Islam is the religion of Love <3
Was maybe, but not any more. It's been snatched away from under your nose.
ISIS have changed it into the new Islam which is now firmly in charge. Until the old Islam lot take back control, they are irrelevant.
Topic: Why do islam hates people? - page 104. (Read 437405 times)
Was maybe, but not any more. It's been snatched away from under your nose.
ISIS have changed it into the new Islam which is now firmly in charge. Until the old Islam lot take back control, they are irrelevant.
Yes ISIS is not muslim...
If muslim did wrong then dnt say that islam is wrong or islam hate people...
Islam is perfect muslims are not...and muslims love humanity......If you are non muslim does matter we love you Our Prophet SAW told us that love the humans whethr they are muslim or non muslims....
Islam is the religion of Love <3
If muslim did wrong then dnt say that islam is wrong or islam hate people...
Islam is perfect muslims are not...and muslims love humanity......If you are non muslim does matter we love you Our Prophet SAW told us that love the humans whethr they are muslim or non muslims....
Islam is the religion of Love <3
Actually I have some good moslem friends too. But, if you say ISIS is not moslem, so what will moslem people do to ISIS since they has ruined everything while shouting name of their god and stated that they were ordered by god to make islam country. Hope you can make it clear
Yes ISIS is not muslim...
If muslim did wrong then dnt say that islam is wrong or islam hate people...
Islam is perfect muslims are not...and muslims love humanity......If you are non muslim does matter we love you Our Prophet SAW told us that love the humans whethr they are muslim or non muslims....
Islam is the religion of Love <3
If muslim did wrong then dnt say that islam is wrong or islam hate people...
Islam is perfect muslims are not...and muslims love humanity......If you are non muslim does matter we love you Our Prophet SAW told us that love the humans whethr they are muslim or non muslims....
Islam is the religion of Love <3
Islam love people not hate people ...
Your title is totally wrong...
Islam promotes Love , Brotherhood, Prosperity....
Our Prophet Muhammad SAW give us a lesson of love and humanity and He SAW proved this by his actions..
Islam is the religion of Peace.....Islam give right to non-muslim...
If u read u will know what Islam Is and what Islam done for you....
Thanks
Your title is totally wrong...
Islam promotes Love , Brotherhood, Prosperity....
Our Prophet Muhammad SAW give us a lesson of love and humanity and He SAW proved this by his actions..
Islam is the religion of Peace.....Islam give right to non-muslim...
If u read u will know what Islam Is and what Islam done for you....
Thanks
I'm agree with you, i'm not muslim but i know muslim not hate people. i have some friend religion mushlim, they nicely people,they friendly and care. maybe some people said islam hate people because they see ISIS. but ISIS not mushlim
Islam love people not hate people ...
Your title is totally wrong...
Islam promotes Love , Brotherhood, Prosperity....
Our Prophet Muhammad SAW give us a lesson of love and humanity and He SAW proved this by his actions..
Islam is the religion of Peace.....Islam give right to non-muslim...
If u read u will know what Islam Is and what Islam done for you....
Thanks
Your title is totally wrong...
Islam promotes Love , Brotherhood, Prosperity....
Our Prophet Muhammad SAW give us a lesson of love and humanity and He SAW proved this by his actions..
Islam is the religion of Peace.....Islam give right to non-muslim...
If u read u will know what Islam Is and what Islam done for you....
Thanks
i think not and I'm sure there are nice muslims, but they did probably still be nice and do nice things
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
Some of the stories are just fabrication or speculation, yet, those are taken as facts by medias and when the truth is discovered, medias bury those truths.
Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11
WASHINGTON — In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.
But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.
The slaying of nine African-Americans in a Charleston church last week, with an avowed white supremacist charged with their murders, was a particularly savage case.
But it is only the latest in a string of lethal attacks by people espousing racial hatred, hostility to government and theories such as those of the “sovereign citizen” movement, which denies the legitimacy of most statutory law. The assaults have taken the lives of police officers, members of racial or religious minorities and random civilians.
Non-Muslim extremists have carried out 19 such attacks since Sept. 11, according to the latest count, compiled by David Sterman, a New America program associate, and overseen by Peter Bergen, a terrorism expert. By comparison, seven lethal attacks by Islamic militants have taken place in the same period.
If such numbers are new to the public, they are familiar to police officers. A survey to be published this week asked 382 police and sheriff’s departments nationwide to rank the three biggest threats from violent extremism in their jurisdiction. About 74 percent listed antigovernment violence, while 39 percent listed “Al Qaeda-inspired” violence, according to the researchers, Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina and David Schanzer of Duke University.
“Law enforcement agencies around the country have told us the threat from Muslim extremists is not as great as the threat from right-wing extremists,” said Dr. Kurzman, whose study is to be published by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security and the Police Executive Research Forum.
John G. Horgan, who studies terrorism at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, said the mismatch between public perceptions and actual cases had become steadily more obvious to scholars.
“There’s an acceptance now of the idea that the threat from jihadi terrorism in the United States has been overblown,” Dr. Horgan said. “And there’s a belief that the threat of right-wing, antigovernment violence has been underestimated.”
Counting terrorism cases is a subjective enterprise, relying on shifting definitions and judgment calls.
If terrorism is defined as ideological violence, for instance, should an attacker who has merely ranted about religion, politics or race be considered a terrorist? A man in Chapel Hill, N.C., who was charged with fatally shooting three young Muslim neighbors had posted angry critiques of religion, but he also had a history of outbursts over parking issues. (New America does not include this attack in its count.)
Likewise, what about mass killings in which no ideological motive is evident, such as those at a Colorado movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school in 2012? The criteria used by New America and most other research groups exclude such attacks, which have cost more lives than those clearly tied to ideology.
Some killings by non-Muslims that most experts would categorize as terrorism have drawn only fleeting news media coverage, never jelling in the public memory. But to revisit some of the episodes is to wonder why.
In 2012, a neo-Nazi named Wade Michael Page entered a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and opened fire, killing six people and seriously wounding three others. Mr. Page, who died at the scene, was a member of a white supremacist group called the Northern Hammerskins.
In another case, in June 2014, Jerad and Amanda Miller, a married couple with radical antigovernment views, entered a Las Vegas pizza restaurant and fatally shot two police officers who were eating lunch. On the bodies, they left a swastika, a flag inscribed with the slogan “Don’t tread on me” and a note saying, “This is the start of the revolution.” Then they killed a third person in a nearby Walmart.
And, as in the case of jihadist plots, there have been sobering close calls. In November 2014 in Austin, Tex., a man named Larry McQuilliams fired more than 100 rounds at government buildings that included the Police Headquarters and the Mexican Consulate. Remarkably, his shooting spree hit no one, and he was killed by an officer before he could try to detonate propane cylinders he drove to the scene.
Some Muslim advocates complain that when the perpetrator of an attack is not Muslim, news media commentators quickly focus on the question of mental illness. “With non-Muslims, the media bends over backward to identify some psychological traits that may have pushed them over the edge,” said Abdul Cader Asmal, a retired physician and a longtime spokesman for Muslims in Boston. “Whereas if it’s a Muslim, the assumption is that they must have done it because of their religion.”
On several occasions since President Obama took office, efforts by government agencies to conduct research on right-wing extremism have run into resistance from Republicans, who suspected an attempt to smear conservatives.
A 2009 report by the Department of Homeland Security, which warned that an ailing economy and the election of the first black president might prompt a violent reaction from white supremacists, was withdrawn in the face of conservative criticism. Its main author, Daryl Johnson, later accused the department of “gutting” its staffing for such research.
William Braniff, the executive director of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland, said the outsize fear of jihadist violence reflected memories of Sept. 11, the daunting scale of sectarian conflict overseas and wariness of a strain of Islam that seems alien to many Americans.
“We understand white supremacists,” he said. “We don’t really feel like we understand Al Qaeda, which seems too complex and foreign to grasp.”
The contentious question of biased perceptions of terrorist threats dates back at least two decades, to the truck bombing that tore apart the federal building in Oklahoma City in April 1995. Some early news media speculation about the attack assumed that it had been carried out by Muslim militants. The arrest of Timothy J. McVeigh, an antigovernment extremist, quickly put an end to such theories.
The bombing, which killed 168 people, including 19 children, remains the second-deadliest terrorist attack in American history, though its toll was dwarfed by the roughly 3,000 killed on Sept 11.
“If there’s one lesson we seem to have forgotten 20 years after Oklahoma City, it’s that extremist violence comes in all shapes and sizes,” said Dr. Horgan, the University of Massachusetts scholar. “And very often, it comes from someplace you’re least suspecting.”
http://nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html
Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11
WASHINGTON — In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.
But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.
The slaying of nine African-Americans in a Charleston church last week, with an avowed white supremacist charged with their murders, was a particularly savage case.
But it is only the latest in a string of lethal attacks by people espousing racial hatred, hostility to government and theories such as those of the “sovereign citizen” movement, which denies the legitimacy of most statutory law. The assaults have taken the lives of police officers, members of racial or religious minorities and random civilians.
Non-Muslim extremists have carried out 19 such attacks since Sept. 11, according to the latest count, compiled by David Sterman, a New America program associate, and overseen by Peter Bergen, a terrorism expert. By comparison, seven lethal attacks by Islamic militants have taken place in the same period.
If such numbers are new to the public, they are familiar to police officers. A survey to be published this week asked 382 police and sheriff’s departments nationwide to rank the three biggest threats from violent extremism in their jurisdiction. About 74 percent listed antigovernment violence, while 39 percent listed “Al Qaeda-inspired” violence, according to the researchers, Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina and David Schanzer of Duke University.
“Law enforcement agencies around the country have told us the threat from Muslim extremists is not as great as the threat from right-wing extremists,” said Dr. Kurzman, whose study is to be published by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security and the Police Executive Research Forum.
John G. Horgan, who studies terrorism at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, said the mismatch between public perceptions and actual cases had become steadily more obvious to scholars.
“There’s an acceptance now of the idea that the threat from jihadi terrorism in the United States has been overblown,” Dr. Horgan said. “And there’s a belief that the threat of right-wing, antigovernment violence has been underestimated.”
Counting terrorism cases is a subjective enterprise, relying on shifting definitions and judgment calls.
If terrorism is defined as ideological violence, for instance, should an attacker who has merely ranted about religion, politics or race be considered a terrorist? A man in Chapel Hill, N.C., who was charged with fatally shooting three young Muslim neighbors had posted angry critiques of religion, but he also had a history of outbursts over parking issues. (New America does not include this attack in its count.)
Likewise, what about mass killings in which no ideological motive is evident, such as those at a Colorado movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school in 2012? The criteria used by New America and most other research groups exclude such attacks, which have cost more lives than those clearly tied to ideology.
Some killings by non-Muslims that most experts would categorize as terrorism have drawn only fleeting news media coverage, never jelling in the public memory. But to revisit some of the episodes is to wonder why.
In 2012, a neo-Nazi named Wade Michael Page entered a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and opened fire, killing six people and seriously wounding three others. Mr. Page, who died at the scene, was a member of a white supremacist group called the Northern Hammerskins.
In another case, in June 2014, Jerad and Amanda Miller, a married couple with radical antigovernment views, entered a Las Vegas pizza restaurant and fatally shot two police officers who were eating lunch. On the bodies, they left a swastika, a flag inscribed with the slogan “Don’t tread on me” and a note saying, “This is the start of the revolution.” Then they killed a third person in a nearby Walmart.
And, as in the case of jihadist plots, there have been sobering close calls. In November 2014 in Austin, Tex., a man named Larry McQuilliams fired more than 100 rounds at government buildings that included the Police Headquarters and the Mexican Consulate. Remarkably, his shooting spree hit no one, and he was killed by an officer before he could try to detonate propane cylinders he drove to the scene.
Some Muslim advocates complain that when the perpetrator of an attack is not Muslim, news media commentators quickly focus on the question of mental illness. “With non-Muslims, the media bends over backward to identify some psychological traits that may have pushed them over the edge,” said Abdul Cader Asmal, a retired physician and a longtime spokesman for Muslims in Boston. “Whereas if it’s a Muslim, the assumption is that they must have done it because of their religion.”
On several occasions since President Obama took office, efforts by government agencies to conduct research on right-wing extremism have run into resistance from Republicans, who suspected an attempt to smear conservatives.
A 2009 report by the Department of Homeland Security, which warned that an ailing economy and the election of the first black president might prompt a violent reaction from white supremacists, was withdrawn in the face of conservative criticism. Its main author, Daryl Johnson, later accused the department of “gutting” its staffing for such research.
William Braniff, the executive director of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland, said the outsize fear of jihadist violence reflected memories of Sept. 11, the daunting scale of sectarian conflict overseas and wariness of a strain of Islam that seems alien to many Americans.
“We understand white supremacists,” he said. “We don’t really feel like we understand Al Qaeda, which seems too complex and foreign to grasp.”
The contentious question of biased perceptions of terrorist threats dates back at least two decades, to the truck bombing that tore apart the federal building in Oklahoma City in April 1995. Some early news media speculation about the attack assumed that it had been carried out by Muslim militants. The arrest of Timothy J. McVeigh, an antigovernment extremist, quickly put an end to such theories.
The bombing, which killed 168 people, including 19 children, remains the second-deadliest terrorist attack in American history, though its toll was dwarfed by the roughly 3,000 killed on Sept 11.
“If there’s one lesson we seem to have forgotten 20 years after Oklahoma City, it’s that extremist violence comes in all shapes and sizes,” said Dr. Horgan, the University of Massachusetts scholar. “And very often, it comes from someplace you’re least suspecting.”
http://nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html
POLL: One-in-Three Muslim-Americans Support Violence Against Those Who Insult the Prophet
12. “I believe that violence against those that insult the prophet Muhammad, the Qur’an, or Islamic
faith is sometimes acceptable.”
29% TOTAL AGREE (NET)
16% STRONGLY AGREE
13% SOMEWHAT AGREE
61% TOTAL DISAGREE (NET)
14% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
47% STRONGLY DISAGREE
10% DO NOT KNOW/CANNOT JUDGE
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150612-CSP-Polling-Company-Nationwide-Online-Survey-of-Muslims-Topline-Poll-Data.pdf
The 29+16+10 group versus the 61+47+14 group.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfmywzjdtRM
Facts people. Just facts.
Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math.
False association fallacy.
That they were Muslim did not lend anything to mathematical or scientific advancement. Application of logic and the scientific method did that. Being Muslim is what they did when they weren't using logic or the scientific method.
Theism isn't knowledge.
Turing was homosexual, and didn't hide it. Maybe people of that era didn't like it - maybe they put up with it until he'd completed his work. Those things can be debated.
What is not debatable is that in a Muslim society, he would not have been allowed to do his creative work and would likely have been killed. If Britain had been Muslim, the Germans would have won the war.
This is not a "hate Islam" argument but a refutation of your assertion of Great Math and Great Science Advances in Islam. To have these great advances requires tolerance and appreciation for a great many odd types of people (which math wizards are often pretty odd). It requires the 50% of humans known as "women" to be allowed and encouraged to go into science and math. If a culture does not, then it will be retarded.
If not for Turing (unless of course his ideas were discovered later by someone else) we would not be conversing on these "computers". There would be no "bitcointalk.org" because there would be no bitcoin because of a lack of crypto in electronic usages.
So, Greg. You want to stand by your comments of your post of 6:38?
I am curious.
I believe his internet connection went dark just after your post. No new posts from him anywhere...
Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math.
False association fallacy.
That they were Muslim did not lend anything to mathematical or scientific advancement. Application of logic and the scientific method did that. Being Muslim is what they did when they weren't using logic or the scientific method.
Theism isn't knowledge.
Turing was homosexual, and didn't hide it. Maybe people of that era didn't like it - maybe they put up with it until he'd completed his work. Those things can be debated.
What is not debatable is that in a Muslim society, he would not have been allowed to do his creative work and would likely have been killed. If Britain had been Muslim, the Germans would have won the war.
This is not a "hate Islam" argument but a refutation of your assertion of Great Math and Great Science Advances in Islam. To have these great advances requires tolerance and appreciation for a great many odd types of people (which math wizards are often pretty odd). It requires the 50% of humans known as "women" to be allowed and encouraged to go into science and math. If a culture does not, then it will be retarded.
If not for Turing (unless of course his ideas were discovered later by someone else) we would not be conversing on these "computers". There would be no "bitcointalk.org" because there would be no bitcoin because of a lack of crypto in electronic usages.
So, Greg. You want to stand by your comments of your post of 6:38?
I am curious.
I don't understand why people hate Islam. I've watched documentaries on the history of Islam, and I see nothing but good things. Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math. They translated all the old Greek texts and shared them. Are we to forget how Islam connected the western world to the far eastern world? When Muhammad (pbuh) conquered lands, he allowed Christians and Jews to still follow their religions. Saladin allowed people of different religions to follow them without the threat of death. When Church of the Holy Sepulchre was burned down, Muslims allowed it to be rebuilt!
So do people hate Islam because they are just completely uneducated? Would any educated person still hate Islam since they know the truth about what happened since the 7th century?
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100704133940AAsbLTs
These are the words of a non Muslim
How you can say Islam hates people......Islam is a religion of Peace and Prosperity....
So do people hate Islam because they are just completely uneducated? Would any educated person still hate Islam since they know the truth about what happened since the 7th century?
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100704133940AAsbLTs
These are the words of a non Muslim
How you can say Islam hates people......Islam is a religion of Peace and Prosperity....
Is mohamed your prophet? If he is then I understand your need to place a (pbuh) after the name. But you say you are not so why the need to say "peace be upon him"? Have you ever wrote or say Jesus (pbuh) or Buddha (pbuh)? Do you say it out of respect... Or fear?
Also, yes he was a conqueror... Does that mean slaughtering men, women and children then build Peace and Prosperity on top of whatever is left standing or alive?
Who burned down that church and why a need to rebuild it?
Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math.
False association fallacy.
That they were Muslim did not lend anything to mathematical or scientific advancement. Application of logic and the scientific method did that. Being Muslim is what they did when they weren't using logic or the scientific method.
Theism isn't knowledge.
For once I more or less agree.
People can be smart at times. Arabs can be smart at times. Anyone can be peaceful among his own people. It doesn't have anything to do with Islam or other religion for people to be smart and peaceful at times.
The thing about Islam is, because of the actual wording of Islamic holy writings, Muslims have been aggressively non-peaceful at times. Sure, there is much peace among brother Muslims. But there is much aggressive war against those of other religions at times. The Islamic holy writings are consistent about forcing non-Muslims to become Muslims, even if peace is shown to non-Muslims at times.
So, who does Islam hate?
Islam hates Muslims because it would keep them making war to their own peril, as evidenced by Islamic holy writings.
Islam inside Muslims hates non-Muslims who do not convert, by causing the Muslims to hate the non-Muslims, through the instructions to Muslims in Islamic holy writings, as evidenced by the history of Islamic peoples.
Thus, Islam hates all people.
Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math.
False association fallacy.
That they were Muslim did not lend anything to mathematical or scientific advancement. Application of logic and the scientific method did that. Being Muslim is what they did when they weren't using logic or the scientific method.
Theism isn't knowledge.
I don't understand why people hate Islam. I've watched documentaries on the history of Islam, and I see nothing but good things. Muslims have done such great things for the world in the areas of science and math. They translated all the old Greek texts and shared them. Are we to forget how Islam connected the western world to the far eastern world? When Muhammad (pbuh) conquered lands, he allowed Christians and Jews to still follow their religions. Saladin allowed people of different religions to follow them without the threat of death. When Church of the Holy Sepulchre was burned down, Muslims allowed it to be rebuilt!
So do people hate Islam because they are just completely uneducated? Would any educated person still hate Islam since they know the truth about what happened since the 7th century?
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100704133940AAsbLTs
These are the words of a non Muslim
How you can say Islam hates people......Islam is a religion of Peace and Prosperity....
So do people hate Islam because they are just completely uneducated? Would any educated person still hate Islam since they know the truth about what happened since the 7th century?
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100704133940AAsbLTs
These are the words of a non Muslim
How you can say Islam hates people......Islam is a religion of Peace and Prosperity....
Fuck organized religion.
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe. I would appreciate if you avoid using abusive language irrespective of any religion. Why?
What's so special about willful ignorance that we can't express our disdain for the poison and madness it spreads through our species?
Ever heard of special-pleading fallacy? There's nothing special about playing pretend *real* hard.
Fuck organised religion.
Yeah. Why?
After all, the organized religions of atheism, agnosticism, and modern science promote ignorance.
Fuck organized religion.
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe. I would appreciate if you avoid using abusive language irrespective of any religion. Why?
What's so special about willful ignorance that we can't express our disdain for the poison and madness it spreads through our species?
Ever heard of special-pleading fallacy? There's nothing special about playing pretend *real* hard.
Fuck organised religion.
Fuck organized religion.
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe. I would appreciate if you avoid using abusive language irrespective of any religion. Hmm....You might appreciate that, but it aint' gonna happen. Not on an unmoderated Internet forum.
Also keep in mind that some people may have very, very good reasons to insult organized religion.
Further, "religion" is much, much more than...
an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe.
I wonder how many people convert to Christianity for the same reason... Does anyone have a link for statistics somewhere?
May be this'll help:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_religion
Quote
The US Department of State estimates that Protestants in Vietnam may have grown by 600% over the last decade. In Nigeria, the percentage of Christians has grown from 21.4% in 1953 to 50.8% in 2010. In South Korea, Christianity has grown from 20.7% in 1985 to 29.3% in 2010.
Millions of people convert to Christianity every year, mostly in Asia and Africa. According to Wiki, 3 million people convert to Christianity every year, compared to 665,000 for Islam. On the other hand, old-age religions such as Hinduism and Shintoism are losing adherents to Christianity and Islam (Hinduism alone is losing some 660,000 people per year).
Fuck organized religion.
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe. I would appreciate if you avoid using abusive language irrespective of any religion. Any religion or a specific one? I personally do not curse on bitcointalk.org. But I know I am not an undercover mutaween either...
Jump to: