Topic: Why do people hate islam? - page 88. (Read 221072 times)

They are.

I didn't specify, but I agree, except that the Buddhists are not theistic.

While I agree with your argument that the theistic religions rely on violent, horrific imagery to promote the "good" of their god, in my opinion, the Abrahamic religions (especially Islam and Christianity) take it to an altogether different level. I am not denying that the Hindus and Buddhists have sometimes relied on violence to spread their faith, but such incidents were rare.

I'm implying, no, straight saying that what religions publicly teach and what they really believe are always at odds. Currently, Muslims appear to be the most violent religious group out there. I think anyone disputing that is not paying attention, regardless of what the more peaceable majority think. And yes, they are the majority, or the world WOULD be overrun. Or at the very least there would be global war. But the past history of the other two major religions I cited isn't any better, except that Muslims have rapid firing rifles and even bigger "toys" that were simply unavailable to the Jews and Christians before the world made them chill the fuck out.

Here in North America, it was less than 3 centuries ago that they were trying "witches" on the flimsiest of evidence and hanging them. Christian hypocrisy runs deep, and has for two millenia. The Romans once condemned Christians (and Rome was a tolerant society by nearly all accounts) as "stealers of children and poisoners of wells" of those who worshipped other gods. Why exactly Constantine converted and took the Christian Cross over that of the gods he previously worshipped is unknown, but from there until near the end of the Renaissance, Christianity spread very rapidly... by the sword.

I do not find it in any way surprising that Islam's adherents act the same way. Religion "forgives" terrible actions if one does them in the name of "god". It can convince otherwise good men that it's perfectly ok to murder, rape, and pillage so long as those heathen bastards refuse to convert. This still goes on in Africa as well, where the Christians and Muslims and Animists in and around the Congo have been killing, maiming, raping, and sometimes (usually in the case of Animists) eating members of the other group.

I grew up Christian, and it was very hard to overcome it. So, yes, there's a special black place in my heart for Christianity. But that doesn't mean I don't see what goes on with the other religions. Most, if not all, theistic religions rely on violent, horrific imagery to promote the "good" of their god. Whether they make that imagery real or not seems to very much depend on the age of the religion. This is stated as my own opinion, I have no hard data to back this. But anecdotally, and historically, the theory holds water.

You can find a lot of double speak within the Abrahamic religions. Their main aim is to gain new converts to their religion, by any means possible. They will blabber like "Love everyone as your neighbor", to gain followers among the pacifist population, while use genocide and warfare to forcibly convert the rest of the population which does not fall for it.

If you have never seen this docu then watch it very good watch
you will see how stupid humans from all backgrounds can be

plus you can see the power it gives these preachers TOTAL POWER
I can see where jesus and the like come from YOU MUST FEEL POWERFUL watch and you will know what i mean..
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rddXrtYWayc


ITS A MUST WATCH IF YOU NEVER SEEN BEFORE

Really?

I think you mean something a little bit different that what you imply.  Because what you imply is that the Jews, The Christians and the Muslims stone gays and rebellious teenagers about the same.

And it's the most curious thing, but here around where I live there certainly haven't been any stonings.  Ever.  Even back when it was populated by Indians.  There may have been a few tresspassing fools of warring tribes or white men who were staked out in the desert sun on top of ant hills.

But hey, there weren't fire ants in North America back then. 

Which religion is that? Christianity certainly don't, and Islam seems to mirror it. Judaism has always been pretty open about being exclusionary in WHO they love.

Now, they do all talk out both sides of their mouth... "Love everyone as your neighbor, but stone gays and rebellious teenagers" etc, etc, ad nauseam

Fact is, media, governments and us have given too much of attention to a particular religion. That is why few people are trying to exploit it by bending the actual facts about that religion. And those few people have not started to think that they can rule the world because of the attention given to them. So it is actually not the religion's fault. It is us and those few people who are making everybody think that religion is bad.

I'm just not so sure about any of this.  Because I have not had an answer on whether the Heaven of Islam allows me the bacon that I truly want.

That's stupid. Have you read the Bible? Everybody prayers are about forgiveness and gratitude. Your answer is biased as you have knowledge about islam religion only.


Hey! That works too...

 

That's stupid. Have you read the Quran? Everybody prayers are about forgiveness and gratitude. Your answer is biased as you have knowledge about Christian religion only.

I don't consider terrorists as a part of any religion. Religion teaches to love and not to kill.

I agree with your premise, and I can posit why. Every advance in science and technology puts one less pigeonhole for "god", by whatever name. I've been watching the same thing with fundamentalist christianity. Every time science comes up with some new discovery, that aspect of "god" gets pushed out of the argument, but everything not understood or poorly understood is "god's doing". The problem with this approach, of course, is that science don't care for the idea of "can't be known" and keeps pushing "god" further out of the picture by it's very existence.

I would guess that islamic leaders play the same games.

I'm starting to seriously think that some aspects of a fundamentalist Islamic oriented culture are diametrically opposed to fostering a modern technological society.  In other words, that Islam may chain people to dire poverty and ignorance.  Hell, the same might be true of any theocracy, but they are very rare excepting for Islamic cultures.  I understand Egypt is not a theocracy, but if 80% vote theocratically, it may approach it.

On a practical sense, a government must be secular to primarily look after the economic interests of it's citizens or subjects.

Check this:


Tourism employs millions of people in Egypt, especially in the Red Sea region and Luxor. If attacks such as this one continue, then all these people would be left jobless. Already the tourist sector in Egypt is under a lot of strain, as the number of tourists from Russia (one of the main destinations) has declined due to the depreciation of Ruble.

It is up to the Egyptians to decide whether they want to work in their hometowns earning decent salaries, or if they want to got to Saudi Arabia, to clean some Sheikh's toilet. Given the fact that the hardcore Islamists received almost two-third of the votes during the last parliamentary election, I don't think that the average Egyptian want to live a peaceful and prosperous life.

Egypt has even a car making capacity and, with cars & public transportation available there, we can expect terrorists maybe able to strike beyond the Sinai. In fact Egyptian islamists already stroke tourist sites at Luxor, in 1997.

According to the Egyptian police sources and the local media, the perpetrators were from the terrorist organization Ansar Bait al-Maqdis. These people had recently pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and its so called "Caliph", Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. However, the Ansar Bait al-Maqdis is mostly active in the Sinai region, which is quite far away from Luxor.

No.  It is a "clue".  As stated earlier - I will most assuredly post the results of the official investigation.

Do we see history repeating itself.  The 1997 Luxor massacre is what cemented support for Hosni Mubarak.

Is this "evidence"?