Pwned by a "secular human" woman
-
Finally! A secularist with the courage and integrity to say what needs to be said about Islam (rather than bashing christianity and pretending to be a hero of secularism). Bravo!
Pardon Libbey!
Stan Shannon wrote:
(rather than bashing christianity and pretending to be a hero of secularism)
Couldn't resist that one, could you? :rolleyes:
"All your God are belong to us."
-
It is a repost but a good one, nonetheless. Bear in mind, though, that however eloquent and erudite she may be in putting across what she believes the intended targets are not listening nor are they likely to as is evidenced by the closing remarks. It does not matter an iota as to whether she is right or not since they have far too much to lose by paying her any attention. This would be true of any relgious adherent: they listen without hearing since to hear would mean to question and that is something they will never do. Again, they're all as bad as each other regardless of belief since it's their way or the highway. That's why they all rail against secularism since it places them all on an equal footing: something they could not tolerate. Pity.
Is there a difference in your view between being "placed on an equal footing", which sounds like fair competition, and being forced to accept the equality of conflicting ideologies, i.e. that none of them are true, before any other debate can take place. Or do you take the post modernist view that there is no truth or falsehood or objective reallity?
digital man wrote:
to hear would mean to question and that is something they will never do
I must be the exception that proves the rule :-D
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
Interesting, she seems to have found a big following amongst the Christians/Zionists when she had practically none amongst the original audience of that show. Ofcourse this clip (a repost), like many clips from that organization is edited for effect[^]. All praise is due to Allah, secularism is on its last breath in that part of the world, as for California that is a different story...
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
Quote: All praise is due to Allah, secularism is on its last breath in that part of the world, as for California that is a different story... I wonder who voted this garbage a 5...
The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. - John Adams
-
Is there a difference in your view between being "placed on an equal footing", which sounds like fair competition, and being forced to accept the equality of conflicting ideologies, i.e. that none of them are true, before any other debate can take place. Or do you take the post modernist view that there is no truth or falsehood or objective reallity?
digital man wrote:
to hear would mean to question and that is something they will never do
I must be the exception that proves the rule :-D
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Is there a difference in your view between being "placed on an equal footing", which sounds like fair competition, and being forced to accept the equality of conflicting ideologies, i.e. that none of them are true, before any other debate can take place. Or do you take the post modernist view that there is no truth or falsehood or objective reallity?
Interesting question. I think they are 2 different things. The law of the land may place every belief on an equal legal footing but you can't force people to accept that which they oppose or believe for religious reasons but you can expect them to respect and obey the law of the land. That is why I believe that secular democracy works since it should give every faith equality under the law whilst allowing them the freedom to think that they are as superior to any other religious group as they wish provided that they do not attempt to force that view or their beliefs on anyone else. As an atheist I have no problem with anyone believing in and worshipping in any way they choose provided that I can include myself out and get left alone. Just because I don't believe in god doesn't mean I should be able to force that view on anyone else. Truth, etc, are perceptual. What you see as the truth I may not yet we may both be correct. As the old saying goes: there's his side, her side and the truth.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
I must be the exception that proves the rule
In that case I'm delighted to be proved wrong.
-
Interesting, she seems to have found a big following amongst the Christians/Zionists when she had practically none amongst the original audience of that show. Ofcourse this clip (a repost), like many clips from that organization is edited for effect[^]. All praise is due to Allah, secularism is on its last breath in that part of the world, as for California that is a different story...
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
All praise is in fact due to pork.
-
All praise is in fact due to pork.
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
All praise is in fact due to pork.
All your pork are belong to us.
"All your God are belong to us."
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
All praise is in fact due to pork.
All your pork are belong to us.
"All your God are belong to us."
Not the one which I devoured for lunch! Hah!
-
All praise is in fact due to pork.
-
Not only are you going to the Christian hell, I am sure you are also going to the Muslim one now. :)
The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. - John Adams
Good. I hate cold places!
-
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
Is there a difference in your view between being "placed on an equal footing", which sounds like fair competition, and being forced to accept the equality of conflicting ideologies, i.e. that none of them are true, before any other debate can take place. Or do you take the post modernist view that there is no truth or falsehood or objective reallity?
Interesting question. I think they are 2 different things. The law of the land may place every belief on an equal legal footing but you can't force people to accept that which they oppose or believe for religious reasons but you can expect them to respect and obey the law of the land. That is why I believe that secular democracy works since it should give every faith equality under the law whilst allowing them the freedom to think that they are as superior to any other religious group as they wish provided that they do not attempt to force that view or their beliefs on anyone else. As an atheist I have no problem with anyone believing in and worshipping in any way they choose provided that I can include myself out and get left alone. Just because I don't believe in god doesn't mean I should be able to force that view on anyone else. Truth, etc, are perceptual. What you see as the truth I may not yet we may both be correct. As the old saying goes: there's his side, her side and the truth.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
I must be the exception that proves the rule
In that case I'm delighted to be proved wrong.
I think I agree with you on secular democracy as long as you don't define ordinary debate and persuasion as an
digital man wrote:
attempt to force that view or their beliefs on anyone else
I know people who do an I don't think that's reasonable. If the truth is perceptual, relative to the perciever, then there is no truth, or reality and this entire conversation isn't happening. We might both be wrong but if we disagree then we can't both be right. That is an axiom of logic which is itself, adimittedly, a belief based system, like all others :)
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
I think I agree with you on secular democracy as long as you don't define ordinary debate and persuasion as an
digital man wrote:
attempt to force that view or their beliefs on anyone else
I know people who do an I don't think that's reasonable. If the truth is perceptual, relative to the perciever, then there is no truth, or reality and this entire conversation isn't happening. We might both be wrong but if we disagree then we can't both be right. That is an axiom of logic which is itself, adimittedly, a belief based system, like all others :)
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
If the truth is perceptual, relative to the perciever, then there is no truth, or reality and this entire conversation isn't happening. We might both be wrong but if we disagree then we can't both be right. That is an axiom of logic which is itself, adimittedly, a belief based system, like all others
Head... hurts... There is a truth somewhere in the mix but my perception of it is different to yours, that's all. It's only a problem if our truths don't match at all: if there are some points of convergence then all is well. And no, this conversation is not really hap...
-
Matthew Faithfull wrote:
If the truth is perceptual, relative to the perciever, then there is no truth, or reality and this entire conversation isn't happening. We might both be wrong but if we disagree then we can't both be right. That is an axiom of logic which is itself, adimittedly, a belief based system, like all others
Head... hurts... There is a truth somewhere in the mix but my perception of it is different to yours, that's all. It's only a problem if our truths don't match at all: if there are some points of convergence then all is well. And no, this conversation is not really hap...
..pening. I beg to differ on that at least. As long as we're agreed that there is an external, objective reality, which we are both accessing some portion of then I'm good with that.:-D
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
Not the one which I devoured for lunch! Hah!
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Not the one which I devoured for lunch! Hah!
:laugh: All your Swedes are belong to us!
"All your God are belong to us."
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Not the one which I devoured for lunch! Hah!
:laugh: All your Swedes are belong to us!
"All your God are belong to us."
73Zeppelin wrote:
All your Swedes are belong to us!
Nah.. Swedes may have become tame the last 3-400 years, but it's only a solemn slumber. If any pork-denying fascist ever tries to take over Sweden, the shit is gonna hit the fan! Ask the Danes what happened last time they tried! :)
-
73Zeppelin wrote:
All your Swedes are belong to us!
Nah.. Swedes may have become tame the last 3-400 years, but it's only a solemn slumber. If any pork-denying fascist ever tries to take over Sweden, the shit is gonna hit the fan! Ask the Danes what happened last time they tried! :)
Okay, I'll settle for your bikini team! :laugh:
"All your God are belong to us."