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.

 

Mosque to go up near New York's ground zero

page: 24
31
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2010 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


1:I consider atheisme a religion. As does the court

"A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate's rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.
"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said. "

But i can understand this a view of opinion, I leave the definition of atheisme and religion to linguist and philosophers in an other topic.

2: I personnaly am not an atheist, i was, but i learned that no matter what , you have always something you believe in, like i believe in energy.

So by saying atheisme is a religion , you prove my point.
Its the fanatics in any kind of religion that causes the problems. And what`s a fanatic in my eyes, someone who believes his choice of religion is the only good? one and forces his religion by word or force .




posted on May, 10 2010 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by makinho21

What would you think will happen if a bunch of white christians move to Mecca and try to build a church there in the middle of the city?



Can't happen. Non-muslims are banned from Mecca by law. Funny, I don't see any of the 'human rights' types railing against that.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by mararas

1:I consider atheisme a religion. As does the court

"A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate's rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.
"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said. "



Absolutely correct. Atheism IS a religion. The nature of a deity cannot be proven or disproven by the scientific method, which requires repeatable and verifiable experimentation. By the nature of the definition, deities can't really be expected to jump through hoops on command in order for scientists to experiment on them. That means religion is based solely on belief.

Atheism is nothing more than a belief that there isn't a deity, same any other religion is a belief that there IS.

So atheism is a religion.

[edit on 2010/5/10 by nenothtu]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Double post. Don't know how THAT happened!

[edit on 2010/5/10 by nenothtu]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   

I mean the only way for that to happen, is if you went there and converted to Islam. And if you did, that is obviously something you know will happen, so as long as you don't force yourself into the situation, you have NOTHING to worry about.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]
So, the gist of your arguement is that it's my responsibilty to avoid any society that's reached the tipping point where some "individuals, not religions" have decided that everyone will be ruled by a theocracy. I'll have to assume the same will be expected should my own society abandon its current system when a sufficient number of indivduals of any faith have the majority required to institute a theocracy.
In other words, I'm to seek safety in numbers to ensure my liberty.
Imagine the uproar were those of a minority faith expected to do the same.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
Absolutely correct. Atheism IS a religion. The nature of a deity cannot be proven or disproven by the scientific method, which requires repeatable and verifiable experimentation. By the nature of the definition, deities can't really be expected to jump through hoops on command in order for scientists to experiment on them. That means religion is based solely on belief.

Atheism is nothing more than a belief that there isn't a deity, same any other religion is a belief that there IS.

So atheism is a religion.

Interesting perspective. I guess it also comes down to how one defines religion. I personally do not see Atheism as a religion because not believing in a deity is only one aspect of what constitutes a religion. Most religions seem to attach the existence of a deity in addition to other beliefs, creeds, customs and rituals. For example: you can link two followers of Christianity together by more than their belief in God alone. Also, two different religions can be linked together in their common belief of a deity, and still retain many features that separate them from other religions. (E.g. Islam & Judaism).

If Atheism is a religion, what else besides the non-existence of God can one claim to have in common with another Atheist? The reason I mention this is because surely there is a reasonable criteria that needs to be met to identity with any religion. If Atheism can be considered a religion, then where do we draw the line? Can't a group of individuals with one common belief (or disbelief) claim to belong to a religion based on this very thin criterion?

[edit on 10/5/2010 by Dark Ghost]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Imagine people going to pay their respects to lost loved ones at Ground Zero, and hearing the prayer call coming from the mosque across the road.... wont belong till the muslims buy up all the buildings around it and turn one of them into a shine for the hijackers...



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonoflibra
I thought this was America where we have freedom of religion? Let them build it who cares what/where its close by. If the people of New York didn't want it then they would say something.



We do have freedoms save for the now and them islamic nut job that deprives others of life, liberty and the right to beleive as they will.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by samhouston1886
 


My husband is a man and did in fact fight in the desert twice. Make sure you know what gender you are speaking too. A lot of ATS seem to think everyone is a man on here....how sexist! I'm offended



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by fatdad
 



Give me some proof that muslims are to blame for 9/11, or even better give me some proof all muslims are to blame....
IMO it's just as likely that the oh so christian, mr turn the other cheek, former pres bush with acomplices rumsfeld and cheney et al.
Wich would mean that there would be just as good a reason to have this kind of debate if a church was to be built near the wtc.

Hatespeech like that is the reason why USA is in the mess that is Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.
Even if the OS is true, what's the problem, surely you are not so ignorant that you think all muslims are complete fanatics.
Just like judaism got its fair share of ultra orthodocs zionist creeps, islam and chritianity got their equal share.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by mararas

1:I consider atheisme a religion. As does the court

"A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate's rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.
"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said. "



Absolutely correct. Atheism IS a religion. The nature of a deity cannot be proven or disproven by the scientific method, which requires repeatable and verifiable experimentation. By the nature of the definition, deities can't really be expected to jump through hoops on command in order for scientists to experiment on them. That means religion is based solely on belief.

Atheism is nothing more than a belief that there isn't a deity, same any other religion is a belief that there IS.

So atheism is a religion.

[edit on 2010/5/10 by nenothtu]



This is going off topic abit, but your reply warrants a response.

So if Billy, tells John, he believes in unicorns, and John explains there is no ground for believing in such a nonsensical notion, and he refuses to believe in such a thing, they are both arguing from a religious standpoint?

This is the stance of "atheism" with reference to a theist's point of view.

My non-belief in leprechauns, according to your reply, is as faith-baised (and thus religious) as taking the stance there are pots of gold at the end of every rainbow.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
A religion requires canon, symbols, rituals and traditions.

Atheism has none of those.

So sick of people calling Atheism a religion when they have no clue what a religion is.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by 23refugee
 


No, the gist of my argument is Ground Zero does not reside in a Theocracy. It resides in the U.S where everyone is free to practice religion. Good luck to you in stopping people from following their faith or "keeping the numbers down". You're obviously concerned about a whole different issue, so start a thread about Muslims infiltrating the U.S. conspiring to start a Theocracy, and then I'll throw in my opinions on that.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by makinho21

So if Billy, tells John, he believes in unicorns, and John explains there is no ground for believing in such a nonsensical notion, and he refuses to believe in such a thing, they are both arguing from a religious standpoint?

This is the stance of "atheism" with reference to a theist's point of view.

My non-belief in leprechauns, according to your reply, is as faith-baised (and thus religious) as taking the stance there are pots of gold at the end of every rainbow.



Precisely. Both stances are rooted in belief, nothing more, nothing less. Such 'supernatural beings', by the nature of the supernatural, are immune to analysis by the dogma of science. The scientific method requires experimentation. Verifiable, repeatable verification of experimental processes. The 'super' part of 'supernatural' takes such matters out of the realm of science, which deals with the natural, however fantastic it may appear to be.

Because of that, a stance either 'for' or 'against' a purported supernatural being is necessarily based on faith alone.

'Gods' don't jump through hoops for the amusement of 'mortals'. That would sort of take the smoke right out of being a god.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpectreDC
A religion requires canon, symbols, rituals and traditions.

Atheism has none of those.

So sick of people calling Atheism a religion when they have no clue what a religion is.


The most oft-quoted 'canon, symbols, rituals, and traditions' of atheists, their dogma, is what they claim as 'the scientific method'. Never mind that it's a futile effort to 'prove' or 'disprove' the existence of a deity with tools designed for other, unrelated, uses.

This is what atheists base their 'faith' on.

What you are describing with your parameters is more along the lines of an 'organized' religion, rather than a 'pure' or basic' religion. No matter, this makes atheism fit into either category.

I understand that a number of atheists have banded together and organized a religion based on a 'flying spaghetti monster'. That is their right, same as anyone else, but I find it a bit laughable that they rail against 'religion' while practicing it in one form or another, and yet appear to fail to understand what a 'religion' IS.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Good Intentions
reply to post by 23refugee
 


No, the gist of my argument is Ground Zero does not reside in a Theocracy. It resides in the U.S where everyone is free to practice religion. Good luck to you in stopping people from following their faith or "keeping the numbers down". You're obviously concerned about a whole different issue, so start a thread about Muslims infiltrating the U.S. conspiring to start a Theocracy, and then I'll throw in my opinions on that.

Since within my posts you won't find me denying Muslims the right to build said mosque, am I to gather that my outcry over the public execution of homosexuals is an attempt to prevent someone from following their faith?
I'm sure that for many, this thread hinges on the concern of Muslims infitrating the U.S. conspiring to start a theocracy. Quite pertinent, I would think. To deny so is to ignore a problem facing Islam in many democracies at the moment.
Even though we're actually in agreement that this is inherently unfair, I'll still respond to your flippant dismissal of my concerns in kind; If you don't want to live in a society with so many bigots, get out. Pretty simple really, if it'll work for me, it'll work for them.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
I remember the comedian frankie boyle said this is what they should do , there is no way muslim exremists are going to fly planes into mosques in new york !



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by 23refugee

Originally posted by Good Intentions
reply to post by 23refugee
 


No, the gist of my argument is Ground Zero does not reside in a Theocracy. It resides in the U.S where everyone is free to practice religion. Good luck to you in stopping people from following their faith or "keeping the numbers down". You're obviously concerned about a whole different issue, so start a thread about Muslims infiltrating the U.S. conspiring to start a Theocracy, and then I'll throw in my opinions on that.

Since within my posts you won't find me denying Muslims the right to build said mosque, am I to gather that my outcry over the public execution of homosexuals is an attempt to prevent someone from following their faith?
I'm sure that for many, this thread hinges on the concern of Muslims infitrating the U.S. conspiring to start a theocracy. Quite pertinent, I would think. To deny so is to ignore a problem facing Islam in many democracies at the moment.
Even though we're actually in agreement that this is inherently unfair, I'll still respond to your flippant dismissal of my concerns in kind; If you don't want to live in a society with so many bigots, get out. Pretty simple really, if it'll work for me, it'll work for them.


Look, the thread may seem to hinge on that because of a perception of the mosque. I'm confused what you mean by a problem facing Islam in many democracies? Did you mean a problem concerning Islam? And this society is not full of bigots, although there are many. They want to live in a society where they are free to practice religion, which in this society, we all are. But in all fairness, I would say that if they don't like being a minority, then they should get out. Since this is getting really off topic, I'll leave it at we both agree on the actual issue on this thread. We've all gone really long on this, and we obviously both have different opinions on the related issue.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by makinho21

So if Billy, tells John, he believes in unicorns, and John explains there is no ground for believing in such a nonsensical notion, and he refuses to believe in such a thing, they are both arguing from a religious standpoint?

This is the stance of "atheism" with reference to a theist's point of view.

My non-belief in leprechauns, according to your reply, is as faith-baised (and thus religious) as taking the stance there are pots of gold at the end of every rainbow.



Precisely. Both stances are rooted in belief, nothing more, nothing less. Such 'supernatural beings', by the nature of the supernatural, are immune to analysis by the dogma of science. The scientific method requires experimentation. Verifiable, repeatable verification of experimental processes. The 'super' part of 'supernatural' takes such matters out of the realm of science, which deals with the natural, however fantastic it may appear to be.

Because of that, a stance either 'for' or 'against' a purported supernatural being is necessarily based on faith alone.

'Gods' don't jump through hoops for the amusement of 'mortals'. That would sort of take the smoke right out of being a god.


Explain to me what is "supernatural" about leperchauns?
We have various books and tales which make claims for their existence. We have visual representations of what they look like and where they live.
Real-life claims warrant scientific investigation: you CAN refute the concept of gold at the end of the rainbow.

You can not appeal to this supernatural plea-bargain, and then turn around and invest that same supernatural "being" in everyday aspects of normal life. Fine - keep it "supernatural" and untouchable, as you attempt to claim it to be. But then, how dare you, forcefully install such an unfalsifiable and untestable creation in our midst and claim it as truth and real and observable.

Dogma, specifically, is defined by doctrine from which divergence is non-permitted. Said doctrine is final and supreme.
Science is anything but - ideas are constantly being re-examined and, if found to be appropriate, corrected. Where does that happen in bible study?
Science is founded on the dynamic principles of experimentation and verification (as you proposed), but that is exactly what separates it from the mindless dogma you so fervently adhere to.

[edit on 11-5-2010 by makinho21]



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by makinho21

What would you think will happen if a bunch of white christians move to Mecca and try to build a church there in the middle of the city?



Can't happen. Non-muslims are banned from Mecca by law. Funny, I don't see any of the 'human rights' types railing against that.


Then we should make a law that states no muslim mosque can be built within a certain mile radius of ground zero.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join