Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 1:29 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
why not religionism ?
#31
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 1, 2021 at 7:09 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Claustrophobia.

Arachnophobia.

Agoraphobia. 

Technophobia.

Boru

Nephophobia = An exaggerated or irrational fear of clouds
Trypophobia = fear of holes
stygiophobia =fear of hell

and the list goes on.

(April 1, 2021 at 7:54 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:
(April 1, 2021 at 6:32 pm)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: I don't like religiophobia either. It bunches together hate of religion and hate of the religious like the term Islamaphobia does, and that way, Islamic apologists can basically call us bigots for having issues with the religion of Islam. That's why I stick to calling it anti-Muslim bigotry.

Yeah, there is no such thing as ISLAMOPHOBIA

It is the right of every individual to question a religion which CLAIMS to be peaceful, and yet is responsible for more terror attacks than any other.

In the Islamic world, women are treated as second class citizens and bound by ancient laws that have no place in a modern world.

If anything, ISLAM has a phobia about ANYTHING not ISLAMIC.

Questioning a religion is important. It helps to develop argumentative skills and encourages exchange of information. Each party learns from each other. If a muslim is calling a person who criticizes islam an islamaphobe (in the same sense as racism) then that muslim has not developed the skills yet to deal with the criticisms or simply, there is no proper response at all.

If islam claims that it should not be criticized and claims that violence should be used when I criticize it, then I have a large problem with that. It is a religion that does not belong in my sector.

I agree. Islam is often on the news when it comes to terrorism. There sure are a lot of islamic terrorist groups.

Where did muslims get this idea that a woman should cover there body parts?
Is it cultural or is it something that is said by one of their "prophets".


Women are treated as second class citizens in judaism, christianity, islam, mormonism. it is clear that the text are written by men. Women are often nameless in these "holy" books. There is very little information about them. Often, the story revolves around the males.

Even the son of the jewish god is a male and so are his 12 followers.
Reply
#32
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 3, 2021 at 7:44 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: Questioning a religion is important. It helps to develop argumentative skills and encourages exchange of information. Each party learns from each other. If a muslim is calling a person who criticizes islam an islamaphobe (in the same sense as racism) then that muslim has not developed the skills yet to deal with the criticisms or simply, there is no proper response at all.

100% agreed on this. 

Each of us should be able to discuss and defend his beliefs in a temperate way. This of course includes religious people as well as atheists whose beliefs cause them to reject religious claims. 

But if the criticism is unfair or just flat out bigoted, then we're allowed to say that. There is criticism which is over the top, unrelated to fact, and unfair, and it's good to call this bigoted.

Quote:If islam claims that it should not be criticized and claims that violence should be used when I criticize it, then I have a large problem with that. It is a religion that does not belong in my sector.

Agreed. Violence is not the way. Muslims should react temperately to fair criticism, Americans should stop using Islam as an excuse to do violence in majority-Muslim countries, the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes, etc. 

Quote:I agree. Islam is often on the news when it comes to terrorism. There sure are a lot of islamic terrorist groups.

This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam.

Quote:Where did muslims get this idea that a woman should cover there body parts?
Is it cultural or is it something that is said by one of their "prophets".

All cultures say that women should cover their body parts. Get your wife to walk naked into Walmart and see if they're OK with it. 

Different cultures have different rules about how many body parts. 

Quote:Women are treated as second class citizens in judaism, christianity, islam, mormonism. 

And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions. 

Quote:Women are often nameless in these "holy" books. There is very little information about them. Often, the story revolves around the males.

Even the son of the jewish god is a male and so are his 12 followers.

The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters. There are a number of important female characters. The lives of Ruth and Esther are more extensively described in the Old Testament than that of most male characters. Since the vast majority of Christianity has not been sola scriptura, detailed accounts of the lives of many female characters are well known from other sources, including figures from scripture itself and later saints and holy figures. 

See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine.
Reply
#33
RE: why not religionism ?
Quote:Onto Sungula's point, I do agree with him that people here don't seem to take anti-Muslim bigotry serious enough, and seem to dismiss it sometimes, just because they don't like the Muslim poster WinterHold or whatever,
This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool.




Quote:but at the same time, Muslim apologists do call people Islamaphobic just for criticizing Islam. 
This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term.




Quote:Therefore, it only makes sense that we use a different term for criticism of Islam, than the term used for bigotry against Muslims.
Nope, it doesn't make any sense at all. Because some people on ultra-rare occasions have misused a term does not mean a different term should be used. That's absurd. By that logic, Antisemitism should be abandoned because the pro-Israeli group has abused to silence critics. That doesn't change the fact it's a legitimate term that accurately describes a phenomenon.



Quote: Islamaphobia is a sneaky term used to prop up Islam in some instances, so I reject the term.
Virtually never and that's a really silly reason to reject a valid term.
"Change was inevitable"


Nemo sicut deus debet esse!

[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]



 “No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM


      
Reply
#34
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 3, 2021 at 8:40 pm)sBelacqua Wrote:
(April 3, 2021 at 7:44 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: Questioning a religion is important. It helps to develop argumentative skills and encourages exchange of information. Each party learns from each other. If a muslim is calling a person who criticizes islam an islamaphobe (in the same sense as racism) then that muslim has not developed the skills yet to deal with the criticisms or simply, there is no proper response at all.

100% agreed on this. 

Each of us should be able to discuss and defend his beliefs in a temperate way. This of course includes religious people as well as atheists whose beliefs cause them to reject religious claims. 

But if the criticism is unfair or just flat out bigoted, then we're allowed to say that. There is criticism which is over the top, unrelated to fact, and unfair, and it's good to call this bigoted.

Quote:If islam claims that it should not be criticized and claims that violence should be used when I criticize it, then I have a large problem with that. It is a religion that does not belong in my sector.

Agreed. Violence is not the way. Muslims should react temperately to fair criticism, Americans should stop using Islam as an excuse to do violence in majority-Muslim countries, the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes, etc. 

Quote:I agree. Islam is often on the news when it comes to terrorism. There sure are a lot of islamic terrorist groups.

This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam.

Quote:Where did muslims get this idea that a woman should cover there body parts?
Is it cultural or is it something that is said by one of their "prophets".

All cultures say that women should cover their body parts. Get your wife to walk naked into Walmart and see if they're OK with it. 

Different cultures have different rules about how many body parts. 

Quote:Women are treated as second class citizens in judaism, christianity, islam, mormonism. 

And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions. 

Quote:Women are often nameless in these "holy" books. There is very little information about them. Often, the story revolves around the males.

Even the son of the jewish god is a male and so are his 12 followers.

The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters. There are a number of important female characters. The lives of Ruth and Esther are more extensively described in the Old Testament than that of most male characters. Since the vast majority of Christianity has not been sola scriptura, detailed accounts of the lives of many female characters are well known from other sources, including figures from scripture itself and later saints and holy figures. 

See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine.

"This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam."

==You mean to say that there is an equal number of christian terrorist groups?

You mean to say that there is an equal number of jewish terrorist groups?
You mean to say that there is an equal number of religion X terrorist groups?

"the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes"

==The USA is still supporting Al-Qaeda?

"And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions."

==Yes, it is part of human nature. It's quite universal. I seem to remember a certain culture that was matrimonial.

"The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters."

==In terms of names, the males are named while quite often, the wife is not. Even Genesis starts off with a name for the man: Adam. It is later on that the female version of the human is created and her name is not even mentioned until many lines later.
Are you talking about the Book of Ruth. Even in the case of Ruth, the names of the males are mentioned. Her husband dies and that's the end of the line for him.


"See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine."

==What do you want me to see?

(April 3, 2021 at 9:46 pm)SUNGULA Wrote:
Quote:Onto Sungula's point, I do agree with him that people here don't seem to take anti-Muslim bigotry serious enough, and seem to dismiss it sometimes, just because they don't like the Muslim poster WinterHold or whatever,
This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool.




Quote:but at the same time, Muslim apologists do call people Islamaphobic just for criticizing Islam. 
This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term.




Quote:Therefore, it only makes sense that we use a different term for criticism of Islam, than the term used for bigotry against Muslims.
Nope, it doesn't make any sense at all. Because some people on ultra-rare occasions have misused a term does not mean a different term should be used. That's absurd. By that logic, Antisemitism should be abandoned because the pro-Israeli group has abused to silence critics. That doesn't change the fact it's a legitimate term that accurately describes a phenomenon.



Quote: Islamaphobia is a sneaky term used to prop up Islam in some instances, so I reject the term.
Virtually never and that's a really silly reason to reject a valid term.

"This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool."

==A tool? That sounded offensive.

"This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term."


==Define rarely.
Reply
#35
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 3, 2021 at 10:35 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: ==You mean to say that there is an equal number of christian terrorist groups?

No, that's certainly not what I said. And it's strange of you to suggest it.

The greatest terrorist threat within the US are Timothy McVeigh types. The biggest terrorist threat all over the rest of the world is the US government.

By the way, did you ever do any research on literalism in Bible hermeneutics? I sent you a good link with a long bibliography, and then you sort of dropped off the thread. I could send you links and sources on this thread's topic as well, but I'm not sure you're interested in hearing things like that.
Reply
#36
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 3, 2021 at 9:46 pm)SUNGULA Wrote:
Quote:Onto Sungula's point, I do agree with him that people here don't seem to take anti-Muslim bigotry serious enough, and seem to dismiss it sometimes, just because they don't like the Muslim poster WinterHold or whatever,
This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool.




Quote:but at the same time, Muslim apologists do call people Islamaphobic just for criticizing Islam. 
This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term.




Quote:Therefore, it only makes sense that we use a different term for criticism of Islam, than the term used for bigotry against Muslims.
Nope, it doesn't make any sense at all. Because some people on ultra-rare occasions have misused a term does not mean a different term should be used. That's absurd. By that logic, Antisemitism should be abandoned because the pro-Israeli group has abused to silence critics. That doesn't change the fact it's a legitimate term that accurately describes a phenomenon.



Quote: Islamaphobia is a sneaky term used to prop up Islam in some instances, so I reject the term.
Virtually never and that's a really silly reason to reject a valid term.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/Islamophobia

Islamophobia - Dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.

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

It is attested in English as early as 1923[27] to quote the French word islamophobie, found in a thesis published by Alain Quellien in 1910 to describe a "a prejudice against Islam that is widespread among the peoples of Western and Christian civilization".[28]

The term did not exist in the Muslim world,[a] and was later translated in the 1990s as ruhāb al-islām (رهاب الاسلام) in Arabic, literally "phobia of Islam".[28]
Reply
#37
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 3, 2021 at 11:57 pm)Irreligious Atheist Wrote:
(April 3, 2021 at 9:46 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool.




This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term.




Nope, it doesn't make any sense at all. Because some people on ultra-rare occasions have misused a term does not mean a different term should be used. That's absurd. By that logic, Antisemitism should be abandoned because the pro-Israeli group has abused to silence critics. That doesn't change the fact it's a legitimate term that accurately describes a phenomenon.



Virtually never and that's a really silly reason to reject a valid term.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/Islamophobia

Islamophobia - Dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.

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

It is attested in English as early as 1923[27] to quote the French word islamophobie, found in a thesis published by Alain Quellien in 1910 to describe a "a prejudice against Islam that is widespread among the peoples of Western and Christian civilization".[28]

The term did not exist in the Muslim world,[a] and was later translated in the 1990s as ruhāb al-islām (رهاب الاسلام) in Arabic, literally "phobia of Islam".[28]
When did I claim it existed in the Muslim world? And none of this challenges my point.

(April 3, 2021 at 10:35 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote:
(April 3, 2021 at 8:40 pm)sBelacqua Wrote: 100% agreed on this. 

Each of us should be able to discuss and defend his beliefs in a temperate way. This of course includes religious people as well as atheists whose beliefs cause them to reject religious claims. 

But if the criticism is unfair or just flat out bigoted, then we're allowed to say that. There is criticism which is over the top, unrelated to fact, and unfair, and it's good to call this bigoted.


Agreed. Violence is not the way. Muslims should react temperately to fair criticism, Americans should stop using Islam as an excuse to do violence in majority-Muslim countries, the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes, etc. 


This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam.


All cultures say that women should cover their body parts. Get your wife to walk naked into Walmart and see if they're OK with it. 

Different cultures have different rules about how many body parts. 


And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions. 


The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters. There are a number of important female characters. The lives of Ruth and Esther are more extensively described in the Old Testament than that of most male characters. Since the vast majority of Christianity has not been sola scriptura, detailed accounts of the lives of many female characters are well known from other sources, including figures from scripture itself and later saints and holy figures. 

See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine.

"This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam."

==You mean to say that there is an equal number of christian terrorist groups?

You mean to say that there is an equal number of jewish terrorist groups?
You mean to say that there is an equal number of religion X  terrorist groups?

"the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes"

==The USA is still supporting Al-Qaeda?

"And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions."

==Yes, it is part of human nature. It's quite universal. I seem to remember a certain culture that was matrimonial.

"The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters."

==In terms of names, the males are named while quite often, the wife is not. Even Genesis starts off with a name for the man: Adam. It is later on that the female version of the human is created and her name is not even mentioned until many lines later.
Are you talking about the Book of Ruth. Even in the case of Ruth, the names of the males are mentioned. Her husband dies and that's the end of the line for him.


"See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine."

==What do you want me to see?

(April 3, 2021 at 9:46 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool.




This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term.




Nope, it doesn't make any sense at all. Because some people on ultra-rare occasions have misused a term does not mean a different term should be used. That's absurd. By that logic, Antisemitism should be abandoned because the pro-Israeli group has abused to silence critics. That doesn't change the fact it's a legitimate term that accurately describes a phenomenon.



Virtually never and that's a really silly reason to reject a valid term.

"This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool."

==A tool? That sounded offensive.

"This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term."


==Define rarely.
1. It's not offensive it simply describes the crude and unpleasant way he acts.


2.As in not often or not consistently
"Change was inevitable"


Nemo sicut deus debet esse!

[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]



 “No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM


      
Reply
#38
RE: why not religionism ?
The long list of tq responses Bel fielded are delicious. Thing about a tq, is that it doesn't actually defend any behavior or position. It simply says "the other guys are assholes too".

Excellent, I'm glad we can agree that islamism turns people into assholes. He may believe that americans are assholes too, but so what? The US takes an interest in things like this, and if we had to wait until some perfect and blameless country came along to render help to our fellow man we'd all be on our own as the world burned down around us. Winter is stuck in a similar position - blasting what he sees as the evil of the great satan while simultaneously imploring the great satan for help.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#39
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 4, 2021 at 7:15 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: The long list of tq responses Bel fielded are delicious.  Thing about a tq, is that it doesn't actually defend any behavior or position. It simply says  "the other guys are assholes too".

Excellent, I'm glad we can agree that islamism turns people into assholes.  He may believe that americans are assholes too, but so what?  The US takes an interest in things like this, and if we had to wait until some perfect and blameless country came along to render help to our fellow man we'd all be on our own as the world burned down around us.  Winter is stuck in a similar position - blasting what he sees as the evil of the great satan while simultaneously imploring the great satan for help.

America -just like any big empire without strong laws concerning double standards- produces a huge bug that defines itself in every American interaction with another race/religion.

First, Americans massacred the native Americans. Then the blacks and the Africans. Then the Asians. Then the Muslims.
I see a pattern.

It's going to repeat and rewind this same program over and over and over.
America knows nothing else to do.

The loop holes in the American constitution makes it...obsolete. A producer of "so many Trump-like instances of doom".

I don't share Jihadi thought -which is the of fruit of the CIA and Saudi alliance-, but America is not a great Satan. America is a lost baby, but whenever the Trump-like minds hold the country, is not lost anymore..It's a hostile.
Reply
#40
RE: why not religionism ?
(April 4, 2021 at 8:54 am)WinterHold Wrote: First, Americans massacred the native Americans. Then the blacks and the Africans. Then the Asians. Then the Muslims.

Massacred the Muslims? Isn't the US Army protecting Muslims so that they don't get massacred by Islamic terrorists like the Taliban and ISIS?
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why, why, why? Little Rik 39 11496 June 14, 2013 at 9:27 am
Last Post: Little Rik



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)