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.

 

Why should Immoral people change?

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


people are already discontent about whats happening in the world against muslims.

What's happening is due to the actions of people like this.

How do you expect the world to react? If "hurting someone's feelings" is seen as reason to kill, that's just wrong.


The insensitivity to other people's feelings and what they hold sacred and the violent reaction to it. Thats not how the Prophet would react

Those people don't seem non-violent or peaceful. They are the ones "reacting" that way, in enormous numbers. They seem SCARY, and they do represent Islam - maybe not in the way you do, or "most" Muslims do, but they are having an impact on the world with their in-your-face hatred.

Kind of like how the Westboro Baptist Church "represents" Christianity - but WBC has been denounced as a hate group. So how do "most Muslims" feel this (yet another) Extreme Islamist sect should be treated?

edit on 6-5-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 



Bangladesh is a 90% muslim country.

It's also a Secular country. It lists as a right "Freedom of Religion."
Here's a part of that list:

Freedom of movement (Article-36)
Freedom of assembly (Article-37)
Freedom of association (Article-38)
Freedom of thought and conscience, and of speech (Article-39)
Freedom of profession or occupation (Article-40)
Freedom of religion (Article-41)
Rights of property (Article-42)
Protection of home and correspondence (Article-43)
Enforcement of fundamental rights (Article-44)

Law of Bangladesh wiki

Looks fine. I also noticed on the wiki page for Bangladesh in general that they are part of NATO, and their military is a very important contributor to "Peacekeeping forces."

So, what happened? They got their feelings hurt by some blog?


edit on 6-5-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Do you see what I'm saying?
Is it immoral for people to disagree with a religion (any religion), or write their opinion in blogs or articles? Sure, a sensitive person would choose their words carefully, but someone's feelings getting hurt shouldn't be the reason they remain silent.

Is it immoral for these protesters to call for death to the bloggers? If they are God-fearing, why do they want this?

Why should they "change"? Because they aren't representing Islam accurately?
(Trying to tie this incident in with the OP question
)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





What's happening is due to the actions of people like this. How do you expect the world to react? If "hurting someone's feelings" is seen as reason to kill, that's just wrong.

yes its wrong. Is it right to hurt feelings for the fun of it? I said its wrong on both sides.
The discontent i meant is occupation of muslim lands, muslims see other muslims all over the world as a part of a single brotherhood. I want for my brother/sister what i would like for myself and i want security and peace.

Those people don't seem non-violent
or peaceful. They are the ones
"reacting" that way, in enormous
numbers. They seem SCARY, and they
do represent Islam - maybe not in the
way you do, or "most" Muslims do, but they are having an impact on the
world with their in-your-face hatred.

they have a valid demand(not kill the atheists) that their sacred space should not be insulted. Their way is very wrong!!
Who made it legal to insult religions anyway? Why should that be a universal standard? The west has set up reactionary anti-religious laws disguised as 'freedoms'
why should muslims who are not having anti-religious feelings confirm to a foreign standard? On the contrary they love their Islam and Prophets including Jesus pbuh.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





So, what happened? They got their feelings hurt by some blog?


A Hefajat-e-Islam activist, Hossain
Soliman Abdullah, said the main aim
of the protest was to press for the
implementation of a 13-point demand
inspired by the Koran. Dhaka's Daily Star newspaper reports
that the group hired at least 3,000
vehicles, including buses, lorries and
minibuses to bring demonstrators
into the capital, while others travelled
there by train. On Friday, Sheikh Hasina said the
government had already met many of
the group's demands. "Many of these have already been
implemented while some are in the
process," she was quoted as telling
the Daily Star. She said the government had already
arrested four bloggers for making
"derogatory comments" against the
Prophet Muhammad and they would
be punished if found guilty.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


Is it right to hurt feelings for the fun of it?

Absolutely not! I was constantly mocked and made the butt of jokes and ridicule as an adolescent - it was very painful, and probably (undoubtedly) led to much of how I am as an adult. I still remember the sensation of burning embarrassment and humiliation. I try hard not to hurt the feelings of others, and would never do so "for the fun of it."

I said its wrong on both sides.

Yes, you did say that. I'm sorry for "derailing" the thread in a religious direction.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


why should muslims who are not having anti-religious feelings confirm to a foreign standard?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was established after WW2:

7 Substantive rights
7.1 Right to life
7.2 Freedom from torture
7.3 Freedom from slavery
7.4 Right to a fair trial
7.5 Freedom of speech
7.6 Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
7.7 Freedom of movement


These things seem self-evident to me - but, I was born a decade after they were established, and the USA has upheld these rights for my whole life (and I suppose it's why its leaders run around the globe trying to implement these things).

I suppose that only the member countries of the United Nations are "beholden" to see these rights are upheld; and of course there are countries who refuse to comply.

Do you think that the list is valid? India is part of the UN, I'm pretty sure. Isn't it?
edit on 6-5-2013 by wildtimes because: GHA! Formatting fail



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





Is it immoral for people to disagree with a religion (any religion), or write their opinion in blogs or articles? Sure, a sensitive person would choose their words carefully, but someone's feelings getting hurt shouldn't be the reason they remain silent.

immoral will be a strong word, its impolite to hurt someone's sentiments. Doing it knowingly is mischevious and abuse of rights.
I have not heard you condemn such shallow behaviour once.


Is it immoral for these protesters to call
for death to the bloggers? If they are
God-fearing, why do they want this? Why should they "change"? Because
they aren't representing Islam
accurately?
(Trying to tie this incident in with the
OP question )

its easy to answer it by tying it to OP. These are ignorant masses who know almost nothing about Islam or Prophet. They are following a local cultural religion with equally narrow minded and ignorant leaders. Religious education will make them more moral and patient. The good thing is (and a bit ironic) that they are demanding more religious education. Hope they get it.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





I'm sorry for "derailing" the thread in a religious direction.

its not derailed, its within the topic, "ways to change immorality"
you may point any immoralities for discussions.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





I suppose that only the member countries of the United Nations are "beholden" to see these rights are upheld; and of course there are countries who refuse to comply. Do you think that the list is valid? India is part of the UN, I'm pretty sure. Isn't it?

yes India is a part. The list should be more defined. The list is of "UN" but does not represents everyone. The superpowers made it and want to impose it. Its wrong, a subjective view cannot be imposed as a universal standard.
A bully who does not respect his mother cannot make a law that its ok to insult mothers and go around insulting other people's mother and show them the law when they get furious, i hope you got the analogy.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Just found this piece on wiki (UDHR is Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
about the two "schools of thought" on "human rights:" Relativism and Universalism


The UDHR enshrines universal rights that apply to all humans equally, whichever geographical location, state, race or culture they belong to.

However, in academia there is a dispute between scholars that advocate moral relativism and scholars that advocate moral universalism. Relativists do not argue against human rights, but concede that human rights are social constructed and are shaped by cultural and environmental contexts. Universalists argue that human rights have always existed, and apply to all people regardless of culture, race, sex, or religion.

More specifically, proponents of cultural relativism argue for acceptance of different cultures, which may have practices conflicting with human rights. Relativists caution that universalism could be used as a form of cultural, economic or political imperialism. The White Man's Burden is used as an example of imperialism and the destruction of local cultures justified by the desire to spread Eurocentric values.[139]

In particular, the concept of human rights is often claimed to be fundamentally rooted in a politically liberal outlook which, although generally accepted in Europe, Japan or North America, is not necessarily taken as standard elsewhere.

Hmmmm...

I'd say I was raised as a Universalist - but at the same time, in college and graduate school we spent a LOT of time discussing "cultural diversity" and "cultural competency" (knowing what other cultures believe in), and in my profession it was a basic tenet that the culture of others must be treated with dignity.

I also see how the "relativist" stance puts forth that it's dangerous to "impose one's values" on others.
That's a hard one for me - because I believe those rights ARE universal, basic, and self-evident, it goes against my own morals to not fight for them. Interesting.

I know I sometimes do want to impose my own values on others, (obviously, right?
) but it's coming from my "soul", my "Divine Spark." ....

Or at least my indoctrination into those rights as "obvious."
Dang it!



Sheesh. Oh well, I'm honestly doing my best, lame as it may be.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


I have not heard you condemn such shallow behaviour once.

What? Did I miss something here? What am I supposed to condemn that I haven't?



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





I know I sometimes do want to impose my own values on others, (obviously, right? ) but it's coming from my "soul", my "Divine Spark." .... Or at least my indoctrination into those rights as "obvious." Dang it! Sheesh. Oh well, I'm honestly doing my best, lame as it may be.

i appreciate that you are getting a broader idea of things

when people have little knowledge they are very certain, when they learn more they start questioning the certainty.
You have learnt a history, values and morals that are biased, culture specific and relative but you may believe them as facts and universally applicable.
Your history says, colombus discovered america, my history says muslims discovered it first, red indians say, muslims came as traders, europeans came as plunderers and colonisers!

thanks for acknowledging a bigger picture



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7
 


I have not heard you condemn such shallow behaviour once.

What? Did I miss something here? What am I supposed to condemn that I haven't?

you said it in later post, i wanted to know your view on people mischeviously insulting what other people hold sacred and then hiding behind freedom of speech, its not illegal but do you think its immoral?



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


i wanted to know your view on people mischeviously insulting what other people hold sacred and then hiding behind freedom of speech, its not illegal but do you think its immoral?

I think that some people take things too seriously. If we can't see the humorous aspects of our world and ourselves, everyone would be miserable all the time. So if you're talking about say, stand-up comedians, or satirical commentators, no, I don't think it's immoral.

We all should be able to look at ourselves and our eccentricities without getting all hostile and defensive and our knickers in a twist because someone disagrees with us. Some things that people "hold sacred" seem preposterous, even hilarious, to others, and vice versa. It works both ways.

No one is "above criticism", as none of us are perfect. I've learned to simply disregard mischievous insults which were meant to harm me. My hair is a reddish "blonde". In the USA there are "blonde" jokes that make blonde women appear to be idiots. Do I want those people "killed" for insulting all "blondes"? No.

Some people love Nascar racing. Some people love hip-hop. I think they're both stupid. Should I be put to death for that?

It's not always easy, but it's part of maturity to realize that we all have individual priorities and tastes.

I hold animals as sacred. When someone says they hate cats or dogs, or they tell me they'd shoot one if it comes in their yard, or they think it's funny to torture them, or that "they're just animals", I think they are immoral. So I tell them I think it's immoral, and after that I stay away from them and keep my pets away from them.

If I see someone abusing an animal, or an animal that has been abandoned and neglected, my heart breaks - and I call them out. Recently one of my Senators drafted a bill to prohibit the slaughtering of horses - and I wrote and told him I appreciated it.

Religion is SUCH a subjective thing that the entire idea seems laughable at times....but I try to be respectful about saying so. But religious "beliefs" are not the same as torturing animals or people. "Beliefs" in invisible, supernatural forces can't be proven true or false;

physical harm with malicious intent to another being can be proven true or false, and is wrong. I suppose what we're talking about with Bangladesh and Muslim sensibilities could be likened to "emotional harm" - because 'feelings get hurt' or people feel 'offended' -

but adults should be beyond 'hurt feelings' just because someone else disagrees with their "ideas."

On the other hand, telling a trusting and vulnerable child they are a worthless sinner doomed to hell is immoral, in my opinion, just as much as spousal abuse, captivity, forced labor and oppression. I don't know how else to express it.


edit on 6-5-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 



i appreciate that you are getting a broader idea of things
when people have little knowledge they are very certain, when they learn more they start questioning the certainty.

HEY!
I are college edjumacated, thanks very much!!


I've never claimed to know everything, that's why I spend my time studying and inquiring. But no matter how long I have left to live, I won't get to all the things I'd like to learn about. And when it comes to some things, like astrophysics and quantum mechanics, it's hard for me to get even the basics into my skull.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Let's go back to the UDHR.
What parts of the UN's "human rights list" items that I posted do you disagree with?
What parts do you see as immoral?



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 





On the other hand, telling a trusting and vulnerable child they are a worthless sinner doomed to hell is immoral, in my opinion,

i also don't agree to it.
But you are again showing selective judgement.
How is it moral to teach kids that its ok to make fun of someone's appearance(hair colour, weight etc), race, religion rather than teaching them mutual respect based on the personality not looks!



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7
 



i appreciate that you are getting a broader idea of things
when people have little knowledge they are very certain, when they learn more they start questioning the certainty.

HEY!
I are college edjumacated, thanks very much!!


I've never claimed to know everything, that's why I spend my time studying and inquiring. But no matter how long I have left to live, I won't get to all the things I'd like to learn about. And when it comes to some things, like astrophysics and quantum mechanics, it's hard for me to get even the basics into my skull.

college edjumaction does not equate to wisdom, it does give an illusion of it

sadly they don't teach morals at school/college.
Its more important than knowing quantum mechanics anyway.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by logical7
 


How is it moral to teach kids that its ok to make fun of someone's appearance(hair colour, weight etc), race, religion rather than teaching them mutual respect based on the personality not looks!

It isn't, and I've never said it is! I taught my kids to be respectful and kind, and that others with odd appearance were "fancy" (thanks, Mister Rogers! )

Hey, I just went in the other room and saw on my desk a pamphlet I picked up at that conference I told you about. It's titled Moral System of Islam. I'd forgotten I picked it up.

I need to get off of here for a while - would you mind looking at it and then sharing what you think of it?
Also - are these "ignorant masses" in Bangladesh supposedly unaware of these things? Or are these things known by every Muslim, whether from cradle to grave or as converts?

How does it happen that there are so many extremists in the Abrahamic religions?

edit on 6-5-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join