It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religion, Culture, War

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

There are simple reasons for that.

1. The Americans who are trying to force all other Americans to follow their interpretation of Christian morals (anti-homosexuality, anti-abortion, anti-prostitution, anti-drugs/intoxication, anti-atheism) are the same Americans who are trying to outlaw Islam, Muslim immigrants, the building of new mosques, the existence of Sharia arbitration courts, etc. In short, the right wing has forced us to work together.

2. Muslim Americans and American atheists tend to believe that no one should be forced to follow Christianity-based laws, specifically because of the 1st Amendment.

3. Muslim Americans and American atheists tend to believe that all citizens should be allowed to follow our own set of beliefs or non-beliefs, specifically because of the 1st Amendment.

I've probably posted this a good dozen or so times, but one of the Qur'an's 114 Surahs/Revelations literally commands all Muslims to tell all non-believers "Unto you your beliefs/religion and unto me my beliefs/religion." No matter how someone tries to interpret it, that's by far an endorsement of "freedom of religion". Any Muslim who disobeys this is literally opposing the Qur'an.

Surah 109 Al-Kaffirun (The Disbelievers) (Pickthall translation):

1. Say: O disbelievers!
2. I worship not that which ye worship;
3. Nor worship ye that which I worship.
4. And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
5. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
6. Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

That's the entire Surah/Revelation so there's no further context for it. The Qur'an also has passages where it says there should be no compulsion in religion (like Surah 2:256) and that it's pointless for us to warn disbelievers of the right & wrong paths because God will deal with them (like Surah 2 Ayats 6 & 7 and Surah 36 Ayats 10 & 11). And once again, any Muslim who disobeys these is literally opposing the Qur'an.

While I admit that the "ignore them & let God deal with them" message may seem elitist, it's also both a further endorsement of "freedom of religion" and it's literally the opposite of the "convert or die" crap the right wing accuses us of. Besides, it seems pretty consistent with many Christian denominations which also believe that God will handle or punish nonbelievers. In fact, nearly every other religion I've ever seen has had some version of that (as in, "those who don't belong in our faith/camp/tribe/caste are the "lost"/goyim/outcasts who will suffer blah blah blah).

As for my first point which says the right wing has basically forced American Muslims and American atheists to work together: I don't actually think that's a bad thing. Clearly I don't agree with the overall concept of atheism, but I can certainly understand it from a logical perspective. I've had some amazing debates/conversations with both atheists and agnostics about our views, some of which opened my mind or have forced me to "up my game" when it comes to debates. The only ones I tend to get angry with are anti-theists whom I simply ignore now (unto them their beliefs, unto me mine).




posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

The concept of atheism is not being a theist.
I don't believe in any gods so my default label is atheist. You can sub group of course, militant atheist, agnostic atheist etc, but atheist is just not believing in any gods.
You religious folk seem desperate to make people unconvinced in claims of gods seem as organised believers like religious people are.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

You're barking up the wrong tree and/or jumping to conclusions. The only group I'm "lumping you into" is the umbrella term "atheist". I know full well that there are many differences among "atheists". I myself would also be considered an "atheist" in ancient Rome or when it comes to animist religions/Nordic pantheons/Shinto, etc since I simply don't believe in the existence of their stated deities.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Ah cool

I'm just always passionate about ensuring the word atheist is kept as meaning one who has no belief in any gods, not one who is a member of an organised group.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

"Passionate" you say? "Passionate" enough to spread the word and clear up any misunderstandings about what you believe and don't believe? Hmmm...


I'm just playing. No worries. I used to think "atheists" as a whole had a set amount of beliefs, but I've been corrected enough to realize it wasn't true. I vaguely remember seeing something about atheist "temples" being set up though, which made me think some atheists do have an agreed upon set of ideals. And I'd had enough verbal battles with militant anti-theists that I've concluded that many of them do indeed have a set system of beliefs/arguments/attack points.

But I also know they don't represent the vast majority of people who don't believe in the known definitions or descriptions of "God". Most of the "atheists" I know in real life came from religious upbringings but simply didn't accept the beliefs they were brought up with or the various religions they looked into.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Not believing in something is a form of belief too.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I'm with you on anti-theists, I'll defend anyone's belief if it harms nobody else.
I'll risk personal injury from physical attack for that freedom for others.
Every time.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

No lol, lack of belief is not belief.
Who the # starred you? Lol



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Not really. "Not believing" can simply mean there hasn't been enough evidence to decide yes or no on a subject.

For example, I haven't seen enough evidence to prove that Bigfoot is real. But that doesn't mean I think Bigfoot is fake, either. So if the largest religion in the world was Bigfootism, I'd be considered an atheist even though I'm actually an undecided. Does being undecided because of a lack of evidence count as a "belief"? I get the same feeling from that as I do from the arguments to prove a negative.

ETA: "I don't accept your interpretation of God" isn't the same thing as "I don't believe in the possibility of a Deity/Deities". A lot of atheists seem to fit the first statement, but get lumped into the 2nd statement. Then again, I could just be rambling lol.
edit on 5-4-2017 by enlightenedservant because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

We share a similar mindset.
No belief is required to be unconvinced by the claims of others, just knowledge of the evidence which supports the claims.
edit on 5.4.2017 by grainofsand because: clarity



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr




Not believing in something is a form of belief too.


Yeah, in my experiences with atheists; in general, given the degree of hostility that I've witnessed them direct towards the notion of theism, I think there's a great deal more going on than a mere lack of belief. Agnostics, again in my experience, would be more accurately described as merely lacking belief.

I mean I have no belief in elves. Atheists claim they have no belief in God. But I can tell you that my "no belief" in elves Is very different from an atheists "no belief" in God. You won't find a conversation about elves pushing me into a apoplectic fit, but I've seen plenty of atheists foaming at the mouth as a result of a conversation about whether or not God exists.

I think the way in which a lot atheists hold their "no god" position is much more like; what they might term, "a religious nutter," holds his religious convictions than say a scientist, as a scientist, holds a "no-belief" in elves or gnomes or dragons.

Way too much emotion, way too much hostility for a mere "no belief".

I think "Agnostic" is closer to "no belief" than Atheism





edit on 5-4-2017 by imwilliam because: Added last line



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Not with me.
I put all gods in the same boat as elves n dragon cookies.
Unverifiable.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
Not with me.
I put all gods in the same boat as elves n dragon cookies.
Unverifiable.


Gods yes, God no. And here's why. God is more than just the anthropomorphic judgmental one you know. There's the pantheistic idea of God. God is just a word. And the word God is used to represent something beyond all other words. God represents every possible idea that can be conceived (the alpha and omega of thought). So there can be only one word with God's meaning. We use the word God all the time in sentences to represent that which is beyond our comprehension or the source of all meaning. It's very useful word.

Jesus, however, is a false idol. There is only one true all-powerful all-loving God. And that God is God.


edit on 5-4-2017 by dfnj2015 because: typos



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

The great struggle is not between theists and atheists, it's between those who worship God and those who worship Lucifer (Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals dedicates his book to Lucifer). Even if you don't believe in God you are still being caught in the crossfire. The question becomes then which deity (imagined or otherwise) is it best to be ruled by? You can claim you are anti-war but if you pay taxes you have been funding it all along. This is not really so different.


edit on 5-4-2017 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals

The problem there is whose interpretation of the relationship between God, humans, and Shaytan/Satan/Lucifer are we talking about? Even denominations and sects within the same religions don't agree on this.

I actually agree with your overall point from my own religious beliefs. But I can certainly understand why agnostics and atheists alike would consider our beliefs BS. Ask 10 random Muslims to describe the situation between God, Shaytan/Lucifer, and humans and you may get 5-10 different & potentially contradicting answers. Ask 10 random Christians to describe the situation between God, Shaytan/Lucifer, and humans and you may get 5-10 more different & potentially contradicting answers. The same goes for 10 random Jews and 10 random believers of other faiths.

If it wasn't for my own personal experiences that match up with what the Qur'an actually says, I'd probably also be doubtful. Because relying on the half thought out interpretations from random people isn't going to cut it (note: I'm not directing that at you in particular, just at any random person who's proselyting).



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: swedy13



Atheism leaves a void and requires a tremendous amount of work to establish your own identity and values, so it defaults to a lot of cultural mimicry.

No it really doesn't. People can and are free to form their own identity and values sans religion.

edit on 5-4-2017 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: swedy13

" Islam shifts the culture into antihuman tendencies regarding women, gays, etc. It also condones lying and violence to further an extremist agenda."

So , according to your Reasoning , Islam is a Religion of Extremist Hate and Intolerance towards Humanity . Hmm....



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 10:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Not believing in something is a form of belief too.


Ummm....No. That's not possible.

That is the same as saying "Not Walking is a form of Walking." But that isn't correct. If you're not walking then whatever you're doing wouldn't also be considered a form of walking.

You can't be fishing and not fishing at the same time. One is the anti of the other.

I know what you're trying to say, but you need to say it in some other way because that way is a breakdown of language.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: swedy13

Why lump lack of belief in any gods with Islam?


Like it or not, Atheism is a faith. It cannot be proven there is no higher being in the universe, so it requires conviction without proof - ie Faith.



I don't believe in any unverifiable woo, from gods to souls and everything in between.
My position is not related to Islamic faith in any way.
My position is not a belief either, I do not believe there are no gods, just that there is no evidence to draw me towards believing there are.


So you are placing faith in the limited human sciences and senses. Face it, we don't know everything.



posted on Apr, 5 2017 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Not believing in something is a form of belief too.


Ummm....No. That's not possible.

That is the same as saying "Not Walking is a form of Walking." But that isn't correct. If you're not walking then whatever you're doing wouldn't also be considered a form of walking.

You can't be fishing and not fishing at the same time. One is the anti of the other.

I know what you're trying to say, but you need to say it in some other way because that way is a breakdown of language.


Yours isn't that good either.

Faith/Belief doesn't auto-default towards a Creator, it leans toward something greater than you... an ideal that is not 100% verifiable.

You can *SAY* you don't believe in God. That's great. It does not mean there is no God, it only means you don't believe He exists. But you can't prove it.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join