Could atheist westerners, please explain?

[robvalue]

OK...

Well, you can't just say secularism is also [lots of other things]. Specific groups of people can be those other things. But complaining "about secularists" is just inaccurate and pointless. You seem to see some connected agenda, and that may be true regarding some people. But certainly not all, any more than I'd assume a particular Muslim is a machete wielding maniac.

Everyone can improve, sure. We should all work together. But the role secularism specifically has is to try and keep equality and fairness for all. It doesn't make sense to say that is the problem, when surely that is the goal you want too.

Anyhow. I really can't stop people in the East killing each other over different fairy tails. Nor can I tell my government how to act. All I can do is promote equality, rational thought and peace, and hope some people somewhere follow my example. I vote for the party I think best represents what needs doing. I wish I could have a greater impact.

[The Grand Nudger]

It seems as though you imagined that "atheist westerners", as a demographic, aren't loaded with people that loosely agree with you on -many- issues.

As others have pointed out to you, the beef you have isn't with "atheist westerners" or with secularism (the reality of either completely eludes you, and perhaps you prefer your fantasies in any case).....but so long as you and others like you can be made to chase your own tails with that bullshit, the demographics whom you might actually have a beef with will not be required to respond to your criticism, well built or not, because you have not addressed it to them.  Further, it turns you into a mass of rambling idiots - casually and routinely ignored by those ideologically opposed...while you alienate yourself from "atheist westerners" who -would be- your ideological allies in that regard....if only you'd stop with the idiotic rambling bit.

Consider -your- part, in the very situations that distress you.

Do you imagine, for a moment, that anything -can or will- be done about this situation without "western" help, or that you will find more ideologically compatible allies, to that end, in "theistic westerners".......with their shared jewpocalypse fantasy?

[pocaracas]

Anyhow. I really can't stop people in the East killing each other over different fairy tails.

Come on, Rob.... wouldn't you kill for a Fairy tail like this?

---

---

[The Grand Nudger]

...and here I thought I didn't have innocent memories left from childhood to ruin......  

[robvalue]

I went and used the wrong spelling again didn't I. Whoops! Like that time I wrote homophones. And the tenants of atheism. Haha!

[WinterHold]

OK...

Well, you can't just say secularism is also [lots of other things]. Specific groups of people can be those other things. But complaining "about secularists" is just inaccurate and pointless. You seem to see some connected agenda, and that may be true regarding some people. But certainly not all, any more than I'd assume a particular Muslim is a machete wielding maniac.

The main complaint, is about the philosophy itself.
Painting a stereotypical image in a propaganda medium -like Fox news- is something, while observing the behavior of a certain group that follows a certain philosophy, is something totally else.

Buying the propaganda, and drawing a conclusion based on extended observation is the difference between the mob-mentality & the honest unbiased mentality.

My complaints come from observation  supported by evidence. While judging all Muslims as "machete wielding maniacs" is plain mob-mentality that is worthy of the dark ages, moved by propaganda, oranges and apples.

Everyone can improve, sure. We should all work together. But the role secularism specifically has is to try and keep equality and fairness for all. It doesn't make sense to say that is the problem, when surely that is the goal you want too.

Sure. We're students  until the day we die anyways.

But I have to object on your definition of the role of secularism: secularism is and was always about religion, always about Europe's attempts to escape the claws of the Roman Catholic church. The definition states it loud and clear:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism

Secularism is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandatedto represent the state from religious institutionsand 

 One manifestation of secularism is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people.

In other words; secularism is the natural response to the human right violations the Roman Catholic Church used to practice over decades, secularism is, and was, always about religion, not equality or whatsoever.

In other words, religion (and the tribalism that the Church ruled with) was replaced with nationalism, the Crusades were replaced with world wars based on nationality.

Moreover, atheism did contribute to secularism:

and from more recent freethinkersand atheists such as Robert Ingersoll and .

 
That's how I draw my logic. And the evidence is up there. That's why I told you, that the machete wielding Muslim example is not valid.

One interesting quote, would be from the atheist secular messiah: Lenin:

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/211960-t...experience

“There are no morals in politics; the is only experience. A scoundrel may be of use because he is a scoundrel”

So technically, I will copy the image now that is drawn in my mind. To be a secular, you must believe in the above, if you didn't, then you're not a secular atheist. Something is wrong with your logic.

The world of today is Lenin's world, he was the one who saw the world as two:
1)religious world
2)secular world

What is Leninism and Marxism, but a secular atheist movement in its core? think about it.
Atheism can be interpreted as "irreligious", and that would be valid if we follow the definition.   The point though,

behind all of this, is the double standard of a world, claiming to hold the banner of secularism -which we know is, in its essence, an atheistic banner-, in  Jews a favoring Jews over Muslims , forcing down support to a religious caliphate in Palestine, following the advice of Lenin which I posted above.

As a conclusion; secularism is no more than the lack of belive in the Catholic Pope, that many Europeans saw after the rivers of blood that were spilled in the dark ages, it's not "the key" to the world's problems, but maybe a good "weapon" against the Roman Catholic bigotry, no wonder it doesn't work in the Muslim world; we have no Catholic Church.

and when it was shipped and exported to the world, earth became a nuclear pool waiting to explode, with more and more people believing in Lenin's atheistic quote, stuff like Israel came to happen, and I can ask: was the middle east better before or after Israel?

Israel is scularism's sin.

Rhythm

It seems as though you imagined that "atheist westerners", as a demographic, aren't loaded with people that loosely agree with you on -many- issues.

No, secularism is a European invention, that came after the supression of the catholic church. other countries were just following the footsteps of Europe, sometimes -believe it or not-, just because they are impressed by the industrial revolution -but don't think it was a monopoly or something; Muslims too under the Ottoman empire had a similar civilization-.

As others have pointed out to you, the beef you have isn't with "atheist westerners" or with secularism (the reality of either completely eludes you, and perhaps you prefer your fantasies in any case).....but so long as you and others like you can be made to chase your own tails with that bullshit, the demographics whom you might actually have a beef with will not be required to respond to your criticism, well built or not, because you have not addressed it to them.  Further, it turns you into a mass of rambling idiots - casually and routinely ignored by those ideologically opposed...while you alienate yourself from "atheist westerners" who -would be- your ideological allies in that regard....if only you'd stop with the idiotic rambling bit.

I told you a lot, Rhythem: don't export your race fetish to my topics, and please don't try to "lure" me into this race thing debate, because it became cheesy..

I have no problem with any race; refering to the origin of a certain line of thought is what I make, and that -believe it or not- do indeed helps a lot in determining the root of the issue.

Like in secularism and the Church.

You try to make show up as the racist Arab who is jealous from the west -don't worry; I heard it on Fox news xD-, like when American soldiers die in Iraq a mother stands in Oprah's show crying and saying: "they killed my son.....they are jelous of us.." .  

What I mean is: this ringtone is old fashion now, I have no beef with any race, I left nationalism to you. Try something new (some members brought me cartoons, you know, to get me all worked up   now that's inventive !)


Anyhow, back to your comment:

Consider -your- part, in the very situations that distress you.

Do you imagine, for a moment, that anything -can or will- be done about this situation without "western" help, or that you will find more ideologically compatible allies, to that end, in "theistic westerners".......with their shared jewpocalypse fantasy?

At this point, Israel would've never lasted a single day if it wasn't for western unconditional support -and the support of his majesty;the next president of the U.S-.

Acting right can happen, no matter what you believe in. theist, atheist, I don't care.

Right now the U.K, there are protests calling for boyocotting Israeli products, the sweet secular government of Britain doesn't like the protests, of course.

Oh, ooooops, am I racist for saying Britain :/ I have just pronounced the name of a country !!
Gotta love nationalists

[The Grand Nudger]

I'll repeat, secularists.....the "atheist westerner" demographic and the "dis-sasatisfied with the state of isreal" demographic have broad overlap..which is a resource you squander by rambling like an idiot about "atheist westerners" and secularism...the office of the american presidency, and the annihilation of isreal in a single day sans western support.

[robvalue]

Atlas, you have lost the plot. I won't be continuing the discussion.

[GUBU]

Constable Dorfl

And here is why I asked the question. A secular post WW2 UN, which neglected religion and claimed to be non-religious, was the first to allow religious fanatics to create a caliphate with a religious symbol in the middle of its flag.

No numbnuts it didn't. It was a combination of initial US and UK support followed up by continuing money and guns being funnelled in by countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE which created this accurate image of islam in our midst. You cannot blame the powerless for the monsters the powerful themselves created.

[WinterHold]

Constable Dorfl

And here is why I asked the question. A secular post WW2 UN, which neglected religion and claimed to be non-religious, was the first to allow religious fanatics to create a caliphate with a religious symbol in the middle of its flag.

No numbnuts it didn't. It was a combination of initial US and UK support followed up by continuing money and guns being funnelled in by countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE which created this accurate image of islam in our midst. You cannot blame the powerless for the monsters the powerful themselves created.

Poor world !
Actually, the united states dominated us, even Israel itself. It's not like I know nothing of the U.S & UK contributions to the creation of the two cancers in the Middle East:

-Arab Countries
-The Jewish state

Believe me, I'm very aware of sykes-picot.
and for the record, in here, I cited the British/Arabic role in creating this mess,o check my wikipedia quotes two comments back.

I'm turning insane, because I never relate. I don't belong anywhere.
But the world could've done more, if secularism as some claimed, care about equality and human rights.

Today, Sweden was sucking up the Sauds and apologizing for the statements of the brave foreign minister against the terrible human rights violations, but hey, it's secularism xD criticize yesterday, make up and apologize tommorow, no big deal !