When will the Middle East become majority Atheist?

[I Am Not A Human Being]

And in PNG women are often still burned alive because Christians there think "witches" are real.

Actually that's an ancient practice rooted in the tribal beliefs of Melanesians.

[Dystopia]

Are we talking about historically or present day? If it is the former, then I could make a strong argument against that statement. If it is the latter, I could still argue the point. Not that it really matters. Both are horrible and dismissing one because the other may be worse is just a fallacy of relative privation. In places like Uganda, LGBT people are thrown in jail and often attacked just for being who they are. They even originally wanted to have them executed. And in PNG women are often still burned alive because Christians there think "witches" are real. The problem isn't so much the religions themselves. They are just a symptom of the underlying issues. We have seen that Christianity and Islam can both be civilized to an extent when they exist in countries with secular laws. safety nets for the poor and proper education systems. However, when you put either of them in a country with rampant poverty, minimal access to education and a government that leans heavily toward being a theocracy, you get the same barbaric and oppressive behavior in both religions.

The past is irrelevant to me, what matters is the present. The amount of terrorism committed in the name of Islam is not comparable with any other religion. It is not our goal, obligation or preoccupation to educate Muslims or any other theists - It is the person's duty to learn how to live with secular law. Also, your belief of poor people is disproved by the amount of Muslim men who hold bigoted views and got rich because of oil, etc. We already have immigrants in Europe, we have no need for more since it's difficult to simply employ our own people.

[I Am Not A Human Being]

At the moment, yes. However, they have also committed their share of violence. Their hands aren't clean.

Such as? And if you're willing to equate protesting for human rights as "violence" then be my guest. It's really not helping your argument because right now you're reaching for straws.

The Copts in Egypt aren't denying religious freedom or trying to establish a Coptic Egyptian State. The Islamists are, however (with an Islamist Egypt of course). They even succeeded with the MB.

Understand that even the Stonewall riots containted a lot of violence at the hands of gays, lesbians and drag queens.

The rioting was triggered by constant police harassment and discrimination, among other things. I guess you will also condemn this landmark event in LGBT history.

If not, you're not consistent with your views and quite frankly a hypocrite.

Does that excuse their own violence?

Again, what do you mean by their own violence? Show some examples. You keep throwing around the word "violence" without specifying.

So Christian violence only counts in the middle-east? Well, since she specifically said the ME, I suppose that is a fair point.

You just answered your own question.

Let's not pretend that it doesn't exist elsewhere though.

Perhaps, perhaps not, I really don't care in this thread because that topic is irrelevant.

Also, by comparing the Coptic Egyptian strive for equal human rights to Uganda's treatment of the LGBT community you're doing yourself a huge intellectual disfavor.

[Thumpalumpacus]

You didn't answer the question of historicity, IANAHB.

If you go back through history, you can find Christian regimes as thoroughly despicable. Carl Sagan estimated that at least 750,000 women were killed in Europe during the witch-hunts running from 1500 - 1750 CE. They were easily as energetic in the external projection of their religious energy, if not more so, than modern Muslims.

None of this, obviously, is meant to justify Muslim atrocities, but simply to point out that blind faith of any stripe has inherent dangers that can and do result in mass horror.

[Dystopia]

@Parkers, I don't disagree, but as I've already said, we should care about the future and the future for Christianity seems to be either erasure or a minority status.

[I Am Not A Human Being]

You didn't answer the question of historicity, IANAHB.

I didn't receive it or I must've missed it.

If you go back through history, you can find Christian regimes as thoroughly despicable.

As with most types of regimes, even the ones with state atheism.

Carl Sagan estimated that at least 750,000 women were killed in Europe during the witch-hunts running from 1500 - 1750 CE.

Sounds like hyperbole. Let's not forget that Carl Sagan was not an academic historian.

They were easily as energetic in the external projection of their religious energy, if not more so, than modern Muslims.

I don't doubt that. But that really says something, doesn't it?

That some widespread Muslim opinions of today regarding women for example can be compared to Christian Europe during mainly the 1500s and the 1600s.

It shows how far Christianity has evolved and how backwards some commonly held Muslim beliefs are today.

[abentwookie]

And in PNG women are often still burned alive because Christians there think "witches" are real.

Actually that's an ancient practice rooted in the tribal beliefs of Melanesians.

Yes. However, it is also been a practice shared by Christians in the past. When missionaries go to places like PNG and teach people about the bible, it just confirms what they already believe. Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live? Remember that verse? We should, considering that it was used as an excuse to kill many women, men and even children. This is what happens when you go to a country in which a large percentage of people who lack basic educations and start teaching them about witches, demons, devils, etc...

Here is an incident that happened this year. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/ja...te-village

Scroll down to toward the bottom of the article. Notice where it says there was no history of this in the province (Enga, which is nearly all Christian) where it happened? Also notice the part where the Bishop is threatening excommunication for those who engage in this behavior. Now why would he be threatening them unless they were Christians?

Here is another interesting article.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/p...men-25108/

The past is irrelevant to me, what matters is the present. The amount of terrorism committed in the name of Islam is not comparable with any other religion. It is not our goal, obligation or preoccupation to educate Muslims or any other theists - It is the person's duty to learn how to live with secular law.

I think you are missing my point. One thing that bothers me about a lot of atheists right now is this narrow, laser-like focus on Islam, while dismissing what Christians and other religions do. I don't think it is wise to ignore the most powerful group (Christians) of people on the planet and focus entirely on a group that mostly inhabits third-world types of areas. As someone who lives in the U.S. it isn't the Muslim fundamentalists that I am worried about in my own country. They don't really have any power outside of the middle-east and I suspect that the clock is ticking as far as their power in certain parts of that area is concerned.

Anyway, as I said earlier, this basically comes down to a fallacy of relative privation. It isn't a good idea to ignore problems in your own back yard, just because they may be worse on your neighbor's property. That is exactly how problems grow.

I do agree with your last point but most of the countries with majorities of Christian and Muslim fundamentalist populations do not really have secular governments to begin with so I don't see how that applies. Educating people has always been the best weapon against any kind of extremism. Just telling people that they have to learn to do something a certain way isn't going to accomplish much. You actually have to help them understand WHY.

Also, your belief of poor people is disproved by the amount of Muslim men who hold bigoted views and got rich because of oil, etc. We already have immigrants in Europe, we have no need for more since it's difficult to simply employ our own people.

Actually, no, it does not. Also, I am referring to the majority of religious fundamentalism being caused by a lack of education and economic disparity. This is going to require a lengthy post so I will address it sometime tomorrow.

---

Such as? And if you're willing to equate protesting for human rights as "violence" then be my guest. It's really not helping your argument because right now you're reaching for straws.

How about the protests in Egypt back in 2011? In Asyut a few thousand Copts attacked and destroyed the property of Muslim shop-owners.

Speaking of Egypt. Yes, the people of Egypt were in the streets rallying for their rights as well but many of those protesters also sexually assaulted multiple women. Should we ignore the bad things they do just because they also may be doing something good as well? I don't think so. You don't get a free pass to commit violent acts against other people just because you are fighting for your own rights.

The Copts in Egypt aren't denying religious freedom or trying to establish a Coptic Egyptian State. The Islamists are, however (with an Islamist Egypt of course). They even succeeded with the MB.

[quote]
Understand that even the Stonewall riots containted a lot of violence at the hands of gays, lesbians and drag queens. The rioting was triggered by constant police harassment and discrimination, among other things. I guess you will also condemn this landmark event in LGBT history.

I condemn acts of violence by anyone, for any reason. With the exception of self-defense or defending someone else of course. I hope you aren't suggesting that I should accept violent behavior even if I support the cause in question. I find that morally questionable to say the least.

If not, you're not consistent with your views and quite frankly a hypocrite.

There is no need for hostility or name-calling here.

Also, by comparing the Coptic Egyptian strive for equal human rights to Uganda's treatment of the LGBT community you're doing yourself a huge intellectual disfavor.

How so? Actually, I was comparing behavior. Trying to dismiss violent behavior just because the people are fighting for their rights is, as I said, morally questionable. However, my biggest issue is that you seem to be trying to cover up the violence as part of their fight for human rights.

---

None of this, obviously, is meant to justify Muslim atrocities, but simply to point out that blind faith of any stripe has inherent dangers that can and do result in mass horror.

I agree. I definitely want to point out that I am not defending Muslim fundamentalism, which is something that some Atheists frequently accuse others of doing. I am just trying to get people to understand that Islam isn't the only religion that is a problem. If the situation were reversed and someone said that Christianity was worse than Islam, I would be arguing against that statement as well. Dismissing the horrible acts committed by one group of people just because another group may or may not do things that are worse, is a very dangerous game to play. While you're watching the second group, the first one could become just as bad right under your nose. As an Atheist in the United States, I definitely see Christianity as a far bigger threat than Islam. I do realize that the person who brought us to this conversation was specifically talking about the middle-east, but still....

[CapnAwesome]

I don't know, I think there might be bigger strains of secularism in the Middle East than you'd think and things also can change incredibly fast. It's just the secularism is pushed underground by the extremists who run many of the countries. An example of how fast things can change when Queen Elizabeth became Queen most Britians believed that God preordained her to be Queen. Today most Britians don't believe in God. That's in the lifetime of one human being. So some things can change shockingly fast. Also during the cold war a number of these places have had communist parties, so Atheism has definitely been there before in one way or another. It's hard to put a number on it in terms of years, but I wouldn't be surprised if by the time some of us were old things were a lot different in the middle east.

[Dystopia]

I think you are missing my point. One thing that bothers me about a lot of atheists right now is this narrow, laser-like focus on Islam, while dismissing what Christians and other religions do. I don't think it is wise to ignore the most powerful group (Christians) of people on the planet and focus entirely on a group that mostly inhabits third-world types of areas. As someone who lives in the U.S. it isn't the Muslim fundamentalists that I am worried about in my own country. They don't really have any power outside of the middle-east and I suspect that the clock is ticking as far as their power in certain parts of that area is concerned.

Most powerful group? I'm not particularly concerned about Christians because here in Portugal state-church separation has been religiously (notice the irony) enforced and the church is progressively losing power not to mention young people are increasingly becoming irreligious and don't buy cheap dogmas - But the most powerful group? I wouldn't say so - Both Christians, Jews and Muslims have power around the globe, it's just a matter of looking for favourable geopolitical circumstances - Jews have power in Israel, but in Saudi Arabia it's Muslims, in the US or Uganda it's Christians, etc.

As for your concerns, it may be ok because, as you said it, you don't have a significant Muslims population but in Europe (specifically in some countries like France and England) there's Muslim immigrants and it's a fast growing religion. The reason why people are upset about Islam is because (1) Suicide bombings and terrorist attacks (2) Literalist interpretations taken to the limit (3) Cultural differences which are incompatible with the west, not to mention human beings are very tribalistic (4) Attacks on women's rights and violence against women (As a man I'm already offended by violence against women in the west and women's issues, let alone in Islam) (5) Protests like the one in the UK when Muslims said free speech against their beloved prophet should be banned (6) Laws all over Europe criminalising criticism of Islam as hate speech (to be fair these laws are terrible regardless of the group they protect - People have the right to be bigots)

by the way, I refuse this ridiculous notion that just because something is far away from me I shouldn't worry about it and that I shouldn't care if Muslims are peaceful - What troubles me it's not Muslims but what's written in the Quran and the fundamentals of Islam - I don't think Christianity and Islam are any different than National-Socialism and Aryanism, they are all offensive ideologies and regardless of moderation I will be hostile towards them. Now, I can give Christianity a pass because as much as I dislike it my country was Christian upon it's foundation and my culture is heavily (like the rest of the west) influenced by Judeo-Christian values and culture - Everything else is unnecessary. If you follow a scripture like the Quran I cannot possibly rest under the excuse that you are being moderate, as far as I know contemporary neo-nazis also advocate for moderation but I don't respect them anymore because of it.

I do agree that it's hypocritical to only criticize Islam because it ignores that religion is like an octopus with tentacles and the source of evil is the same, but it's not unwise for people, specially Europeans to be concerned with demographics - I can go the politically correct way if I wish but there's no doubt that if the majority of the population becomes Muslim - Which will not happen in the near future - A war will start and it will not be different than what happened between the X-XII century

Anyway, as I said earlier, this basically comes down to a fallacy of relative privation. It isn't a good idea to ignore problems in your own back yard, just because they may be worse on your neighbor's property. That is exactly how problems grow.

And I don't, I love with my backyard

I do agree with your last point but most of the countries with majorities of Christian and Muslim fundamentalist populations do not really have secular governments to begin with so I don't see how that applies. Educating people has always been the best weapon against any kind of extremism. Just telling people that they have to learn to do something a certain way isn't going to accomplish much. You actually have to help them understand WHY.

No, the tool is not indoctrinating anyone. You see, you can find examples of intelligent and educated members extremist groups like the neo-nazis and Hilter in particular - If you don't indoctrinate anyone I don't see how further problems would arise even with poverty.

Actually, no, it does not. Also, I am referring to the majority of religious fundamentalism being caused by a lack of education and economic disparity. This is going to require a lengthy post so I will address it sometime tomorrow.

Could you please provide evidence to refute my former reply regarding indoctrination? Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to simply not teach religion or teach less often? Also, how do you plan to take people out of poverty - Assuming you are not planning to destroy capitalism?

There is no need for hostility or name-calling here.

I agree but people have the right to slightly insult each other when there's disagreement.

How so? Actually, I was comparing behavior. Trying to dismiss violent behavior just because the people are fighting for their rights is, as I said, morally questionable. However, my biggest issue is that you seem to be trying to cover up the violence as part of their fight for human rights.

I don't know if you've looked at the news but some months ago I posted something about a court in Uganda repealing the law against LGBT.

Also, can you prove that human rights as posed in the UDHR exist?

[abentwookie]

I don't know, I think there might be bigger strains of secularism in the Middle East than you'd think and things also can change incredibly fast. It's just the secularism is pushed underground by the extremists who run many of the countries. An example of how fast things can change when Queen Elizabeth became Queen most Britians believed that God preordained her to be Queen. Today most Britians don't believe in God. That's in the lifetime of one human being. So some things can change shockingly fast. Also during the cold war a number of these places have had communist parties, so Atheism has definitely been there before in one way or another. It's hard to put a number on it in terms of years, but I wouldn't be surprised if by the time some of us were old things were a lot different in the middle east.

I agree! I think a lot of us will see significant changes in parts of the middle-east in our lifetimes. I honestly think Iran will be the first one to see change due to the rising secularism among people my age. Anyone remember the Green Movement from 2009? I think that was just the tip of the coming iceberg.