Who does this planet belong to?
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
I appreciate your honesty, because it is true that in some parts of the world this is what happens by law.
Do you realize the lack of freedom your religion imposes?
Morality aside, you have children which are forced into Islam by their parents and if they do not like it, they are beheaded?
Does this bring peace?
Peace if the party with a disagreement is beheaded since there is no disagreement then.
But WAR when people decide to fight instead of being beheaded just because of their opinion.
Islam is not a religion of piece, peace may happen regardless of Islam not because of it.
It actually gives good reasons to rebel against the authorities.
That is why you have radicals for.
The first radical that wants power will use Islam to get an army of mindless sheep.
Islam is a tool for mind control, it really has no other purpose.
Why do you need this planet to "belong" to someone?
I certainly hope that dudes not serious. I guess this is why we should oppose Muhhamed's personality Cult. Or perhaps it's just me who immediately thought "Jonestown", after that comment.
Whatever. Islam is not a religion of peace, like most entities of the social spectrum, they clearly have social/political goals, and historically as a whole, they have not shied away from using violence to advance them. Do I even need mention that Muhammed as a historical person waged war and murdered his political adversaries?
Saying Islam is a religion of peace is about as accurate as calling battle ship a bath tub.
you said "Muhammed as a historical person waged war." Is fighting wars a criteria to decide if someone or some ideology is violent or not? In that case, would you those countries that fought against Nazis were violent???
Next, you said "Muhammed murdered political adversaries"... can you bring the proof, so we can discuss what exactly it's all about.
I don't think that Muhammed really existed, just like Jesus and other biblical and quran characters
Well, I said Muhammed murdered political rivals because that is pretty much what he did. For example, the hadiths even contain a story about an Ka'b Ibn al-Ashraf, who was murdered for writing songs and poems criticizing Muhammed, Allah, and Muslim women. Muhammed asks which of his followers wI'll kill him, and several followers volunteer for the assassination. They offer to talk to Ka'b at night, and behead him.
And to answer your question, yes. The frequency of war is possibly the best and only way to judge the violence of a particular culture. Yes the Nations that fought the Nazi's were, and still are, violent nations. The question I think you are alluding to is whether the violence of that war was necassary?
Kaab bin ashraf was not killed for criticizing the prophet but for going to the enemies and inciting them to fight against the muslim nation...he was endangering the peace and security of an entire nation...get your facts from the right sources please
Religious insanity strikes again...
"Survivors reported that the rebels rampaged through villages slitting throats of residents, looting and burning homes and abducting dozens of trapped women and children."
Boko Haram even has two crossed AK-47 in their logo.
Joseph Stalin an atheist killed 2 million Russians because they refused to yield to his economic policies... if you can accept that as proof for atheism to be a violent ideology.... then i can think of entertaining your claims
The Atheist Atrocities Fallacy
Stalin had a political agenda, which was in no way based on atheism.
Oh...so you seem to know people's intentions??? Why do you think Boko Haram doesn't have any political agenda...wouldn't power look attractive to them????
Please, point out how Stalin's political agenda was based on "Lack of belief in a god or gods"...
Please get my point straight... PRAGMATIC
I am not saying that atheism or for that matter even communism inspired stalin to violence... i am only saying that he used the ideology to further his imperialists ideas... now if you say that islam inspires boko haram...show me how, and then i will present my rebuttal
Peace be upon you, brother.
Are you advancing any argument through this link...or is this also just sharing of information?
You asked me: "now if you say that islam inspires boko haram...show me how", hence the link.
Some excerpts from that page:
"The official name is Jamā‘atu Ahli is-Sunnah lid-Da‘wati wal-Jihād, meaning "People Committed to the Prophet's Teachings for Propagation and Jihad."
"Boko Haram was founded as a Sunni Islamic fundamentalist sect advocating a strict form of Sharia Law and developed into a Salafist-jihadi group in 2009, influenced by the Wahhabi movement. The movement is so diffuse that fighters associated with it do not necessarily follow Salafi doctrine. Boko Haram seeks the establishment of an Islamic state in Nigeria."
"Boko Haram uses a number of visual symbols in flags, printed materials and in propaganda videos...
- Two crossed Kalashnikov AK-47 automatic rifles. This symbolizes armed struggle and the willingness to use violence.
- An open Quran, the holy book of Islam. This symbolizes Islamic proselytizing.
- The Islamic declaration of faith, the shahada."
So you are saying that people don't have any motives behind what they claim??? In that case stalin said he was doing his attrocities for socialism, so by your logic socialism is evil...bush killed iraqis in the name of spreading democracy - therefore democracy must be very evil.
Strawman and generalisation fallacy:
"by your logic socialism is evil...bush killed iraqis in the name of spreading democracy - therefore democracy must be very evil"
Are you going for some kind of new record number of fallacies today?
You keep "misunderstanding" others, drawing unfounded conclusions from that misunderstanding, misrepresenting the view of others.
You should really read up on fallacies.
It would do much better if you can present arguments instead of throwing open ended accusations that mean nothing... if you think islam is evil because Boko Haram says it's doing what it's doing in the name of Islam... then by that logic democracy must be evil because Bush did what he did in the name of democracy..
I think the logic is strong...
I never asked you to comment on my comments. I just posted about the latest atrocities in the name of Islam.
And no, I definitely don't think your logic is strong. More like confused.
Same generalisation fallacy again, ex:
"If we meet an angry person from a given country X, we may suspect that most people in country X are often angry or even that all people in country X are always angry."
Compare with your argument:
"then by that logic democracy must be evil because Bush did what he did in the name of democracy"
No, I don't think islam is evil because what Boko Haram says or does.
I think the Abrahamic religions, with Islam in the lead, are the most evil religions, but most Muslims have the common sense to not interpret the Qur'an and the Hadith literally and to skip the sharia laws.
But those who do interpret it literally or are sadistic enough to just want to live that way, do what Boko Haram does.
And Al-Qaeda, ISIS, the Taliban, Abu Sayyaf, Ansar al-Islam, Armed Islamic Group of Algeria, Army of Islam, Boko Haram, Taliban, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Jemaah Islamiyah, Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, Indian Mujahideen, etc...
Atheism has killed less people than those of religious backgrounds. if you forgot there's several thousand years of religious leaders destroying innocent lives before we even get to the 1900's. You're truly an idiot. I feel terrible for you're family who raised such an ignorant and yes I will say it PIG HEADED moron like you. Valiya you seriously need to grow up and get you're information straight. For goodness sake you're probably one of the most stupid people I've ever seen.
Lol, Valiya, you just proved my point flawlessly. If you are running around murdering political rivals, it should not matter whether the name is Hitler, Stalin, or Muhammed. Muhammed fought and killed for political strength. He eliminated personal adversaries, and waged war for control against rival religions and nations. And in turn, he too was murdered by his rivals There is nothing remotely special about the life of Muhammed.
Anyway, my overall point is that not only was Muhammed merely a warlord in his time, but his fiction infused writings continue to inspire violence using Muhammed's philosophy of Jihad. Only by teaching that violence is wrong on any form could a religion be considered truely "peaceful". However, either expressly in their writings or voiced by leaders withing religious cultures, pretty much every religion fails to promote a purely peaceful philosophy.
However, you have brought up Stalin and Hitler several times, trying to say all atheists are inherently violent. I would challenge you to find where in the Atheist Bible we promote a violent culture. Don't worry, I'll wait...
Your statements are all just assertions without proofs…so not meriting a response.
And then you say that the Mohammed’s (PBUH) “fiction” (may be you mean the quran) is inspiring violence even today…that’s like saying that Moaists are violent because of Das Capital. Unless you can substantiate your claims…i can only reply in kind, asserting you are simply wrong.
Correction: I am not saying that atheism drove stalin and others to violence… I am only saying that just as their ideologies they claimed to profess can’t be blamed for their violence, you can’t do the same with what some mulims are doing…
So, now it’s my turn to wait for you to bring up your proof from the sources to islam to show how islam inspires violence.
"Before Sunday’s assault in Cameroon, the militants launched one of their bloodiest attacks yet in Nigeria, on the towns of Baga and Doron on 3 January that left hundreds of people dead and thousands of houses burnt or razed."
"Boko Haram has repeatedly stated its opposition not only to western education", "but also to democracy and secular government, which it regards as a form of 'paganism', and its attacks could intensify to discourage voting.
Some 1.5 million people have been displaced by the insurgency. As of mid-September 2014, the insurgents had seized 25 towns in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states. Nigerian media reports say Boko Haram has seized and established control over 20,000 sq km of territory in the region."
Are you posting this as an argument? If yes, i don't understand what you are trying to say from all this
I am just sharing information.
Valiya, there are tons of verses that can be perceived as calls to violence. However, I'm on a mobile phone, so no way in hell am I going to type them all.
But here's a link that explores some of them.
And it was rather witty of you to catch on so quickly that the psuedo-historical fiction I spoke of was in fact the Quran. However, you failed to reply to my acqusation that Muhammed assassinated Ka'b ibn al-Ashram pre-emptively was anything other than a political move. In fact, you know in an ironic twist of fate, the subject of your favorite subject to brandish when dealing with challenging ideas, Joseph Stalin, also murdered pre-emptively over 2 million people who were allied to factions he opposed. Ironic that your prophet has alot in common with your favorite mass murder subject, but you would not admit that it is essentially the exact same scenario.