(October 14, 2014 at 2:41 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:

(October 14, 2014 at 12:32 pm)genkaus Wrote: Here's the deal - until you can prove god and his influence, let's keep him out of civil laws and experiential moral lessons.

Unmoved Mover. Next.

Insufficient. Next.

(October 14, 2014 at 6:29 am)genkaus Wrote: So, Bill Maher has been on the new quite a bit recently with his "anti-Islam propaganda".

I don't see it as "anti-Islam propaganda". He never states that the vast majority of Muslims mean us harm. They are like everyone else, just trying to get by, raise a family, have a career, be healthy, etc.

Maher, Harris, Dawkins, et al speak out against the Jihadists and Fundamentalists, because their form of Islam is dangerous. He and Harris make this abundantly clear in the now infamous exchange with Afleck.

Quote:What that makes me think of is the argument I’ve seen from Harris and others in that clique which is, more or less, that they have a better handle on what Islam actually mandates — and that the millions and millions of Muslims who would disagree with their interpretation are in reality shirking elements of their faith that make them uncomfortable.

Well, here’s the thing: That statement is indicative of the extreme lack of sophistication that is exhibited by people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher when it comes to religion in general and Islam, specifically.

It's not Harris, Dawkins, Maher's fault that a minority of Muslims decide to take the Qur'an literally.

Harris, Dawkins and Maher are very aware that the majority of Muslims do not take it literally. They do not speak out against those Muslims because they are not dangerous.

Quote:Atheists often forget the myriad of ways a religion can be followed. NOT extracting your morals from the holy book is the basic lesson of religion - something you learn on your first day.

We completely understand that theists of all stripes will cherry pick their religious texts.

And thanks for the unsophisticated view of atheists, Reza.

Maybe Mr. Aslan should travel to Syria or Iraq and explain this to the ISIS. Oh that's right, he'd probably be stoned for being an infidel.

Quote:The idea of following the holy book dogmatically and taking it literally are forms of fundamentalism. Since that is what atheists expect religious people to do, they are proposing another kind of fundamentalism - one that applies to others, not themselves.

Another unsophisticated generalization about atheists from Mr. Aslan. Bigoted much Reza?

I don't ever expect theists to be dogmatic followers of their holy books. I wait for them to tell me. That's what non-bigoted people do.

.

(October 14, 2014 at 3:42 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: I don't see it as "anti-Islam propaganda". He never states that the vast majority of Muslims mean us harm. They are like everyone else, just trying to get by, raise a family, have a career, be healthy, etc.

Its not anti-Muslim propaganda, its anti-Islam propaganda.

(October 14, 2014 at 3:42 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Maher, Harris, Dawkins, et al speak out against the Jihadists and Fundamentalists, because their form of Islam is dangerous. He and Harris make this abundantly clear in the now infamous exchange with Afleck.

Did they distinguish it from other forms of Islam?

(October 14, 2014 at 3:42 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: It's not Harris, Dawkins, Maher's fault that a minority of Muslims decide to take the Qur'an literally.

Harris, Dawkins and Maher are very aware that the majority of Muslims do not take it literally. They do not speak out against those Muslims because they are not dangerous.

However, all of them frequently do speak out against the Quran itself.

And people on this forum frequently speak out against the Bible itself as well, because like the Koran, it's a collection of immorality and superstitious shit with a handful of nice ideas and concepts that have been presented elsewhere more effectively and without the threat of divine punishment or the shoe-horning in of supernatural justifications. Both books deserve to be ridiculed because both books are ridiculous.

(October 14, 2014 at 4:03 pm)genkaus Wrote: Its not anti-Muslim propaganda, its anti-Islam propaganda.

How is it propaganda to point out that Islam has some horrendous ideas in its holy text?

Quote:Did they distinguish it from other forms of Islam?

Absolutely.

Quote:However, all of them frequently do speak out against the Quran itself.

True.

But as Harris states, the Qur'an is "a mother load of bad ideas". Don't you agree?

The fact that the majority of Muslims don't follow it has nothing to do with what it actually says.

(October 14, 2014 at 4:14 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: The fact that the majority of Muslims don't follow it has nothing to do with what it actually says.

But it does speak to the shallow nature of anti-Muslim bigotry. It's okay to cherry-pick the Bible, but Muslims cannot do so, by Western lights: they must either embrace every repulsive sura, or be false Muslims.

Cafeteria Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Southern Baptists ... Christian sects and outlooks are not held to the same standard.

I wonder why.

Perhaps because as a rational being I think god, if he existed, would be greatly mad at us for cherry picking the scriptures. By the way, does this mean I pick my morals and then I am supposed to pick the religion that fits my morals best? So basically everyone has morals, but the ones with a certain morality are right and therefore are led to the right religion? This is complete absurdity.

But I will agree that it becomes annoying when us atheists start shoving down theists the argument of 'You're not a real Christian!' since that is mostly and attempt do take credit and prestige away from your opponent, I will avoid using that argument and try to see someone as a Christian as long as they are followers of Christ, whatever that means - Unless the person in hand touches the specific subject, then I'll start arguing on interpretations, literalism/metaphors and tell them I think they're just trying to hard to not led bible verses fall into misery.

Atheist fundamentalism?

When an atheist blows himself up in a crowded market place or tortures someone to make them not believe in deities, then get back to me.

(October 14, 2014 at 5:19 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(October 14, 2014 at 4:14 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: The fact that the majority of Muslims don't follow it has nothing to do with what it actually says.

But it does speak to the shallow nature of anti-Muslim bigotry. It's okay to cherry-pick the Bible, but Muslims cannot do so, by Western lights: they must either embrace every repulsive sura, or be false Muslims.

Cafeteria Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Southern Baptists ... Christian sects and outlooks are not held to the same standard.

I wonder why.

None of the people mentioned exhibit anti-Muslim bigotry.

They are talking about Islam and the Qur'an, not Muslims.

Harris makes the point, that Muslims that are fundamentalists and Jihadists are getting their ideas from their holy text. The fact that the vast majority of Muslims cheery pick is great.

Are these or are these not bad ideas:

Killing infidels.
Stoning women that are not virgins on their wedding night.
Stoning a women if she did not scream loud enough when she was raped.
Woman's testimony is not acceptable in court unless there are 2 or more.

If you agree that these are bad ideas, you are in agreement with Harris.

Of course Christians that espouse the bad ideas in the Bible are held to the same standards.

Harris has spoken out many times on the anti-condom policy that Catholics spread in Africa. He's spoken about the anti-gay policy spread by an American Evangelical Christian that has lead to government policy to kill or imprison gays in Africa.

There are some impressive straw creations in this thread