of pages of Sura 2. I was gob-smacked at "God's" extremely negative view of infidels. I persisted and read the whole thing (I can read a little Arabic, but it's a painful process). It only got worse. And that doesn't even count the hadiths. The Muslims who kill, and those who support them (and how can we know the heart of each person?) get their encouragement and marching orders from Islamic literature and from the example set by Mohamed and the first Muslims. Remember, they created an empire within 100 years of Mohamed's death. Does this automatically indict all Muslims? The answer to that has to be no. We can't allow ourselves to go there, but neither can we ignore the source of jihad.
Click to expand...

There are a few cases of Shinto violence, what you really ought to look at is Jainism. They're not violent at all. However, you are correct, the vast majority of religious books are very bloody because they were often written back when mankind was very bloody. They are just a product of their people, not some imaginary gods. What's happened in the western world is that secular society has largely neutered religion. It has told the religious, who have demonstrably been violent and hold potentially violent beliefs, that it simply isn't allowed. Over the generations, those now-neutered religious people have found a way to ignore the parts that they are no longer allowed to do, to the point that a lot of them no longer even remember that their religion was ever any different. And then they play the victim card whenever someone points out what their religion used to be like and potentially could be like again. Sorry, I don't buy it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom