This is Islam. Malcom X

[Mystic]

Whatever you want to conjecture and build more conjecture upon, and make a giant mess of things, you are welcome to.  Just don't blame me for it.

I'll blame you for the things you are responsible for, independent of the bullshit that is your religion.  There is no conflict in condemning both.

I'm not responsible for taking you out of your misguidance.

[Brian37]

Mystic, nobody is saying you personally are a bad person, we are arguing that you have a false perception of reality.

Whether people are or not, doesn't matter. Some people do, some people don't. I don't care for your judgement at all. 

Obviously people that are misguided will see the guided as having a false perception of reality, but it's the guided by guidance and proofs from God that are correct at the end of the day.

---

That's fine, Mystic.  As clearly demonstrated, you aren't a reliable guide to the truth anyway, so it would be foolish of me to look to you for affirmation of anything.  Your refusal itself is evidence I'm on the right path.

Whatever you want to conjecture and build more conjecture upon, and make a giant mess of things, you are welcome to.  Just don't blame me for it.

My "Judgment" is not of you personally, but the things you claim I certainly can and will judge.

My late mom, whom I loved deeply, whom cared for me long after most parents would have, whom never let me end up on the street, was a Christian, and died a Christian. But no, as much as I loved her, I still do not buy claims of babies with magic powers, nor do I believe humans can survive rigor mortis as the death myth of Jesus would imply.

If our species never questioned social norms, our species never would have left the caves.



I wont give you a pass on your fantastic claims anymore than I would Catholic Lady or Road Runner or Atlass. None of what I do here is about oppressing others and everything with evidence.

Even if I like or love you, that does not make everything you claim true.

[Angrboda]

I'll blame you for the things you are responsible for, independent of the bullshit that is your religion.  There is no conflict in condemning both.

I'm not responsible for taking you out of your misguidance.

I'm not in any misguidance, so your help would be unnecessary even if you were willing to give it. I don't condemn you for not helping. I condemn you for your lies, idiocy, and sophistry. And you indeed are responsible for that.

[WinterHold]

The most realistic, and most logical thing I have ever heard






Just to know, that what you see on the media about Islam today is not actually Islam.
This is Islam.

No wonder Malcom was killed.

Um Atlass, I think you do a great job fighting the religiously justified violence and sexism coming out of that part of the world.

But just like Malala and Malcolm they still derive their claims of moral justification from the same holy book monsters like Bin Laden and ISIS.

As far as Malcolm himself, I take his entire life into account. His crime as a youth was acting out in desperation because of economic disparity and abuse from bigoted whites. He then went to prison and "found Islam" and stopped committing crimes in the same way a Christian in America finds Jesus and cleans up their act.

He also got dose of reality that his boss was imperfect. The positive message I get from his life, was at the end, when he finally realized that we were the same species.

But he made the same mistake people of all religions worldwide do. The empathetic religious left, whom value compassion fail to realize that there are others of different sub sects of the same umbrella label whom use the same holy writings to justify harm to others.

Just like Martin Luther King Jr, as much of a hero to humanity he was, there were others who used the same bible to justify murdering him.

I do understand Malcolm and why he fought back though. I just don't agree with any theist of any religion as to where they thing our species morality is coming from. I have consistently said that our species morality is not being magically handed down to us from above, nor is it in any holy writing, but has always been in us, in our genes. Our ability to be cruel or compassionate, to lean to violence or non violence, is not magic, it is in the individual.

Too me though, and I have had this debate with my Redneck friend from Oklahoma, the argument over tactics. He's more of a Martin Luther King Jr atheist and I am more of a Malcolm X atheist. I think Malcolm was severely misunderstood on his context of tactics, and even the host in your clip missed the point. I do love that he said basically to whites, "instead of making excuses to allow others to avoid responsibility, own up to your transactions." 

Nor do I think white people back then accepted that Malcolm was not advocating unprovoked violence, but mere self defense.

Let me put it too you this way. I think BOTH Martin Luther King Jr, if had been around during the Civil War would have stood against the South. I also think if they had had been forced to serve in WW2 they both would have fought the Nazis.

Extremist Muslims all share the same belief of taking morals from Hadith books. Look at it as a shop for customizing cars; the main engine is the Quran, but the arms that cause the terrorism are not Quranic at all.

Malcom believed in the engine, sticking to the engine is the source of great ideas like the one he suggested in the video.

---

Islam is whatever the people currently practice it make it out to be.  Just like Christianity and Buddhism and every other religion, it changes over time.  
And it varies from location to location as well as well as sect to sect and person to person.
There is no "true" Islam.  There is only whatever the modern interpretation is, wherever you happen to be looking at that point in time.

Muslims don't have a variation between sects when it comes to the foundations of the faith -which can all be found in the Quran-; but the variation begins with the gigantic secondary sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles...ry_sources

The true Islam is the primary source; aka the Quran.

What vary are secondary sources.

---

Islam is whatever the people currently practice it make it out to be.  Just like Christianity and Buddhism and every other religion, it changes over time.  
And it varies from location to location as well as well as sect to sect and person to person.
There is no "true" Islam.  There is only whatever the modern interpretation is, wherever you happen to be looking at that point in time.

If I may add to this another thing I point out and am very consistent about. Religions DO change over time, I 100% agree.

Having said that, while one cannot force any religion out of existence, for to do so you'd have to become a monster, it is a mistake to focus on one narrow point in human history. There is not one religion in our species entire history that has not had it's transgressions against other religions, or even between the sub sects of the same umbrella religions.

Even in the history of Asia between Buddhist majorities. Japan and China have had their wars and have also committed acts of cruelty on each other.

My point is to say that it isn't the religion that causes an individual to be cruel or causes them to be compassionate, but our evolution. 

Every nation, friend and foe alike, have hospitals and prisons. There were no religions 200,000 years ago, and without written religion, our species were even  back then, displaying acts of cruelty and compassion.

If all we can do as a species, is argue for more compassionate interpretations of our different religions, that is a far better tactic than to demand the forced end of any one group. The only difference between a theist and I is that I simply doubt where they think our ability to do good and be good as a species is coming from. BUT, I will certainly take a Malala or Martin Luther King Jr, or an Ann Frank or a Gandhi over a monster like Hitler, or Po Pot, or KKK members or ISIS.

If we collaborate on doing the good things and build instead of murder and demolish, everything will head to the best.

---

This would be true if God didn't provide a representative that would the official representative and the one who humans have to return to, to return to the chosen word of guidance of God remaining in the line and offspring of Abraham, who was the official representative of the creed in his time.

This one reason among many why the religion cannot really exist in true form without a leader and guide from God!

Even if Atlas say had the right interpretation of Islam, he has no proof from God, and no one is required to pay attention to him or me or anyone without proof from God that their view of Islam is the correct interpretation of God's religion.

Mystic, can you try for once to lose the romance in your argument?

Between the two of you, he is far less likely to go off the deep end and go ISIS on anyone.

The "right interpretation".

Yep, every religion, including Jews and Christians and Buddhists ....... ect ect ect..

If you'd only swallow my version.

Look I do get it, I used to believe in a god myself. But there is no "correct" interpretation. 

No matter which religion anyone of any religion argues, it is still the same, "I like what I believe and anyone else even in my same religion with a different interpretation got it wrong."

Every religion does this. Baptists argue with Catholics, Catholics argue with Mormons but none of them want to face it all stems from the same Christian God. Just like Sunnis and Shiites refuse to face it is the same Koran.

How you wish others would behave who claim the same label are equally Muslim as you are. Not because they always do good, but because they hold the same book to be true but interpret it differently.

I take the same approach with even my fellow atheists. Stalin was an atheist, I am an atheist. He was a monster regardless of how I wanted him or any atheist to behave. Holding the same position between diverse people does not change that the core position are the same.

Personally, I think that the human mind is the source of variation between peoples' beliefs and moral choices. And you can even see it with young people who are so stubborn. Even nations and different societies get too stubborn to accept only their own version of a certain religion or idea.

[WinterHold]

Malcolm X's religion did not mean shit to me. I admire the man and his place in U.S. history. White supremacy and Jim Crow was not giving way. We had two men offering two opposing solutions to this racial tyranny. MLK,  offering shame and martyrdom or Malcolm offering a self defense philosophy that did not stop at outright warfare.This dichotomy forced Americans to choose accepting their shame and giving way towards racial integration. Malcolm (and the Panthers) deserve credit for this.

The "self defense" philosophy is what Islam advocates.
The "handing off the other cheek" philosophy is what modern Christianity advocates.

I totally think and believe that Malcom showed the variation between both religions: he was right when he described MLK being an "uncle Tom". But both men changed TBH. And both were essential to reform the look towards black American.

[The Grand Nudger]

I appreciate that -you- advocate self defense...but magic book offers pretext for a then/soon to be current war.  It would be phenomenally dishonest (or almost inexplicably ignorant) of you to pretend that this is not what is written..and what happened. Islamic magic book isn't unique in this, obviously. People often point to islam as a particularly nasty religion and juxtapose it against sihkism, for example. Hilariously, they also "advocated self defense" while engaging in an aggressive military expansion. The movement actually began as the intellectual backdrop of a warrior caste. They would find themselves the oppressed, soon enough, squeezed by the islamic rulers of the subcontinent, who tortured, raped, and murdered the dogshit out of them for the crime of not converting to islam...in self defense, I'm sure.

It's an interesting trait of so many religions, that when in power they scream "submit, submit or die"...and when they find themselves on the outs, they begin to plead for tolerance. You find yourself towards the latter end of that cycle.

[Brian37]

Um Atlass, I think you do a great job fighting the religiously justified violence and sexism coming out of that part of the world.

But just like Malala and Malcolm they still derive their claims of moral justification from the same holy book monsters like Bin Laden and ISIS.

As far as Malcolm himself, I take his entire life into account. His crime as a youth was acting out in desperation because of economic disparity and abuse from bigoted whites. He then went to prison and "found Islam" and stopped committing crimes in the same way a Christian in America finds Jesus and cleans up their act.

He also got dose of reality that his boss was imperfect. The positive message I get from his life, was at the end, when he finally realized that we were the same species.

But he made the same mistake people of all religions worldwide do. The empathetic religious left, whom value compassion fail to realize that there are others of different sub sects of the same umbrella label whom use the same holy writings to justify harm to others.

Just like Martin Luther King Jr, as much of a hero to humanity he was, there were others who used the same bible to justify murdering him.

I do understand Malcolm and why he fought back though. I just don't agree with any theist of any religion as to where they thing our species morality is coming from. I have consistently said that our species morality is not being magically handed down to us from above, nor is it in any holy writing, but has always been in us, in our genes. Our ability to be cruel or compassionate, to lean to violence or non violence, is not magic, it is in the individual.

Too me though, and I have had this debate with my Redneck friend from Oklahoma, the argument over tactics. He's more of a Martin Luther King Jr atheist and I am more of a Malcolm X atheist. I think Malcolm was severely misunderstood on his context of tactics, and even the host in your clip missed the point. I do love that he said basically to whites, "instead of making excuses to allow others to avoid responsibility, own up to your transactions." 

Nor do I think white people back then accepted that Malcolm was not advocating unprovoked violence, but mere self defense.

Let me put it too you this way. I think BOTH Martin Luther King Jr, if had been around during the Civil War would have stood against the South. I also think if they had had been forced to serve in WW2 they both would have fought the Nazis.

Extremist Muslims all share the same belief of taking morals from Hadith books. Look at it as a shop for customizing cars; the main engine is the Quran, but the arms that cause the terrorism are not Quranic at all.

Malcom believed in the engine, sticking to the engine is the source of great ideas like the one he suggested in the video.

---

Islam is whatever the people currently practice it make it out to be.  Just like Christianity and Buddhism and every other religion, it changes over time.  
And it varies from location to location as well as well as sect to sect and person to person.
There is no "true" Islam.  There is only whatever the modern interpretation is, wherever you happen to be looking at that point in time.

Muslims don't have a variation between sects when it comes to the foundations of the faith -which can all be found in the Quran-; but the variation begins with the gigantic secondary sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles...ry_sources

The true Islam is the primary source; aka the Quran.

What vary are secondary sources.

---

If I may add to this another thing I point out and am very consistent about. Religions DO change over time, I 100% agree.

Having said that, while one cannot force any religion out of existence, for to do so you'd have to become a monster, it is a mistake to focus on one narrow point in human history. There is not one religion in our species entire history that has not had it's transgressions against other religions, or even between the sub sects of the same umbrella religions.

Even in the history of Asia between Buddhist majorities. Japan and China have had their wars and have also committed acts of cruelty on each other.

My point is to say that it isn't the religion that causes an individual to be cruel or causes them to be compassionate, but our evolution. 

Every nation, friend and foe alike, have hospitals and prisons. There were no religions 200,000 years ago, and without written religion, our species were even  back then, displaying acts of cruelty and compassion.

If all we can do as a species, is argue for more compassionate interpretations of our different religions, that is a far better tactic than to demand the forced end of any one group. The only difference between a theist and I is that I simply doubt where they think our ability to do good and be good as a species is coming from. BUT, I will certainly take a Malala or Martin Luther King Jr, or an Ann Frank or a Gandhi over a monster like Hitler, or Po Pot, or KKK members or ISIS.

If we collaborate on doing the good things and build instead of murder and demolish, everything will head to the best.

---

Mystic, can you try for once to lose the romance in your argument?

Between the two of you, he is far less likely to go off the deep end and go ISIS on anyone.

The "right interpretation".

Yep, every religion, including Jews and Christians and Buddhists ....... ect ect ect..

If you'd only swallow my version.

Look I do get it, I used to believe in a god myself. But there is no "correct" interpretation. 

No matter which religion anyone of any religion argues, it is still the same, "I like what I believe and anyone else even in my same religion with a different interpretation got it wrong."

Every religion does this. Baptists argue with Catholics, Catholics argue with Mormons but none of them want to face it all stems from the same Christian God. Just like Sunnis and Shiites refuse to face it is the same Koran.

How you wish others would behave who claim the same label are equally Muslim as you are. Not because they always do good, but because they hold the same book to be true but interpret it differently.

I take the same approach with even my fellow atheists. Stalin was an atheist, I am an atheist. He was a monster regardless of how I wanted him or any atheist to behave. Holding the same position between diverse people does not change that the core position are the same.

Personally, I think that the human mind is the source of variation between peoples' beliefs and moral choices. And you can even see it with young people who are so stubborn. Even nations and different societies get too stubborn to accept only their own version of a certain religion or idea.

Once again Atlass, just like Mystic, just like Christians and Jews too. You ARE EMPLOYING the "true Scotsman" fallacy.

"The Koran is the true source"....... Um no, it is the common source, the interpretations vary. Just like Martin Luther King Jr and KKK members both think Jesus is the one true savior. Martin Luther King Jr interpreted the bible to bring people together, the KKK uses the same holy book to justify racial purity.

Just like Sunnis and Shiites use the Koran.

Even with atheists, Ayn Rand was an atheist, I am an atheist, but she valued "fuck you I got mine" economics, I don't. Stalin also was an atheist, so am I, he valued dictatorial authoritarian rule, I DON'T.

What most humans worldwide are not seeing, because they buy what they are mostly sold from birth, is that our ability to be good or bad, to be cruel or compassionate, IS NOT being handed down to humans from above from a magical divine source.

You are good, not because you are a Muslim, you are good because you the individual are good. One is not good because they are a Christian but because that individual is good. One is not good because they are an atheist, they are good, as an individual because that individual is good.

Labels have no magic divine power. You do good, or you don't. All 7 billion of us are the same species and our species has ALWAYS, and long before any written religion, have ALWAYS had the ability to be cruel or compassionate. It is still up to humans how we choose to interact.