Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Boston Marathon Explosion (Page 10)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 23 pages: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  ...  21  22  23   
Author Topic: Boston Marathon Explosion
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, I'm not talking about the people themselves, just the insane beliefs with no foundation in reality. If society did not tolerate these crazy ideas perhaps they would actually become less common.... people should be free to believe what they want of course, but if they didn't get validation from people pretending that "yeah sure, your religions ideas are just as valid as anyone else"... perhaps things would slowly change... it already happens naturally anyway otherwise we'd still be in the dark ages, but perhaps we should try to speed up the process.

[ April 20, 2013, 07:58 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"just the insane beliefs with no foundation in reality"

Last I checked, North Korean atheists pose more of a threat to civilization than the Amish and Balinese volcano-dwelling animists combined.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:

Last I checked, North Korean atheists pose more of a threat to civilization than the Amish and Balinese volcano-dwelling animists combined.

That is debatable but regardless even if there is more than one significant threat (sadly there are many), it doesn't mean you should just do nothing about one of them because you think one of the threats may be greater.

[ April 20, 2013, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What do you propose that we do about Balinese volcano-dwelling animists, Linux, and how do you find them threatening?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You respect people right up to the point that they prove to you that avoidance is your best bet. You tolerate them right up to the point that they prove to you avoidance is impossible. Beyond that you just have to hope the law is on your side.

To be fair Pete Linux did say instead of just "respecting beliefs". Any religion that takes offense at being questioned about their beliefs is one to fear. Most welcome such questions.

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I do find it somewhat offensive when someone tells me that my beliefs are nuts, when that person doesn't even know what my beliefs are. Is it OK for me to find that offensive, or does that give you cause to fear me? [Big Grin]
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LinuxFreakus:
I don't think I'll ever understand what it is about religion that people are attracted to.

Have you asked and listened earnestly? Otherwise that statement is a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Since when do people need cause to fear someone not like them? [Razz] It's ok to be offended by them for it though.
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
OK, so you see big brother as the Mohammed and little brother as his mini-me Malvo. That's a plausible theory.

No, I see them as prime suspects whose actual motivations have yet to fully understood even it's seems pretty clear they were involved.

I think that that's a plausible scenario given the evidence so far, but it's purely speculative at this point, not nearly conclusive enough to reach a verdict.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LinuxFreakus:
No, I'm not talking about the people themselves, just the insane beliefs with no foundation in reality. If society did not tolerate these crazy ideas perhaps they would actually become less common.... people should be free to believe what they want of course, but if they didn't get validation from people pretending that "yeah sure, your religions ideas are just as valid as anyone else"... perhaps things would slowly change... it already happens naturally anyway otherwise we'd still be in the dark ages, but perhaps we should try to speed up the process.

It was barbarians, not religion, that brought on yhe dark ages and religion which preserved scholorship long enough to get us out of it.

Portraying religion as society's great villian without seeing it's positive contributions is so deliberately dogmatic that it really can't be considered anything other than a kind of religion.

Amongst the crazy ideas with no that religion has propegated are mercy (illogical and potentially dangerous), compassion ( illogical and inneficient), and unconditional charity.

If you want to start going after religion more critically why not go after all our taboos? Can we do away with racial equality, gender equality, democracy, ect if we can't show that they are based on quantifiable data?

I'm sorry you had a close call, but countering fanaticism with predjudice and sloppy thinking seems like a poor plan to me.

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You have it backwards. One person's prejudices are character flaws, but when two people with the same flaws come together they can feel stronger for their alliance. If you get 10 or 100 or 1 million people who share their attitudes they naturally feel emboldened to start a community of "like minded" souls with recognizable or formalized membership criteria so they can identify themselves and find each other when they leave their home base. The common features that define their community can easily create a wall that separates them from everyone else.

I think religions both define their community and set up walls to separate their members from other communities and hence from the same kind of intimacy they share among themselves. The older of these two brothers said explicitly that he didn't understand Americans and they didn't understand him, and complained that he had no American friends.

It's silly to deny that a broad swath of Americans, which are 90% self-identified as Christians, are suspicious of Muslims, blacks, Jews, Christians of other denominations, or Atheists in the large. They (we) also tend to be more suspicious or less trusting toward people who live two or three blocks away than they are toward people who live closer by. I barely know my next door neighbor (I've been in her house only once), but we ask her to come into our house every day to feed our cats when we travel. I wouldn't even consider asking the people who live in the house next to theirs on the other side, because I don't know them at all. For all I know, they could be Cleveland Indian fans (<shudder>).

Saying that religion causes xenophobia is too simplistic, but since it's probably the greatest binder that brings people together, it's also one of the greatest dividers separating people who "aren't like them".

Listening to all the information being gathered about these two bombers, there's still too little information to say why they did what they did, and it is seeming increasingly likely that there never will be an easily identifiable ultimate root cause to blame. They appear to have been misguided, vulnerable, emotionally weak and ultimately victims who found some solace in lashing out at the world.

But I could be wrong.

[ April 21, 2013, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
You respect people right up to the point that they prove to you that avoidance is your best bet. You tolerate them right up to the point that they prove to you avoidance is impossible. Beyond that you just have to hope the law is on your side.

To be fair Pete Linux did say instead of just "respecting beliefs". Any religion that takes offense at being questioned about their beliefs is one to fear. Most welcome such questions.

Yes this is along the lines of how I feel. There is no "definition" for any religion but many people feel there is. That is what I'm trying to describe (and evidently not doing a good job of it).

Most "normal" people realize this, but unstable, suggestible, and/or vulnerable people who are religious are easy picking for terror groups and cults and other related organizations because they have been trained from a young age that it is acceptable and commendable to believe things which have no foundation in reality, and from there its not hard to make that jump into the deep end.

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:

If you want to start going after religion more critically why not go after all our taboos? Can we do away with racial equality, gender equality, democracy, ect if we can't show that they are based on quantifiable data?

I'm sorry you had a close call, but countering fanaticism with predjudice and sloppy thinking seems like a poor plan to me.

I never said we shouldn't go after other taboos. I think all topics should be open for discussion... and its not so much that they are closed either (at least in relatively free countries)... but it is considered rude and offensive to objectively question people's religious beliefs, and I think that needs to change.

There are psychological studies which show that people who are effectively "brainwashed" can change their opinions if they are continuously questioned, so don't you think perhaps these extremists could become more moderate if everyone they encountered was actively questioning their extreme views?

I realize nothing is perfect, and clearly these guys were intentionally hiding their true feelings, but I don't see why it would hurt to openly question religious dogmas as part of our public discourse. I'm sure you would draw out some angry people at first but longer we wait the more dangerous these people could be as weapons, bio-agents, etc are getting more and more powerful.

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also with regard to North Korea, just because you may consider the country to be "atheist" does not mean it isn't a similar situation there. They might not be Christian, or Muslim, but the totalitarian government there has essentially created its own religion, a cult of personality.

It is unclear how many of the people actually believe it, and how many are just scared they will be killed if they poke their head up, but it really isn't so unlike religion, and there are certainly many more fanatical followers than there would be if the cult of personality did not exist.

[ April 21, 2013, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
It was barbarians, not religion, that brought on yhe dark ages and religion which preserved scholorship long enough to get us out of it.

Strange, I've always read that it was the church responsible for all the book burning, the destruction of all the schools, etc, etc. Was it not the fall of the Roman empire which set things in motion?

Under Papal rule, Rome sank to unprecedented levels of illiteracy, to they point where they managed to actually kill off Latin.

I feel like you might be giving them a little too much credit.

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not sure which section is more silly. That high illiteracy had no 'precedent' in pagan rome with its humdreds of thousands of slaves and illiterate pauper citizens makimg up the majority, or that pagan rome was less religious than Christian Rome
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LinuxFreakus:
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
It was barbarians, not religion, that brought on yhe dark ages and religion which preserved scholorship long enough to get us out of it.

Strange, I've always read that it was the church responsible for all the book burning, the destruction of all the schools, etc, etc. Was it not the fall of the Roman empire which set things in motion?

Under Papal rule, Rome sank to unprecedented levels of illiteracy, to they point where they managed to actually kill off Latin.

I feel like you might be giving them a little too much credit.

That's somewhat backwards. The of the reasons books survived was because of generations of monks working in scriptoriums. The reason we have the university system is because the Franciscans needed a system to educate friars. (This is the reason professors wear formal robes with hoods.) It was mostly Byzantine clergy that preserved Greek philosophy until the Muslims conquered Byzantium and got the books in the bargain.

Why don't you start by questioning your own predjudices before you start trying to tell other people how to think? I'm serious about that. Take some time an consider if you aren't reflexive predjudiced against the religous, because you sound to me like you are.

Secondly how are you going to question other people's religous beliefs if you don't understand what they believe in the first place? I'd wager that you don't have much a concept of theosis, and I know after years of working with muslims there's way way more that I don't know about Islam than I do know.

[ April 21, 2013, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: Viking_Longship ]

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Saying that religion causes xenophobia is too simplistic, but since it's probably the greatest binder that brings people together, it's also one of the greatest dividers separating people who "aren't like them".

Al I can't see much difference in terms of Islamaphobia between Christians and non-Christians, non after 9/11.

I think politics has more to do with what leads Americans in thier opinions and predjudices about the secular world. Anecdotally most of the politically conservative Catholics I have known are pro-death penalty, which the Catholic church opposes, and the liberal Catholics are almost as likely to be pro-choice.

If anything I think the political factions are dictating to most of our churches, not the other way around.

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aris Katsaris:
Keep in mind that I wasn't saying I consider it the *most* likely explanation, only that I significantly increased my assigned probability for a false-flag operation; e.g. up to 20% or so.

That still means 80% probability it's not such.

There's still a slight possibility that the sudden islamization of brother 1 might have been feigned. I still agree on 20% FSB plot to get support for some Russian atrocity to come.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Al I can't see much difference in terms of Islamaphobia between Christians and non-Christians, non after 9/11."

Do you mean that you see Jew-on-Muslim and black-on-Muslim -phobia to the same degree and in similar organized ways that white Christians have militantly acted to keep mosques and Islamic community centers out of their cities and states, as was done in NYC and over 30 states? Can you point to a representative set of either Jews or blacks who have voted to outlaw sharia law, as was done in Oklahoma and Florida, or have burned down Islamic community centers, as was done in missouri, Ohio and Illinois?

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"outlaw sharia law, as was done in Oklahoma and Florida"

Is that grotesque fundamentalist propaganda, or are you speaking about something other than Florida refusing to change the laws to 24/7 fundamentalist slave-women to show a mask rather than a face on their photo IDs?

Your very term "outlawing sharia law" is as bogus a piece of propaganda as "outlawing gay marriage," since we're talking about a refusal to SUBMIT ourselves to Sharia law, a refusal to encode Sharia into our own civil law. Calling that an "outlawing" is an egregious form of brainwashing. WTF, Al.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here's the AP report on what Al calls "outlawing sharia"

"The twin House and Senate bills in Florida make no mention of Shariah law or any other specific foreign system. The language of the legislation, in fact, seems innocuous, outlawing the use of foreign law only when it violates rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, and only in certain domestic situations, such as divorces and child custody cases. It does not apply to businesses and says it shouldn't be construed to prohibit any religious organization from making judgments in "ecclesiastical matters.""


Oh boo hoo, Al. You think that it's anti-Muslim bigotry to outlaw the use of foreign law that violates the US constitution?

That's a despicable position to take. Please tell me you've got something better than that to accuse Florida legislators of anti-Muslim bigotry. Tell me you haven't bought into that garbage Al Qaeda propaganda.

[ April 21, 2013, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
quote:
Originally posted by LinuxFreakus:
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
It was barbarians, not religion, that brought on yhe dark ages and religion which preserved scholorship long enough to get us out of it.

Strange, I've always read that it was the church responsible for all the book burning, the destruction of all the schools, etc, etc. Was it not the fall of the Roman empire which set things in motion?

Under Papal rule, Rome sank to unprecedented levels of illiteracy, to they point where they managed to actually kill off Latin.

I feel like you might be giving them a little too much credit.

That's somewhat backwards. The of the reasons books survived was because of generations of monks working in scriptoriums. The reason we have the university system is because the Franciscans needed a system to educate friars. (This is the reason professors wear formal robes with hoods.) It was mostly Byzantine clergy that preserved Greek philosophy until the Muslims conquered Byzantium and got the books in the bargain.

Why don't you start by questioning your own predjudices before you start trying to tell other people how to think? I'm serious about that. Take some time an consider if you aren't reflexive predjudiced against the religous, because you sound to me like you are.

Secondly how are you going to question other people's religous beliefs if you don't understand what they believe in the first place? I'd wager that you don't have much a concept of theosis, and I know after years of working with muslims there's way way more that I don't know about Islam than I do know.

You are completely missing the point. I realize there were other religious "entities" out there at the same time, but if you honestly think the catholic church was a mostly positive influence during the dark ages, then this is going to be a long discussion. At no time did I state that Religious organizations only carry out negative activities. I stated that there is great potential for evil to occur because of the way people are conditioned to accept outlandish claims as fact based on "faith". Back in ancient times I have to give people a bit more leeway because the general population was much less educated, but these days there is no reason we shouldn't be able to move past this phase faster than we are.

Also, just because I don't believe what some religion wants me to, why does that make me prejudiced? What is wrong with objectively calling into question outlandish claims? Why is that prejudiced?

[ April 21, 2013, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LinuxFreakus:
Also with regard to North Korea, just because you may consider the country to be "atheist" does not mean it isn't a similar situation there. They might not be Christian, or Muslim, but the totalitarian government there has essentially created its own religion, a cult of personality.

First of all, it's not just me that considers them atheist; they consider themselves to be atheist. Now I agree that they have created their own religion via a cult of personality. That's typically what steps in to replace religion when the government drives religion out.

Now I agree that we should be free to ask questions, questions even about root assumptions that our community takes for granted. Religion should not be exempt from that, but it shouldn't be singled out for it, either. Because North Korea isn't the only community that has instituted a religious-like cult without recognizing that's what it was doing.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
I'm not sure which section is more silly. That high illiteracy had no 'precedent' in pagan rome with its humdreds of thousands of slaves and illiterate pauper citizens makimg up the majority, or that pagan rome was less religious than Christian Rome

Obviously many in ancient times were illiterate compared with modern times, but I'm talking about the upper class, the nobility, large numbers drifted and became illiterate, unable to sign their own names, etc. Exactly how many is unknown and subject to debate, but clearly there was a large decline. Much of the writing which was recorded by the nobility was of terrible quality too. Again I was talking about literacy in the dark ages after the fall of the empire once the rise of christianity took place and Papal rule was in place for approximately an entire millennium.

Many ancient works of literature, science and philosopy were destroyed for being "the work of the devil". Fortunately many of the ancient works had been conveyed elsewhere and the remnants of this pre-Christian literature were translated into Arabic as well as some other Middle Eastern languages. When Islam arose, these Greek works (along with Indian, and the few remaining Persian works that survived the parallel fall of Persia to Islam) were also heavily used as references and building blocks for new literature in Arabia. In this way, ancient Hellenic knowledge was reintroduced into Europe, along with the introduction of pre-Christian knowledge from Persia's ruins and beyond.

So yes, I suppose you could say religion helped, but back in ancient times it was much harder to draw a distinction between science/critical thinking and religion (within the general population anyway).

The overwhelming majority of the monasteries of the Middle Ages were colonies of peasants, who could not write their own names. Impossible? In his "History of Pedagogy" Compayre shows that at the close of the thirteenth century, which is supposed to be the most intellectual and scholarly period of the Middle Ages, not one single monk in the largest and greatest monastery of France, St. Gall, could read or write!

Source

There are even papal documents, especially from the 7th century which are written in such poor latin that they are barely readable.

The Pope boasted of the destruction of the Pagan schools in letters, etc...

I could go on but hopefully you're starting to get the idea.

[ April 21, 2013, 05:00 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Relax, Pete. Here's another description of what they did, which had an obviously single-minded purpose:
quote:
The bill has become known as the anti-Shariah law because opponents say it’s based on anti-Muslim legislation in other states. Sharia laws are based on the Koran.

The House passed HB 351 by a 79-39 vote. The bill faces a tougher test in the Senate.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott congratulated the House for passing a measure to "affirm U.S. law."

Get that? They passed a law to affirm that US laws govern the country. What would be different in Florida today if they hadn't passed it?

Care to attack me for referencing the Oklahoma law?
quote:
An amendment that would ban Oklahoma courts from considering international or Islamic law discriminates against religions and a Muslim community leader has the right to challenge its constitutionality, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.

The court in Denver upheld U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange's order blocking implementation of the amendment shortly after it was approved by 70 percent of Oklahoma voters in November 2010.

Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma, sued to block the law from taking effect, arguing that the Save Our State Amendment violated his First Amendment rights.

The amendment read, in part: "The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law."



[ April 21, 2013, 05:12 PM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
First of all, it's not just me that considers them atheist; they consider themselves to be atheist.


Now I agree that they have created their own religion via a cult of personality. That's typically what steps in to replace religion when the government drives religion out.

Now I agree that we should be free to ask questions, questions even about root assumptions that our community takes for granted. Religion should not be exempt from that, but it shouldn't be singled out for it, either. Because North Korea isn't the only community that has instituted a religious-like cult without recognizing that's what it was doing.

That doesn't matter, the problem is more fundamental than whether it is tied to an actual god belief. The problem is promoting and encouraging people to think it is a good idea, or even imperative, or healthy, or otherwise beneficial, that they should accept certain things as truth without question.

Society should not allow this to happen regardless of whether the source is a traditional "Religion" or not. Religions just happen to be one of the biggest and most globally prevalent reasons for this problem. They are not the *only* reason and even if Religions disappeared or evolved into something more like philosophy these problems would still happen, but at least the chances would be reduced.

For the record, I also never stated that we should "abolish", "destroy" or otherwise forcefully bring an end to religion the way that certain totalitarian regimes have attempted to do. Not only would it end up as an epic failure sooner or later, but it just isn't effective in changing the desired social dynamic, instead it would seek to enhance and extend this dynamic for the purposes of exploitation. This is not even remotely what I would suggest.

[ April 21, 2013, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Setting aside the echo chamber logic, and blather about what people call the law [Roll Eyes] , is there any bigoted PROVISION in the law, or has there been any specific enforcement of the law that you could describe, that fits the bill?

No, I don't change the subject to discuss another locale until you've either admitted that you were wrong about Florida, or posted actual facts rather than tea leaf readings to support your argument that the Florida law is anti-Muslim. You cited Florida, and that's where I challenged you. I know enough about the Florida situation to say that whether you know it or not, you're passing on Al Qaeda propaganda. There's nothing wrong about saying that foreign laws that violate the US constitution won't be used or enforced here.

Foreign laws are often enforced in the US because our complex choice of law provisions. There are classes on this in law school, entirely devoted to Choice of Law. It's also a section on the Bar exam in most states. So if someone's told you this isn't a serious concern, they lied to you. The US often does, by principle, enforce foreign laws. It's entirely appropriate to provide that this won't be done when the foreign law is substantively repugnant to the American Constitution.

[ April 21, 2013, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Linux

As an American you're living in a country founded by anti-Papists and you should consider whether that's affecting your worldview.

That ancient philosophy survived through the middle ages at all you can than 3 religious societies, Catholic Europe, Byzantium and the Islamic Caliphate.

No Catholic church, no Franciscans, no Franciscans, no univesities as we know them. No Muslims, no algebra, no algebra, no higher math.

Also bear in mind the ancient Greeks treated women like animals and the Romans were big fans of exterminating troublesome peoples. So lets not fall all over ourselves singing their praises.

[ April 21, 2013, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: Viking_Longship ]

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Linus and again please answer me, how can you criticize people for their religous beliefs when you don't know what they believe? Pete's absolutely right about this.
Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
Linus and again please answer me, how can you criticize people for their religous beliefs when you don't know what they believe? Pete's absolutely right about this.

Where did I say this was what we should do? I don't believe I said that, and if I did it was most certainly not my intention to imply anything like that.

I said when people hear outlandish claims, they should be openly questioned. Encourage healthy debate using real logic. One conversation is unlikely to change anyone's opinion but if people started to do this on a large scale society might begin to evolve. It is unlikely that this would result in the absence of god belief entirely, that that isn't quite as central to the problem anyway because many of the truly harmful ideas which are promoted in the name of religion can be logically refuted with philosophical and/or scientific arguments.

[ April 21, 2013, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Linux

Okay, how do you determine what is truly harmful? How do you draw the line between concepts that are superstiion and the ones that might be valid but you can't understand because you're ingorant of both the culture and the language of that culture?

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Linux

Also having been raised in this culture you have lived all your life in a place where magic has been forbidden by religious taboo and then having not seen it, the culture dismissed it as not being real. Are that certain they were right?

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
"Al I can't see much difference in terms of Islamaphobia between Christians and non-Christians, non after 9/11."

Do you mean that you see Jew-on-Muslim and black-on-Muslim -phobia to the same degree and in similar organized ways that white Christians have militantly acted to keep mosques and Islamic community centers out of their cities and states, as was done in NYC and over 30 states? Can you point to a representative set of either Jews or blacks who have voted to outlaw sharia law, as was done in Oklahoma and Florida, or have burned down Islamic community centers, as was done in missouri, Ohio and Illinois?

Al three of the most prominent Islamaphobes in the US were the late Christopher Hitchens and Bill Maher, both atheists, and Pam Geller, a Jew. So I still think this is an ecumenical phobia.

My point was that I really think in America most Chrisitians take their social cues from their political faction and the either expect their churches to support it (which is what evangellicals do) or ignore the church when it disagrees with their political faction (what Catholics and Orthodox do).

If you think you can refute that, be my guest, but that last post didn't do that.

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"I said when people hear outlandish claims, they should be openly questioned. Encourage healthy debate using real logic. One conversation is unlikely to change anyone's opinion but if people started to do this on a large scale society might begin to evolve."

I agree with that entirely.

" It is unlikely that this would result in the absence of god belief entirely, that that isn't quite as central to the problem anyway because many of the truly harmful ideas which are promoted in the name of religion can be logically refuted with philosophical and/or scientific arguments."

But as you and I agree in the case of North Korea, some profoundly harmful ideas, analogous to the worst that appears in religion, are not even done "in the name of religion." Humans are capable of rationality, and that's a wonderful thing, and to be encouraged ... but we also have a tendency, perhaps even a need, to look for reasons and purposes which are beyond the capacity of reason to explain. Love, beauty ... I look at the images generated by the Hubble telescope and see a beauty that I don't think can be adequately explained by mathematics. If I'm wrong, please show me. Question my premises and my conclusions, but if you start the question with ridicule, what could that accomplish other than making the universe uglier for both of us?

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LinuxFreakus
Member
Member # 2395

 - posted      Profile for LinuxFreakus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:

That ancient philosophy survived through the middle ages at all you can than 3 religious societies, Catholic Europe, Byzantium and the Islamic Caliphate.

I believe I already pointed out this connection in my earlier post, although it is plainly evident in history that christians in Europe actively worked to destroy the ancient works. The fact that any survived is mostly because in addition to burning and destruction of libraries, they also chose to simply abandon some of them, the other reason, as I already said is because many of the works were conveyed elsewhere and preserved. A few of the monks did sit and make endless copies of a few religious texts, etc... but surviving latin versions of the other abandoned texts are exceedingly rare compared with their counterparts in other geographies.

In the course of the fifth century the Roman system of schools was entirely destroyed. Christianity had become, by imperial decree, the sole religion of the empire, which means of the entire civilized world apart from India and China. Again, by the year 500, there was not a single trace left of the pagan structure of schools. No writer on education can prove the existence of a single school in Europe at that date. To say, therefore, that Christianity gave the world schools, when its triumph was followed by the annihilation of the finest system of education the world ever had until the second half of the nineteenth century, is difficult to justify, and I would say approaches willful ignorance.

In some monasteries ancient texts did survive... abandoned and forgotten with few who could still read them... but their reintroduction was certainly not due to the policies of the Papal/Christian rule during the middle ages.

[ April 21, 2013, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: LinuxFreakus ]

Posts: 1240 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Al:

"They passed a law to affirm that US laws govern the country. What would be different in Florida today if they hadn't passed it?"

To understand the answer to that question, you need to understand the three different types of law in the USA:

1. SUBSTANTIVE LAW.

2. Procedural law.

3. Choice of Law provisions.


This law affects which types of foreign SUBSTANTIVE law can be enforced or respected under US choice of law provisions, and also under the Hague Convention on family law.

For example, if a court in France awards sole custody to dad, finding that mom is unfit, then if Mom grabs the kids, a Florida court will find against Mom for kidnapping under the Hague Convention. However, per this law, if a Saudi Arabia court awards kids to dad, based on some misogynistic Sharia law which violates the US constitution, Florida says screw the Hague Convention, we're giving Mommy a day in a real court. And I think that's entirely reasonable.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"In the course of the fifth century the Roman system of schools was entirely destroyed."

Linux, having done a teeny bit of research on the matter in the last couple hours, I have to admit that I was wrong and that you were right about literacy being higher in ancient Rome. However, you remain absolutely wrong to assume that Pagan Romans were less "religious"! [Big Grin]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Linux

For a start you're totally ignoring Byzantium, the Pandidakterion was founded in 425 CE

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"The older of these two brothers said explicitly that he didn't understand Americans and they didn't understand him, and complained that he had no American friends."

I've seen interview after interview of his former American friends that he rejected when he turned into a sicko fundy. He rejected them, and of course they didn't understand him then.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 23 pages: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  ...  21  22  23   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1