Religion was of some benefit before the invention of the scientific method - all the learning was centralized and managed by the Church (I am speaking of Christianity here. In Islam, it was mosques that serves as both repositories of knowledge and centers of learning).
Now the only purpose religion can serve is tranquilization of unruly minds. Mao (cursed be his memory) was right when he said “religion is opium for the masses”. So much easier to say “inshallah” when forced with a problem than to actually seek a resolution…
Moreover, the religious monopoly on morality is probably causing more harm than anything. Even while the basics of philosophy (”love of knowledge”) are no longer taught in our houses of learning - Ethics and Logic, which are the cornerstones of Western Civilization - the religious alternative has discredited itself time and time again. The Inquisition, the Crusades, the trial of Galileo, the witch-burning, the passivity of Vatican in the face of the Holocaust - all of these prove that Christian morality has failed as a concept. I am not even talking about Islam, with its inherent contradictions, or Judaism with its violent past.
No, mate, faith may bring a false sense of peace and that warm glow of irresponsibility (because Big Daddy’s the Ultimate Authority); it will not, however, solve any problems (unless your problems are unruly slaves that need to be reconciled with their grim fates).
Raccoon, me support science big time but I still believe that we shouldn’t completely let go of God. God is real and He does exist. =)
Islam and science can go hand in hand. I don’t know about Christianity’s concept of science but I support the pope’s main message. God shouldn’t be erased and replaced with science because again…
LOL, here I am once again trying to tackle an unreasonable subject with reason
The reality of divinity (or the lack thereof) is irrelevant to the issue. We’re talking about religion here, not belief in divinity: the latter is a personal, while the former is an institutional, issue.
As I have said, religion is an institution. Moreover, it is an extremely powerful one - a system of rigid control. Basically, it’s a tyrrany in all but name: slavery by consent. What the new Pope demands (as all Popes did) is more power for the Church: more churchgoers mean more money and influence for Vatican.
BTW, I can’t believe you have put Twosret’s vile propaganda blog in “opinions that matter”… unless you mean opinions that matter for perpetuation of violence and incitement to murder (I know it’s harsh, but I’m calling it as it is).
Raccoon, the opinion there DOES matter. Yes it is very anti-Israeli but it shows the kind of some opinions coming out from the American Left. On the same list, you’ve got Israpundit who’s proud opener is “THERE IS ONLY A MILITARY SOLUTION”. What do you think of that?
His blog represents the opinion of many who believe his views and is very opposing to Twosret’s but to me it still matters.
In my daily readings, I try and read diverse blogs from the far Left to the far Right. All what’s said in them matters because it enables me to get a good understanding of how different people perceive different things in their own way eg: the recent war Israel-Lebanon war. It was damn interesting reading the strongly opposing views on all the different sides. Each blog on that list has its own unique views and I feel their opinions do matter because they represent people out there with similar views too.
Twosret’s blog isn’t really that bad. There are by far much worse and inciting stuff out there on the internet dude.
BTW I don’t really think anybody reading it will actually feel the need to murder somebody or strap a bomb belt. Saying that is a little too extreme don’t you think?
Dude, that’s “soft bigotry of low expectations”. I respect Twosret - I know her to be an intelligent and well-educated woman. Accordingly, when she writes or promotes demonization of and libel against Israelis and Jews (under the name of a Muslim mass murderer who conquered Israel and slaughtered countless innocents), I judge her harshly.
Yes, there are worse pits of depravity online and offline. So what? The fact that Nazis had been slaughtering Jews doesn’t make KKK anti-semites good. The fact that Bin-Laden is a bigger monster than Nasrallah doesn’t absolve the latter of guilt.
And any irrational demonization is adding to the hatred. Hatred invariably breeds violence. By itself that blog is the pathetic rantings of a hate-filled person; but when viewed in the larger tapestry of demonization, it’s part of a culture of death. Much the same way the firing pin of a gun is unlikely to kill anyone… but when it’s part of an assembled gun, it’s deadly. D’you see what I’m getting at?
Al-Jazeera is another part of the same gun… so is Al-Manar… virtually all Arab/Islamic media, education, and culturally influential events… adding up to Jihad manuals, religious sermons which demonize Infidels and incite to murder against them…
Together, they kill thousands every year. Thousands, if not millions, of children are being brainwashed by them to hate and kill and die. Which is why I say that every additional lie, every additional spin, every additional bit of hatred and demonization are another dead human, most likely a child.
I don’t read Israpundit (I find the format uncomfortable, to be frank) - but if he doesn’t demonize and doesn’t preach hatred, he’s not inciting to murder. And about a military solution… you’re for a military solution (by AU) in Sudan, are you not? War is always hell; but sometimes they are needed to prevent a worse hell.
“a Muslim mass murderer who conquered Israel and slaughtered countless innocents”
I don’t know about that. In “our” history he’s portrayed much differently than “your” history…
I do however understand what you’re trying to say but at the end of the day, the opinion there does matter because it is representitive of many people who feel and view the conflict in the same light. It’s not like am endorsing it or the Atheist Jew for example. I just think it’s important to read different relevant perspectives.
Sallah al-Din was no different from Attila, Chenghis Khan, Barbarossa, Alexander, or Napoleon - a brutal invader and a mass murderer. More relevantly, he has conquered what is now Israel, initiating a mass slaughter of Jews (even though his personal physician was a very famous Jew). Sure, he brought some semblance of law (as a Kurd, he was a highly civilized man) into lawless lands; he was renowned for his charity and mercy; he was greatly respected as both a general and a politician… but this does not absolve his acts of wanton slaughter. Admittedly, if I had to choose whom I’d rather be conquered from the aforementioned people, I’d probably go for Sallah al-Din
And while I certainly understand your desire to represent as many relevant POVs as possible, I still think that promoting a hate propaganda site is… irresponsible, as would be promoting a Hizballah or Al-Qaeda site.
But I shall stop my Raccoonish whining
Leave a Comment
Name: Drima Abu Hamdan.
Location: Deep, Deep Down the Orgasmic Rabbit Hole of Epistemology.
Bio of Awesomeness: Traditionalist Muslim, Turned Free Thinking Sufi Lover. Social Media Consultant to NY Times Best-Selling Authors. Author of Upcoming Memoir. Belief Systems Junkie. Afro-Arab Libertarian Music Freak. Vehemently Anti-Islamist. Loud and Drop Dead Gorgeous. The High Priest of Mischievous "Blasphemy." Read on and Have Your Brain Spun. You've Been Warned!
"If I don't have the freedom to disbelieve, I cannot believe."
— Abdullahi An-Na'im
"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must approve the homage of reason rather than of blind-folded fear."
SudaneseThinker
SudaneseThinker
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
I wholly disagree
Religion was of some benefit before the invention of the scientific method - all the learning was centralized and managed by the Church (I am speaking of Christianity here. In Islam, it was mosques that serves as both repositories of knowledge and centers of learning).
Now the only purpose religion can serve is tranquilization of unruly minds. Mao (cursed be his memory) was right when he said “religion is opium for the masses”. So much easier to say “inshallah” when forced with a problem than to actually seek a resolution…
Moreover, the religious monopoly on morality is probably causing more harm than anything. Even while the basics of philosophy (”love of knowledge”) are no longer taught in our houses of learning - Ethics and Logic, which are the cornerstones of Western Civilization - the religious alternative has discredited itself time and time again. The Inquisition, the Crusades, the trial of Galileo, the witch-burning, the passivity of Vatican in the face of the Holocaust - all of these prove that Christian morality has failed as a concept. I am not even talking about Islam, with its inherent contradictions, or Judaism with its violent past.
No, mate, faith may bring a false sense of peace and that warm glow of irresponsibility (because Big Daddy’s the Ultimate Authority); it will not, however, solve any problems (unless your problems are unruly slaves that need to be reconciled with their grim fates).
Raccoon, me support science big time but I still believe that we shouldn’t completely let go of God. God is real and He does exist. =)
Islam and science can go hand in hand. I don’t know about Christianity’s concept of science but I support the pope’s main message. God shouldn’t be erased and replaced with science because again…
God is real and He does exist. =)
LOL, here I am once again trying to tackle an unreasonable subject with reason
The reality of divinity (or the lack thereof) is irrelevant to the issue. We’re talking about religion here, not belief in divinity: the latter is a personal, while the former is an institutional, issue.
As I have said, religion is an institution. Moreover, it is an extremely powerful one - a system of rigid control. Basically, it’s a tyrrany in all but name: slavery by consent. What the new Pope demands (as all Popes did) is more power for the Church: more churchgoers mean more money and influence for Vatican.
BTW, I can’t believe you have put Twosret’s vile propaganda blog in “opinions that matter”… unless you mean opinions that matter for perpetuation of violence and incitement to murder (I know it’s harsh, but I’m calling it as it is).
.
Raccoon, the opinion there DOES matter. Yes it is very anti-Israeli but it shows the kind of some opinions coming out from the American Left. On the same list, you’ve got Israpundit who’s proud opener is “THERE IS ONLY A MILITARY SOLUTION”. What do you think of that?
His blog represents the opinion of many who believe his views and is very opposing to Twosret’s but to me it still matters.
In my daily readings, I try and read diverse blogs from the far Left to the far Right. All what’s said in them matters because it enables me to get a good understanding of how different people perceive different things in their own way eg: the recent war Israel-Lebanon war. It was damn interesting reading the strongly opposing views on all the different sides. Each blog on that list has its own unique views and I feel their opinions do matter because they represent people out there with similar views too.
Twosret’s blog isn’t really that bad. There are by far much worse and inciting stuff out there on the internet dude.
BTW I don’t really think anybody reading it will actually feel the need to murder somebody or strap a bomb belt. Saying that is a little too extreme don’t you think?
Aljazeera? Maybe. LOL. =)
Dude, that’s “soft bigotry of low expectations”. I respect Twosret - I know her to be an intelligent and well-educated woman. Accordingly, when she writes or promotes demonization of and libel against Israelis and Jews (under the name of a Muslim mass murderer who conquered Israel and slaughtered countless innocents), I judge her harshly.
Yes, there are worse pits of depravity online and offline. So what? The fact that Nazis had been slaughtering Jews doesn’t make KKK anti-semites good. The fact that Bin-Laden is a bigger monster than Nasrallah doesn’t absolve the latter of guilt.
And any irrational demonization is adding to the hatred. Hatred invariably breeds violence. By itself that blog is the pathetic rantings of a hate-filled person; but when viewed in the larger tapestry of demonization, it’s part of a culture of death. Much the same way the firing pin of a gun is unlikely to kill anyone… but when it’s part of an assembled gun, it’s deadly. D’you see what I’m getting at?
Al-Jazeera is another part of the same gun… so is Al-Manar… virtually all Arab/Islamic media, education, and culturally influential events… adding up to Jihad manuals, religious sermons which demonize Infidels and incite to murder against them…
Together, they kill thousands every year. Thousands, if not millions, of children are being brainwashed by them to hate and kill and die. Which is why I say that every additional lie, every additional spin, every additional bit of hatred and demonization are another dead human, most likely a child.
I don’t read Israpundit (I find the format uncomfortable, to be frank) - but if he doesn’t demonize and doesn’t preach hatred, he’s not inciting to murder. And about a military solution… you’re for a military solution (by AU) in Sudan, are you not? War is always hell; but sometimes they are needed to prevent a worse hell.
“a Muslim mass murderer who conquered Israel and slaughtered countless innocents”
I don’t know about that. In “our” history he’s portrayed much differently than “your” history…
I do however understand what you’re trying to say but at the end of the day, the opinion there does matter because it is representitive of many people who feel and view the conflict in the same light. It’s not like am endorsing it or the Atheist Jew for example. I just think it’s important to read different relevant perspectives.
Sallah al-Din was no different from Attila, Chenghis Khan, Barbarossa, Alexander, or Napoleon - a brutal invader and a mass murderer. More relevantly, he has conquered what is now Israel, initiating a mass slaughter of Jews (even though his personal physician was a very famous Jew). Sure, he brought some semblance of law (as a Kurd, he was a highly civilized man) into lawless lands; he was renowned for his charity and mercy; he was greatly respected as both a general and a politician… but this does not absolve his acts of wanton slaughter. Admittedly, if I had to choose whom I’d rather be conquered from the aforementioned people, I’d probably go for Sallah al-Din
And while I certainly understand your desire to represent as many relevant POVs as possible, I still think that promoting a hate propaganda site is… irresponsible, as would be promoting a Hizballah or Al-Qaeda site.
But I shall stop my Raccoonish whining
Leave a Comment