Adnan's emotions... A white paper [modified]
-
Adnan Siddiqi wrote:
People like stan,espeir and kagaddy will always be ready to increase gap between two faiths no matter whatever you do.
Really? I thought that's what Muslims did when they flew airplanes into the World Trade Center...then rallied behind Osama Bin Laden. Tell me...Were you of the 92% who supported him back then or of the 8% who didn't?
Sigh! First take a :rose: then a sincere advise for you.Go outside and take a deep breathe and then take a cold glass of water.It will make you feel better.Too much bitterness and haterd have made you a cynical.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
-
Nishant various dialogues in various forums(offcourse not CP's soapbox) are being taken places for many years and authorites from christianity islam and judaism are keep in touch and trying to understand each other's faith and also discovering similarties between all abrahamic faith so i have no worries that these 3 mentioned religions are not compatible.I cant say similar about Hinduism because its entirely different than religions based on abrahamic faith and I think hinduism and islam is not a universal issue as such conflicts only exist between India and Pakistan only so i would rather call it a political issue rather a religious one. People like stan,espeir and kagaddy will always be ready to increase gap between two faiths no matter whatever you do.the recent attempt by Jorgen is the perfect example+espeir and kagaddy personally asked my opinion about sucide bombing but as I knew that they were jusing being naughty and they proved in latest posts.Such minorities offcourse harmful for masses but good thing is that masses ignore them as well.There will be hardly 2/3 muslim members who will be active in Soapbox.I only find A.A other than me who posts here otherwise most of the time this group of thugs is damned by people of their own side and many of them would be follower of their book as well.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
A lot of people are now seemingly attacking Islamic terrorism
No this has been happening since ages,its just media is so powerful that you have access to everything very easily via net or tv.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
Adnan Siddiqi wrote:
People like stan,espeir and kagaddy will always be ready to increase gap between two faiths no matter whatever you do.
Speaking for myself, this is not true. Before 911, I didn't know or care anything about Islam. I really don't care what you people do. You could worship bullfrogs for all I care. But when you start flying planes into buildings and yelling "god is great" I, and many others took notice of your religion. So, I fyou want to stop the divide between the religions, try and get you fellow musliums that do believe in killing to stop. When this happens I would have no problem with islam. There are some muslims who are against terrorists, they fight in the US army and Iraqi armies (and I'm sure there are others), so I know there are some. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
Why is so much of the soapbox conversation so centered around Adnan? Stand rigid for the next battle Peace means reloading your guns The love for life is all hatred in disguise - Dimmu Borgir
Score: 1.0 (1 vote). wrote:
Why is so much of the soapbox conversation so centered around Adnan?
Adnan's probably the most popular guy in the Soapbox. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
Sigh! First take a :rose: then a sincere advise for you.Go outside and take a deep breathe and then take a cold glass of water.It will make you feel better.Too much bitterness and haterd have made you a cynical.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
Bitterness??? You're justifying the actions of people who kill thousands of innocents! Now you're upset that America got sick of the Middle East's BS and is now mopping the floor with your butts! Get over it. You guys already lost. We're just cleaning up before we turn off the lights and go home.
-
Not only muslims ..Many people became happy since they dont like the polocies of america.And anyone can undderstand the heroism attained by osama or saddam since they are figthing against the mighty USA. Nobody realizing the fact that Islamic terrorism is only growing and if USA stand in forefornt it would never come to an end.Becoz USA is not an Islamic state and their fight would be viwed as fight against Islam and Bin Laden is cleverly adorning the attire of the saviour of Islam. If not Osama there would be some X or Y becoz the world is full of those creatures who has belief in none. if we truely wants to put a fullstop to Islamic terrorism ,the fight agaist it should be started by Islams .
jithAtran - ii wrote:
Not only muslims ..Many people became happy since they dont like the polocies of america.And anyone can undderstand the heroism attained by osama or saddam since they are figthing against the mighty USA.
What policies?
jithAtran - ii wrote:
Nobody realizing the fact that Islamic terrorism is only growing and if USA stand in forefornt it would never come to an end.
So, the acts in India, Bali, London, Madrid, and the ones just caught in Canada, is because of USA?
jithAtran - ii wrote:
if we truely wants to put a fullstop to Islamic terrorism ,the fight agaist it should be started by Islams .
I welcome Islam to stop terrorism. Well....Islam? Adnan? Anybody? crickets............. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
Not only muslims ..Many people became happy since they dont like the polocies of america.And anyone can undderstand the heroism attained by osama or saddam since they are figthing against the mighty USA. Nobody realizing the fact that Islamic terrorism is only growing and if USA stand in forefornt it would never come to an end.Becoz USA is not an Islamic state and their fight would be viwed as fight against Islam and Bin Laden is cleverly adorning the attire of the saviour of Islam. If not Osama there would be some X or Y becoz the world is full of those creatures who has belief in none. if we truely wants to put a fullstop to Islamic terrorism ,the fight agaist it should be started by Islams .
jithAtran - ii wrote:
Many people became happy since they dont like the polocies of america.
We call those people "enemies" and we bomb the crap out of them for attacking us. Then they cry and say, "Oh look! America bombed us when all we did was wage war on them! Boo hoo!"
jithAtran - ii wrote:
And anyone can undderstand the heroism attained by osama or saddam since they are figthing against the mighty USA.
No, only screw-ups like you can understand that. It's comforting to know that we have such a capable military. :cool:
-
The various religions were formed in the past for various reasons - people needed a god, or gods, or some saints, or messengers from heaven to move on. But they've been left to rot into a sort of plague. Islam is one of them. Christianity, Hinduism etc. are pretty much the same too. If people get too religious, it's not good at all. Belief in a god entity is not necessarily a bad thing. But believing that a way of religion (like Islam or Christianity) is the only way to reach this god entity, and anyone following a different route must be bad - is destructive. If Islam, Hinduism, Christianity etc. were mutually compatible, it'd have been less of a problem. But the various religions are not compatible. So there's going to be a power struggle between these religions. A lot of people are now seemingly attacking Islamic terrorism. But quite a few of them are using that as an excuse to directly attack Islam, in the hope that it would help popularize their religions. Eventually, one of the religions would have to dominate, crushing other religions - I wonder when that will be, perhaps in 400 years or so - if humanity still exists. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)That's largely based on the assumption that there is no God. If there is no God, then to an outsider, it seems that religion is harmless so long as it's a open to all new ideas, tolerant of everything and everyone, adhering to the "all paths lead to the same mountain" kind of thinking. I hear that a lot: "your belief, Judah, is harmless so long as you're not hurting anyone". Look at it from the other perspective for a moment. If there is a God, then not everyone or everything should be tolerated, assuming good and evil exist. This sounds nasty and evil, but in practice it's logical and required. For one, we can all agree that killing another human for no reason at all is evil and shouldn't be tolerated. If some acts are evil, then not all paths lead to the same mountain. If some of the paths -- ways of living your life -- be that religion or just plain ethics, lead to an evil way of live, a way of life that is not God-honoring, then we can't say that all ways are acceptable. This is what I am concerned about most. Those who just do whatever's right in their own eyes live a life free to do whatever they please. Sounds good, right? I tried living that way for awhile. But where did it get me? Pornography, insatiable lusting, all lust no love, in the sex department. That's a dark, downward spiral for anybody. Doing whatever's right in your own eyes is flexible; you can have your own personal rules; for instance, be kind to others. But your own rules you're of course free to bend and break anytime you want without consequence. What I'm saying is this: without God (and I don't mean in a religious way, but in a personal relationship way), free living is hardly free; instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with. What I've found out through all this is that the real free living is found by living a Godly life, not by following the whims of your personal wants and desires. The real free life, ironically, is the servant life, living for God and living for other instead of yourself. Nish, I hope that is something you'll find out in your life. Now, you're right about all this painful bashing of other religions. You know what, I can't speak for everybody here, since we all come from different backgrounds. I know for those believing that Jesus is the Messiah, those folks saying all these nasty things about Islam, they're not following Jesus too closely. Jesus said that of all of our Scripture, of everything written in the Jewish Law, the whole point of all of it, boils down to 2 things: love God, a
-
The second popular would probably be espeir Stand rigid for the next battle Peace means reloading your guns The love for life is all hatred in disguise - Dimmu Borgir
Score: 1.0 (1 vote). wrote:
The second popular would probably be espeir
Yeah, those two - they make a good pair :-) Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
Score: 1.0 (1 vote). wrote:
Why is so much of the soapbox conversation so centered around Adnan?
Adnan's probably the most popular guy in the Soapbox. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)The second popular would probably be espeir Stand rigid for the next battle Peace means reloading your guns The love for life is all hatred in disguise - Dimmu Borgir
-
Score: 1.0 (1 vote). wrote:
The second popular would probably be espeir
Yeah, those two - they make a good pair :-) Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi
-
Nishant various dialogues in various forums(offcourse not CP's soapbox) are being taken places for many years and authorites from christianity islam and judaism are keep in touch and trying to understand each other's faith and also discovering similarties between all abrahamic faith so i have no worries that these 3 mentioned religions are not compatible.I cant say similar about Hinduism because its entirely different than religions based on abrahamic faith and I think hinduism and islam is not a universal issue as such conflicts only exist between India and Pakistan only so i would rather call it a political issue rather a religious one. People like stan,espeir and kagaddy will always be ready to increase gap between two faiths no matter whatever you do.the recent attempt by Jorgen is the perfect example+espeir and kagaddy personally asked my opinion about sucide bombing but as I knew that they were jusing being naughty and they proved in latest posts.Such minorities offcourse harmful for masses but good thing is that masses ignore them as well.There will be hardly 2/3 muslim members who will be active in Soapbox.I only find A.A other than me who posts here otherwise most of the time this group of thugs is damned by people of their own side and many of them would be follower of their book as well.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
A lot of people are now seemingly attacking Islamic terrorism
No this has been happening since ages,its just media is so powerful that you have access to everything very easily via net or tv.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
Adnan Siddiqi wrote:
the recent attempt by Jorgen is the perfect example
I think you have totally misinterpreted me. I'm not seeking to increase gaps between any religions. What I would like to see though, is removing every religion from every authority which have power over individuals. Theocracy is just another form of fascism...
-- 100% natural. No superstitious additives.
-
That's largely based on the assumption that there is no God. If there is no God, then to an outsider, it seems that religion is harmless so long as it's a open to all new ideas, tolerant of everything and everyone, adhering to the "all paths lead to the same mountain" kind of thinking. I hear that a lot: "your belief, Judah, is harmless so long as you're not hurting anyone". Look at it from the other perspective for a moment. If there is a God, then not everyone or everything should be tolerated, assuming good and evil exist. This sounds nasty and evil, but in practice it's logical and required. For one, we can all agree that killing another human for no reason at all is evil and shouldn't be tolerated. If some acts are evil, then not all paths lead to the same mountain. If some of the paths -- ways of living your life -- be that religion or just plain ethics, lead to an evil way of live, a way of life that is not God-honoring, then we can't say that all ways are acceptable. This is what I am concerned about most. Those who just do whatever's right in their own eyes live a life free to do whatever they please. Sounds good, right? I tried living that way for awhile. But where did it get me? Pornography, insatiable lusting, all lust no love, in the sex department. That's a dark, downward spiral for anybody. Doing whatever's right in your own eyes is flexible; you can have your own personal rules; for instance, be kind to others. But your own rules you're of course free to bend and break anytime you want without consequence. What I'm saying is this: without God (and I don't mean in a religious way, but in a personal relationship way), free living is hardly free; instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with. What I've found out through all this is that the real free living is found by living a Godly life, not by following the whims of your personal wants and desires. The real free life, ironically, is the servant life, living for God and living for other instead of yourself. Nish, I hope that is something you'll find out in your life. Now, you're right about all this painful bashing of other religions. You know what, I can't speak for everybody here, since we all come from different backgrounds. I know for those believing that Jesus is the Messiah, those folks saying all these nasty things about Islam, they're not following Jesus too closely. Jesus said that of all of our Scripture, of everything written in the Jewish Law, the whole point of all of it, boils down to 2 things: love God, a
Judah, Your a better person than I am. I hear what you say and I know in my heart you are right. Some questions?
Judah Himango wrote:
the whole point of all of it, boils down to 2 things: love God, and love other people.
What if the other people do not love you back, and worse, want to kill you?
Judah Himango wrote:
but at least the disagreeing can be done with respect and without backstabbing and hatred;
I agree, and I pray for this. But when only one party is respectful, and the other ones want to kill you, what then? I hope someday that Christians, Jews and Muslims can live together and respect one another. But it seems a long way off. Only one group is doing 99% of the head chopping, and terrorism. What do we do until then? Good luck to your brother and I hope he stays safe. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi
espeir wrote:
espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi espeir Siddiqi
Repost! :-D Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
That's largely based on the assumption that there is no God. If there is no God, then to an outsider, it seems that religion is harmless so long as it's a open to all new ideas, tolerant of everything and everyone, adhering to the "all paths lead to the same mountain" kind of thinking. I hear that a lot: "your belief, Judah, is harmless so long as you're not hurting anyone". Look at it from the other perspective for a moment. If there is a God, then not everyone or everything should be tolerated, assuming good and evil exist. This sounds nasty and evil, but in practice it's logical and required. For one, we can all agree that killing another human for no reason at all is evil and shouldn't be tolerated. If some acts are evil, then not all paths lead to the same mountain. If some of the paths -- ways of living your life -- be that religion or just plain ethics, lead to an evil way of live, a way of life that is not God-honoring, then we can't say that all ways are acceptable. This is what I am concerned about most. Those who just do whatever's right in their own eyes live a life free to do whatever they please. Sounds good, right? I tried living that way for awhile. But where did it get me? Pornography, insatiable lusting, all lust no love, in the sex department. That's a dark, downward spiral for anybody. Doing whatever's right in your own eyes is flexible; you can have your own personal rules; for instance, be kind to others. But your own rules you're of course free to bend and break anytime you want without consequence. What I'm saying is this: without God (and I don't mean in a religious way, but in a personal relationship way), free living is hardly free; instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with. What I've found out through all this is that the real free living is found by living a Godly life, not by following the whims of your personal wants and desires. The real free life, ironically, is the servant life, living for God and living for other instead of yourself. Nish, I hope that is something you'll find out in your life. Now, you're right about all this painful bashing of other religions. You know what, I can't speak for everybody here, since we all come from different backgrounds. I know for those believing that Jesus is the Messiah, those folks saying all these nasty things about Islam, they're not following Jesus too closely. Jesus said that of all of our Scripture, of everything written in the Jewish Law, the whole point of all of it, boils down to 2 things: love God, a
Judah Himango wrote:
I don't buy the nonsense that everyone's way to God is alright
That's strange to me. So to you, the only way to God is the Jesus way - any other way won't get to God. To Adnan, it's through Mohammed's ways and no other. And to Hindus, through temples and Hindu prayers (though moderate Hindus believe that Christians and Muslims eventually pray to the same single-god-entity as Hindus do). Why cannot there be multiple paths to a god (or gods)? Why go by the "my belief is the only true belief" theory? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
That's largely based on the assumption that there is no God. If there is no God, then to an outsider, it seems that religion is harmless so long as it's a open to all new ideas, tolerant of everything and everyone, adhering to the "all paths lead to the same mountain" kind of thinking. I hear that a lot: "your belief, Judah, is harmless so long as you're not hurting anyone". Look at it from the other perspective for a moment. If there is a God, then not everyone or everything should be tolerated, assuming good and evil exist. This sounds nasty and evil, but in practice it's logical and required. For one, we can all agree that killing another human for no reason at all is evil and shouldn't be tolerated. If some acts are evil, then not all paths lead to the same mountain. If some of the paths -- ways of living your life -- be that religion or just plain ethics, lead to an evil way of live, a way of life that is not God-honoring, then we can't say that all ways are acceptable. This is what I am concerned about most. Those who just do whatever's right in their own eyes live a life free to do whatever they please. Sounds good, right? I tried living that way for awhile. But where did it get me? Pornography, insatiable lusting, all lust no love, in the sex department. That's a dark, downward spiral for anybody. Doing whatever's right in your own eyes is flexible; you can have your own personal rules; for instance, be kind to others. But your own rules you're of course free to bend and break anytime you want without consequence. What I'm saying is this: without God (and I don't mean in a religious way, but in a personal relationship way), free living is hardly free; instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with. What I've found out through all this is that the real free living is found by living a Godly life, not by following the whims of your personal wants and desires. The real free life, ironically, is the servant life, living for God and living for other instead of yourself. Nish, I hope that is something you'll find out in your life. Now, you're right about all this painful bashing of other religions. You know what, I can't speak for everybody here, since we all come from different backgrounds. I know for those believing that Jesus is the Messiah, those folks saying all these nasty things about Islam, they're not following Jesus too closely. Jesus said that of all of our Scripture, of everything written in the Jewish Law, the whole point of all of it, boils down to 2 things: love God, a
Judah Himango wrote:
instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with
It does not require faith in God to resist short term pleasure in favour of long term peace with yourself and for the good of those you love. There's a fair strain of acetism in both the pre christian philosophies of Stoicism and epicurism which influenced Christian theology, as well as in the writings of Atheist enlightenment philosophers like John Stewart Mill. Faith in the supernatural, and certainly faith in the specific models of the supernatural specified by monotheistic religion is not required to live a life free from the reckless indulgence of animal desire. It requires will and good counsel, if your faith aids you with that, so be it. Ryan
"Michael Moore and Mel Gibson are the same person, except for a few sit-ups. Moore thought his cheesy political blooper reel was going to tell people how to vote. Mel thought that his little gay SM movie about his imaginary friend was going to help him get to heaven." - Penn Jillette
-- modified at 14:37 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
-
Judah Himango wrote:
I don't buy the nonsense that everyone's way to God is alright
That's strange to me. So to you, the only way to God is the Jesus way - any other way won't get to God. To Adnan, it's through Mohammed's ways and no other. And to Hindus, through temples and Hindu prayers (though moderate Hindus believe that Christians and Muslims eventually pray to the same single-god-entity as Hindus do). Why cannot there be multiple paths to a god (or gods)? Why go by the "my belief is the only true belief" theory? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)I think you don't understand. If you belive something, then that means that contrary beliefs, are to you, wrong. That is what belief means. But, that does not mean we cannot respect each other and allow each other to live our lives as we please.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Why cannot there be multiple paths to a god (or gods)? Why go by the "my belief is the only true belief" theory?
That is just another beief! And you are welcome to it. There are many beliefs, you have to pick one. And your belief, that everyone is right, is just another belief. In other words, you can belive the world is flat or round. You have to pick one. But this does not give the 2 groups the right to kill each other. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
That's largely based on the assumption that there is no God. If there is no God, then to an outsider, it seems that religion is harmless so long as it's a open to all new ideas, tolerant of everything and everyone, adhering to the "all paths lead to the same mountain" kind of thinking. I hear that a lot: "your belief, Judah, is harmless so long as you're not hurting anyone". Look at it from the other perspective for a moment. If there is a God, then not everyone or everything should be tolerated, assuming good and evil exist. This sounds nasty and evil, but in practice it's logical and required. For one, we can all agree that killing another human for no reason at all is evil and shouldn't be tolerated. If some acts are evil, then not all paths lead to the same mountain. If some of the paths -- ways of living your life -- be that religion or just plain ethics, lead to an evil way of live, a way of life that is not God-honoring, then we can't say that all ways are acceptable. This is what I am concerned about most. Those who just do whatever's right in their own eyes live a life free to do whatever they please. Sounds good, right? I tried living that way for awhile. But where did it get me? Pornography, insatiable lusting, all lust no love, in the sex department. That's a dark, downward spiral for anybody. Doing whatever's right in your own eyes is flexible; you can have your own personal rules; for instance, be kind to others. But your own rules you're of course free to bend and break anytime you want without consequence. What I'm saying is this: without God (and I don't mean in a religious way, but in a personal relationship way), free living is hardly free; instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with. What I've found out through all this is that the real free living is found by living a Godly life, not by following the whims of your personal wants and desires. The real free life, ironically, is the servant life, living for God and living for other instead of yourself. Nish, I hope that is something you'll find out in your life. Now, you're right about all this painful bashing of other religions. You know what, I can't speak for everybody here, since we all come from different backgrounds. I know for those believing that Jesus is the Messiah, those folks saying all these nasty things about Islam, they're not following Jesus too closely. Jesus said that of all of our Scripture, of everything written in the Jewish Law, the whole point of all of it, boils down to 2 things: love God, a
Judah Himango wrote:
but at least the disagreeing can be done with respect and without backstabbing and hatred; we should leave leave those things to the lawless, godless folks.
I am a little shocked by this sentence. I am an atheist - and therefore god-less. I don't think I like being equated with being lawless :~ Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
Judah Himango wrote:
instead you become slaves to addictions that you can ruin your life with
It does not require faith in God to resist short term pleasure in favour of long term peace with yourself and for the good of those you love. There's a fair strain of acetism in both the pre christian philosophies of Stoicism and epicurism which influenced Christian theology, as well as in the writings of Atheist enlightenment philosophers like John Stewart Mill. Faith in the supernatural, and certainly faith in the specific models of the supernatural specified by monotheistic religion is not required to live a life free from the reckless indulgence of animal desire. It requires will and good counsel, if your faith aids you with that, so be it. Ryan
"Michael Moore and Mel Gibson are the same person, except for a few sit-ups. Moore thought his cheesy political blooper reel was going to tell people how to vote. Mel thought that his little gay SM movie about his imaginary friend was going to help him get to heaven." - Penn Jillette
-- modified at 14:37 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
Ryan Roberts wrote:
Faith in the supernatural, and certainly faith in the specific models of the supernatural specified by monotheistic religion is not required to live a life free from the reckless indulgence of animal desire. It requires will and good counsel, if your faith aids you with that, so be it.
Exactly - very true! That's one area where I thoroughly disagree with Judah - he equates godless people with lawless people! That sort of attitude is only one magnitude away from those used by religious extremists against other religions! :sigh: Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
I think you don't understand. If you belive something, then that means that contrary beliefs, are to you, wrong. That is what belief means. But, that does not mean we cannot respect each other and allow each other to live our lives as we please.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Why cannot there be multiple paths to a god (or gods)? Why go by the "my belief is the only true belief" theory?
That is just another beief! And you are welcome to it. There are many beliefs, you have to pick one. And your belief, that everyone is right, is just another belief. In other words, you can belive the world is flat or round. You have to pick one. But this does not give the 2 groups the right to kill each other. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
kgaddy wrote:
I think you don't understand. If you belive something, then that means that contrary beliefs, are to you, wrong. That is what belief means. But, that does not mean we cannot respect each other and allow each other to live our lives as we please.
I understand the core idea that leads to this - but I think it's not good for society as a whole. I am an atheist - so it doesn't really matter to me what religion someone believes in. But I don't want to be treated with suspicion by someone because he/she feels I am god-less. In a way, I think moderate Hinduism is the mildest of the religions in the world today - since there is no specific way to reach the single-god, moderate hindus are ok with the idea that christians, muslims pray to the same god that they pray to. That allows for social compatibility. The islamic and christian idea of reaching god is slightly more extreme - they aren't compatible with other religions. While this incompatibility is kept peaceful, it's okay - but there are always going to be a bunch of idiots (in all religions) who'd use this as an excuse to attack other religions - this eventually leads to acts of terrorism.
kgaddy wrote:
But this does not give the 2 groups the right to kill each other.
Agreed. Whether you are religious, or agnostic, or atheist, no one has the right to kill another. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New) -
kgaddy wrote:
I think you don't understand. If you belive something, then that means that contrary beliefs, are to you, wrong. That is what belief means. But, that does not mean we cannot respect each other and allow each other to live our lives as we please.
I understand the core idea that leads to this - but I think it's not good for society as a whole. I am an atheist - so it doesn't really matter to me what religion someone believes in. But I don't want to be treated with suspicion by someone because he/she feels I am god-less. In a way, I think moderate Hinduism is the mildest of the religions in the world today - since there is no specific way to reach the single-god, moderate hindus are ok with the idea that christians, muslims pray to the same god that they pray to. That allows for social compatibility. The islamic and christian idea of reaching god is slightly more extreme - they aren't compatible with other religions. While this incompatibility is kept peaceful, it's okay - but there are always going to be a bunch of idiots (in all religions) who'd use this as an excuse to attack other religions - this eventually leads to acts of terrorism.
kgaddy wrote:
But this does not give the 2 groups the right to kill each other.
Agreed. Whether you are religious, or agnostic, or atheist, no one has the right to kill another. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
But I don't want to be treated with suspicion by someone because he/she feels I am god-less.
Sorry, but your own admission, you are Godless. You cannot make people view this the way you want. People are free to interpret this anyway they want. It's called free thought. But no one should try to harm your for your belief. They may not like you, but again, free thought.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
The islamic and christian idea of reaching god is slightly more extreme - they aren't compatible with other religions. While this incompatibility is kept peaceful, it's okay - but there are always going to be a bunch of idiots (in all religions) who'd use this as an excuse to attack other religions - this eventually leads to acts of terrorism.
Umm, where are Christians attacking other religions becasue there is incompatibility? I only know of one religion that does this. Christians get along with Hindus, Jews. We may not agree, but we are not killing each other. On the other hand Islam is currently fighting ALL religions, In all parts of the world. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"