CAIR: Writer Smears Muslim Community
Sadiqi Az-Zindiki
condemning Daniel Pipe's editorial "It Matters What Kind of Islam Prevails."
But I am wondering how many will be bemoaning the fact that Islam places
restrictions on some American's first amendment rights.
I was an American convert to Islam, but because of my changing opinions I
found myself one day outside of the fold of Islam- an apostate. At this
moment in time, unless I want to be harassed or threatened, I cannot
reasonably speak out against the flaws I perceive in Islam save under
conditions of anonymity.
I very much wish I could say it was the case that this was only because of a
few overzealous Muslims, likely to be misinterpreting their own religion-
but that is simply not the case. There are a minority of Muslim
intelligentsia who actively speak out against the death penalty for
apostates, on the basis of the Qur'anic principle of "no compulsion in
religion."
However, the vast majority of the major schools of fiqh- jurisprudence-
maintain that in an Islamic state the death penalty is mandatory for
apostates if they do not revert to Islam- a situation brought to the
attention of the Western public by the fatwas against Salman Rushdie.
The basis for this is primarily in the Hadith, the narrated sayings and
stories of the Prophet Muhammad, where it is recorded in Sahih Bukhari
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17, considered one of the most reliable
collections of Hadith by Sunni Muslim scholars, that Muhammad said : "The
blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but
Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In
Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse
and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."
This is not to say that if we looked into the Bible, we would not find
parallels in the murder of idolaters by unjustly famed Prophets like Moses,
but rather to say that thankfully Christian scholars are no longer as free
in a secular society to incite the murder of heretics and blasphemers.
There has been no such parallel experience within Muslim culture that I am
aware of, such that the Muslim 'ulema feels ashamed to know that such
penalties could even have been carried out, and apologizes every other year
like the Papacy.
In my experience, after telling my closest Muslim friends that I no longer
could say I believed, we remain friends- but this is despite the rulings of
the 'ulema, and because the vast majority of religionists don't let
obnoxious set-in-stone doctrines interfere with their humanity. I make this
clear because there are the chauvinistic Islamists who Pipe speaks of, and
then there is everyone else.
Crimespeak
http://crimespeak.8m.com
Jeremiah McAuliffe
<crime...@xoommail.com> wrote:
>I was an American convert to Islam,
I don't believe you.
> At this
>moment in time, unless I want to be harassed or threatened, I cannot
>reasonably speak out against the flaws I perceive in Islam save under
>conditions of anonymity.
Crap! I do it all the time.
What you are telling us is you are a coward who does not actually have
any courage of conviction.
Michael Alexander
Qu'ran and I have read a little bit about Islam. This is the main reason I
hate Islam. If 100 people don't kill me, but one person kills me, I am
still dead. Most Muslims are reasonable people, but the kill rate is too
high, especially in Islamic countries. I left a religion, Christianity, 30
years ago and I feel some empathy towards apostates from other religions. I
simply don't forgive Islam for crimes against fellow apostates.
Two things I care about are truth and techniques for achieving the truth. I
believe that debate is a valid path to truth. If you kill the other side in
debates, you can't follow this path. Many religious people have no
technique for acquiring truth.
Sadiqi Az-Zindiki <crime...@xoommail.com> wrote in message
news:7najho$3ff$1...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net...
> I have no doubt that the LA Times will be receiving a flood of letters
> condemning Daniel Pipe's editorial "It Matters What Kind of Islam
Prevails."
> But I am wondering how many will be bemoaning the fact that Islam places
> restrictions on some American's first amendment rights.
>
> I was an American convert to Islam, but because of my changing opinions I
> found myself one day outside of the fold of Islam- an apostate. At this
> moment in time, unless I want to be harassed or threatened, I cannot
> reasonably speak out against the flaws I perceive in Islam save under
> conditions of anonymity.
>
Jeremiah McAuliffe
<kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net> wrote:
>I have never been Muslim, but I have read portions of the Koran and the
>Qu'ran and I have read a little bit about Islam. This is the main reason I
>hate Islam. If 100 people don't kill me, but one person kills me, I am
>still dead. Most Muslims are reasonable people, but the kill rate is too
>high,
I wonder what you say about African-Americans, who have a crime rate
higher than other groups in the States.
Guess you hate them too......
Michael Alexander
news:379ec47...@news.city-net.com...
But they don't target apostates and the truth. Islam happens to be a false
religion. People who criticize it are telling the truth. Attacking
apostates is attacking truth.
Therion Ware
<kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
Not that I diagree, but it's a tricky position to defend before a
Shria court.
- ----- ------
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
------ <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
ICQ: 29168081
---
drop the ".eac" for mail, because the EAC doesn't exist.
Jeremiah McAuliffe
<kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net> wrote:
>> I wonder what you say about African-Americans, who have a crime rate
>> higher than other groups in the States.
>>
>> Guess you hate them too......
>
>But they don't target apostates and the truth.
Oh? So, tell us, who do they target? Whitey?
Michael Alexander
I am more likely to blame leaders than followers. Many Islamic leaders lead
their flocks astray. They say that power corrupts and absolute power
corrupts absolutely. Islamic leaders seem to be much more susceptible to
this corruption than other religious leaders. When they control a country,
they lead that country down a worse path.
Jeremiah McAuliffe
<kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net> wrote:
>Jeremiah McAuliffe <ali...@city-net.com> wrote in message
>news:379a47a7...@news.city-net.com...
>> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999 07:26:18 -0700, "Michael Alexander"
>> <kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> I wonder what you say about African-Americans, who have a crime rate
>> >> higher than other groups in the States.
>> >>
>> >> Guess you hate them too......
>> >
>> >But they don't target apostates and the truth.
>>
>> Oh? So, tell us, who do they target? Whitey?
>
>I am more likely to blame leaders than followers. Many Islamic leaders lead
>their flocks astray.
Agree.
They say that power corrupts and absolute power
>corrupts absolutely. Islamic leaders seem to be much more susceptible to
>this corruption than other religious leaders.
Oh puh-leeze. Tell it to the Catholic altar boys.....
The seeker
McAuliffe) wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:36:05 -0700, "Sadiqi Az-Zindiki"
><crime...@xoommail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I was an American convert to Islam,
>
>I don't believe you.
I do not believe him either
>> At this
>>moment in time, unless I want to be harassed or threatened, I cannot
>>reasonably speak out against the flaws I perceive in Islam save under
>>conditions of anonymity.
>
>
>Crap! I do it all the time.
>
>What you are telling us is you are a coward who does not actually have
>any courage of conviction.
>
>
>
----
Science in the Quran http://www.al-muslim.org/science/sc1_main.htm
Muslim Scientists and Islamic Civilization http://www.erols.com/zenithco/
Islamic & Arabic arts and architecture http://islamicart.com/
American_Muslim
The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam, means
peace. Salam is also part of the greeting of peace among Muslims. In
addition, one of the beautiful names of God is As-Salam, meaning "The
Peace." The word, however, means much more than just "peace." It means
submission to the One God, as well as to live in harmony with other people
and with the environment. A Muslim is, therefore, any person, anywhere in
the world, whose obedience, allegiance and loyalty are to God, Lord of the
Universe, and who strives to live in accordance with God's laws.
II. Muslims and Arabs
The followers of Islam are called Muslims. We should not confuse Muslims
with Arabs. Muslims may be Arabs, or they may be Turks, Persians, Indians,
Pakistanis, Indonesians, Europeans, Africans, Americans, Chinese, or any
other nationality. Islam is not limited to any nationality or race.
Arabs,also,
are not limited to only one religion. An Arab may be a Muslim, a Jew, a
Christian, an atheist, or part of any other belief system. Any person who
adopts the Arab language as his or her mother tongue is called an Arab.
While there are over one billion Muslims in the world, there are about 200
million Arabs, among whom about ten percent are not Muslim. Thus, Arab
Muslims constitute only about twenty percent of the Muslim population of the
world.
The language of the Qur'an, the Holy Book of Islam, is Arabic. Muslims all
over the world try to learn Arabic so that they may be able to read the
Qur'an and understand its meaning. They pray in the language of the Qur'an,
but supplications to God may be in any language.
III. Allah, the One and Only God
Allah is the name of the One and Only God. Allah has ninety-nine beautiful
names, such as: The Gracious, the Merciful, the Beneficent, The Creator, The
All-Knowing, the All-Wise, The Lord of the Universe, The First, The Last,
and many others. He is the Creator of all human beings. He is the God for
the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists, the Hindus and all
others, including those who do not even believe in Him. Muslims worship
God, and put their trust in Him as they seek His help and guidance.
IV. Muhammad
Muhammad was chosen by God to deliver His Message of Peace, namely Islam.
He was born in 570, C.E.* in Makkah, Arabia. He was entrusted with the
Message of Islam when he was at the age of forty years. The revelation that
he received is called the Qur'an, while the message is called Islam.
Muhammad is the very last Prophet of God to mankind. He is the final
Messenger of God. His message was and is still to all of mankind,
including the Christians and Jews. He was sent to those religious people
to inform them about the true mission of Jesus, Moses, David, Jacob,
Isaac and Abraham.
Muhammad is considered to be the summation and culmination of all the
prophets and messengers that came before him. He purified the previous
messages from adulteration and completed the Message of God for all
humanity. He was entrusted with the power of explaining, interpreting and
living the teachings of the Qur'an.
V. Sources of Islam
The legal sources of Islam are the Qur'an and the Hadith. The Qur'an is the
exact words of God; its authenticity, originality and totality are intact.
The
Hadith are the reports of the sayings, deeds and approvals of the Prophet
Muhammad. The Prophet's sayings and deeds are called Sunnah. The
Seerah is the writings of followers of Muhammad about the life of the
Prophet.
Hence, it is the life history of the Prophet Muhammad which provides
examples
of daily living for Muslims.
VI. Some Islamic Principles
A. Oneness of God:
He is One and the Only One. He is not two in one or three in one. This means
that Islam rejects the idea of trinity or such a unity of God which implies
more
than one God in one.
B. Oneness of mankind:
People are created equal in front of the Law of God. There is not
superiority
of one race over another. God made us of different colors, nationalities,
languages and beliefs so as to test who is going to be better than others.No
one can claim that he is better than others. It is only God Who knows who is
better. It depends on piety and righteousness.
C. Oneness of Messengers and the Message:
Muslims believe that God sent different messengers throughout the history of
mankind. All came with the same message and the same teachings. It was the
people who misunderstood and misinterpreted them. Muslims believe in Noah,
Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Moses, David, Jesus and Muhammad. The
Prophets of Christianity and Judaism are indeed the Prophets of Islam.
D. Angels and the Day of Judgement:
Muslims believe that there is a Day of Judgement when all people of the
world
throughout the history of mankind till the last day of life on earth, are to
be
brought for accounting, reward and punishment.
E. Innocence of Man at Birth:
Muslims believe that people are born free of sin. It is only after they
reach
the age of puberty and it is only after they commit sins that they are to be
charged for their mistakes. No one is responsible for or can take
responsibility for the sins of others. However, the door of forgiveness
through true repentance is always open.
F. State and Religion:
Muslims believe that Islam is a total and a complete way of life. It
encompasses
all aspects of life. As such, the teachings of Islam do not separate
religion from
politics. As a matter of fact, state and religion are under the obedience of
Allah
through the teachings of Islam. Hence, economic and social transactions, as
well
as educational and political systems, are a part of the teachings of Islam.
VII. Practices of Islam.
God instructed the Muslims to practice what they believe in. In Islam there
are five pillars:
A. Creed (Shahadah):
The verbal commitment and pledge that there is only One God and Muhammad
is the Messenger of God, is considered to be the creed of Islam.
B. Prayers (Salat):
The performance of the five daily prayers is required of Muslims.
C. Fasting (Saum):
Fasting is total abstinence from food, liquids and intimate relations from
dawn to sunset during the entire month of Ramadan.
D. Purifying Tax (Zakat):
This is an annual payment of a certain percentage of a Muslim's property,
which is distributed among the poor or other rightful beneficiaries.
E. Pilgrimage (Hajj):
The performance of pilgrimage to Makkah is required once in a lifetime if
the means are available. Hajj is, in part, a memorial to the trials and
tribulations of Prophet Abraham, his wife Hagar and his eldest son,
Prophet Ishmael.
VIII. Other Related Aspects.
A. Calendar:
Islamic practices are based on the lunar calendar. However, Muslims also use
the Gregorian calendar in their daily religious lives. Hence, the Islamic
calendar includes both the common era and the migration (Hijra) year of
the Prophet of Islam from Makkah to Madinah in the year of 623 C.E.
B. Celebrations (Eid):
Muslims have two celebrations (Eid): the Eid of Sacrifice and the Eid of
Fast-breaking. The Eid of Sacrifice is in remembrance of the sacrifice to
have been made by Prophet Abraham of his son. The Eid of Fast-breaking
comes at the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting.
C. Diets:
Islam allows Muslims to eat everything which is good for the health. It
restricts certain items such as pork and its by-products, alcohol and
any narcotic or addictive drugs.
D. Place of Worship:
The place of worship is called the Mosque or Masjid. There are three holy
places of worship for the Muslims on the world. These are the Mosque of
the Kaabah in Makkah, the Mosque of Prophet Muhammad in Madinah, and
Masjid Aqsa, adjacent to the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. A Muslim may
pray anywhere in the world, whether in a Mosque, a house, an office, or
outside. The whole world is a place of worship. It is preferable that
Muslims
pray in a congregation, but he/she may pray individually anywhere.
E. Holiday:
The holy day of the Muslims is Friday. It is considered to be sacred, and
the Day of Judgement will take place on Friday. Muslims join together
shortly after noon on Friday for the Friday congregational prayer in a
Mosque. A leader (Imam) gives a sermon (khutbah) and leads the
congregational prayer.
F. Distribution of Muslims in North America:
There are approximately five million Muslims in North America and are
distributed all around the continent, including major cities.
G. Contributions in North America:
Muslims are now established in North America. The Sears Tower and John
Hancock buildings in Chicago were designed by a Muslim chief architect,
originally from Pakistan. Muslims have established academic institutions,
community centers and organizations, schools and places of worship. They
live in peace and harmony among themselves and among other groups of
people in the society. The rate of crime among Muslims is very minimal.
Muslims in North America are highly educated and have added to the success
of American scientific and technological fields.
The Muslims of the early period of the Islamic era were pioneers in
medicine,
geography, navigation, arts, poetry, mathematics, algebra, logarithms,
calculus,
etc. They contributed to the Renaissance of Europe and world civilization.
IX. Non-Muslims
Muslims are required to respect all those who are faithful and God conscious
people, namely, those who received messages. Christians and Jews are called
People of the Book. Muslims are asked to call upon the People of the Book
for
common terms, namely, to worship One God, and to work together for the
solutions of the many problems in the society.
Christians and Jews lived peacefully with Muslims throughout centuries in
the
Middle East and other Asian and African countries. The second Caliph, Umar,
did not pray in the church in Jerusalem so as not to give the Muslims an
excuse
to take it over. Christians entrusted the Muslims, and as such, the key of
the
Church in Jerusalem is still in the hands of Muslims.
Jews fled from Spain during the Inquisition, and they were welcomed by the
Muslims. They settled in the heart of the Islamic Caliphate. They enjoyed
positions of power and authority. Throughout the Muslim World, churches,
synagogues and missionary schools were built within the Muslim
neighborhoods. These places were protected by Muslims even during
the contemporary crises in the Middle East.
by Ahmad H. Sakr, Ph.D.
For other such informative articles, please visit,
The Institute of Islamic Information: http://www.iiie.net/
For more Authentic information on Islam, please visit:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Discover Islam: http://www.discoverislam.com/
It is the Truth: http://www.it-is-truth.org/
Be Convinced: http://www.beconvinced.com/
Islaam: http://www.islaam.com/
Islamic City: http://www.islam.org
Converts for Humanity: http://www.convertstoislam.org/
New Muslims: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/newmuslims/
Women Issues: http://www.jannah.org
The Muslim Woman: http://members.aol.com/TrueIsOne/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DupDup
>I. Islam and Muslims
>
>The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam, means
>peace. Salam is also part of the greeting of peace among Muslims. In
>addition, one of the beautiful names of God is As-Salam, meaning "The
>Peace." The word, however, means much more than just "peace." It means
Well , isn't that odd ... in Algeria some 100.000 people have been
killed in the name of "peace" ... any explanation ?
>submission to the One God, as well as to live in harmony with other people
>and with the environment. A Muslim is, therefore, any person, anywhere in
>the world, whose obedience, allegiance and loyalty are to God, Lord of the
>Universe, and who strives to live in accordance with God's laws.
Live in harmony ? See above ... At least you guys are informed about
the universe . :-)
>II. Muslims and Arabs
>
>The followers of Islam are called Muslims. We should not confuse Muslims
>with Arabs. Muslims may be Arabs, or they may be Turks, Persians, Indians,
>Pakistanis, Indonesians, Europeans, Africans, Americans, Chinese, or any
>other nationality. Islam is not limited to any nationality or race.
>Arabs,also, are not limited to only one religion. An Arab may be a Muslim,
BUT NOT :
>a Jew, a Christian, an atheist, or part of any other belief system. Any person who
>adopts the Arab language as his or her mother tongue is called an Arab.
>While there are over one billion Muslims in the world, there are about 200
>million Arabs, among whom about ten percent are not Muslim. Thus, Arab
>Muslims constitute only about twenty percent of the Muslim population of the
>world.
>The language of the Qur'an, the Holy Book of Islam, is Arabic. Muslims all
>over the world try to learn Arabic so that they may be able to read the
>Qur'an and understand its meaning. They pray in the language of the Qur'an,
>but supplications to God may be in any language.
If he's almighty and understands all languages how come that he didn't
write "his" book in all major laguages ?
>III. Allah, the One and Only God
>
>Allah is the name of the One and Only God. Allah has ninety-nine beautiful
>names, such as: The Gracious, the Merciful, the Beneficent, The Creator, The
>All-Knowing, the All-Wise, The Lord of the Universe, The First, The Last,
>and many others.
I.E.: Just 9 ...
>He is the Creator of all human beings. He is the God for
>the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists, the Hindus and all
>others, including those who do not even believe in Him. Muslims worship
>God, and put their trust in Him as they seek His help and guidance.
EEEEE ... wrong he can not be a God to Atheists since Atheism is all
about NOT believing religious lies and fantasies ... And according to
me God didn't create me but my parents did through a simple biological
funtion called sex .
>IV. Muhammad
>
>Muhammad was chosen by God to deliver His Message of Peace, namely Islam.
>He was born in 570, C.E.* in Makkah, Arabia. He was entrusted with the
>Message of Islam when he was at the age of forty years. The revelation that
>he received is called the Qur'an, while the message is called Islam.
He wasn't a spring chicken then ...
>Muhammad is the very last Prophet of God to mankind. He is the final
>Messenger of God. His message was and is still to all of mankind,
>including the Christians and Jews. He was sent to those religious people
>to inform them about the true mission of Jesus, Moses, David, Jacob,
>Isaac and Abraham.
But not to the Atheists :-( ...
>Muhammad is considered to be the summation and culmination of all the
>prophets and messengers that came before him. He purified the previous
>messages from adulteration and completed the Message of God for all
>humanity. He was entrusted with the power of explaining, interpreting and
>living the teachings of the Qur'an.
Again not for the Atheists ... ;)
>V. Sources of Islam
>
>The legal sources of Islam are the Qur'an and the Hadith. The Qur'an is the
>exact words of God; its authenticity, originality and totality are intact.
After some 1400 years ? I doubt it ...
>The Hadith are the reports of the sayings, deeds and approvals of the Prophet
>Muhammad. The Prophet's sayings and deeds are called Sunnah. The
>Seerah is the writings of followers of Muhammad about the life of the
>Prophet.
>Hence, it is the life history of the Prophet Muhammad which provides
>examples of daily living for Muslims.
I.E.: A pack of lies ...
>VI. Some Islamic Principles
>
>A. Oneness of God:
>He is One and the Only One. He is not two in one or three in one. This means
>that Islam rejects the idea of trinity or such a unity of God which implies
>more
>than one God in one.
>
>B. Oneness of mankind:
>People are created equal in front of the Law of God. There is not
>superiority of one race over another. God made us of different colors, nationalities,
>languages and beliefs so as to test who is going to be better than others
Ahah ! He created us equal ... but what about the repression of women
from society in Afghanistan , in the name of Allah ? That isn't
equality ! That's plain sexism !
>No one can claim that he is better than others. It is only God Who knows who is
>better. It depends on piety and righteousness.
But then you said that we are all created equal ... so sorry ...
>C. Oneness of Messengers and the Message:
>Muslims believe that God sent different messengers throughout the history of
>mankind. All came with the same message and the same teachings. It was the
>people who misunderstood and misinterpreted them. Muslims believe in Noah,
>Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Moses, David, Jesus and Muhammad. The
>Prophets of Christianity and Judaism are indeed the Prophets of Islam.
I dunno but here you give the exact reason for most atheism ...
Muhammad wasn't a miracle man , the people just misunderstood him ...
>D. Angels and the Day of Judgement:
>Muslims believe that there is a Day of Judgement when all people of the
>world
>throughout the history of mankind till the last day of life on earth, are to
>be
>brought for accounting, reward and punishment.
So equality fails again ... we are gonna be judged and who's gonna be
the last in row ... ;-)
>E. Innocence of Man at Birth:
>Muslims believe that people are born free of sin. It is only after they
>reach
>the age of puberty and it is only after they commit sins that they are to be
>charged for their mistakes. No one is responsible for or can take
>responsibility for the sins of others. However, the door of forgiveness
>through true repentance is always open.
So if I kill a (wo)man at the age of 9 I'm innocent in the laws of
Allah ? I think not !
>F. State and Religion:
>Muslims believe that Islam is a total and a complete way of life. It
>encompasses
>all aspects of life. As such, the teachings of Islam do not separate
>religion from
>politics. As a matter of fact, state and religion are under the obedience of
>Allah
>through the teachings of Islam. Hence, economic and social transactions, as
>well
>as educational and political systems, are a part of the teachings of Islam.
This is disastrous ... just look at Afghanistan !
>VII. Practices of Islam.
>God instructed the Muslims to practice what they believe in. In Islam there
>are five pillars:
>
>A. Creed (Shahadah):
>The verbal commitment and pledge that there is only One God and Muhammad
>is the Messenger of God, is considered to be the creed of Islam.
>
>B. Prayers (Salat):
>The performance of the five daily prayers is required of Muslims.
>
>C. Fasting (Saum):
>Fasting is total abstinence from food, liquids and intimate relations from
>dawn to sunset during the entire month of Ramadan.
>
>D. Purifying Tax (Zakat):
>This is an annual payment of a certain percentage of a Muslim's property,
>which is distributed among the poor or other rightful beneficiaries.
>
>E. Pilgrimage (Hajj):
>The performance of pilgrimage to Makkah is required once in a lifetime if
>the means are available. Hajj is, in part, a memorial to the trials and
>tribulations of Prophet Abraham, his wife Hagar and his eldest son,
>Prophet Ishmael.
Zakat : Ripping-off some dumb people whom still want to believe in the
year 1999 ...
>VIII. Other Related Aspects.
>A. Calendar:
>Islamic practices are based on the lunar calendar. However, Muslims also use
>the Gregorian calendar in their daily religious lives. Hence, the Islamic
>calendar includes both the common era and the migration (Hijra) year of
>the Prophet of Islam from Makkah to Madinah in the year of 623 C.E.
>
>B. Celebrations (Eid):
>Muslims have two celebrations (Eid): the Eid of Sacrifice and the Eid of
>Fast-breaking. The Eid of Sacrifice is in remembrance of the sacrifice to
>have been made by Prophet Abraham of his son. The Eid of Fast-breaking
>comes at the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting.
>
>C. Diets:
>Islam allows Muslims to eat everything which is good for the health. It
>restricts certain items such as pork and its by-products, alcohol and
>any narcotic or addictive drugs.
Why not pork it's healty isn't it ? And about the alcohol ... here's
a true story :
13th August 1986 , Belgium
A muslim working in a construction site has just been nearly killed by
a falling iron beam . But thanks to these laws they could not
des-infect the wound with alcohol and he died due to wound-infection .
True story kids !
>D. Place of Worship:
>The place of worship is called the Mosque or Masjid. There are three holy
>places of worship for the Muslims on the world. These are the Mosque of
>the Kaabah in Makkah, the Mosque of Prophet Muhammad in Madinah, and
>Masjid Aqsa, adjacent to the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. A Muslim may
>pray anywhere in the world, whether in a Mosque, a house, an office, or
>outside. The whole world is a place of worship. It is preferable that
>Muslims pray in a congregation, but he/she may pray individually anywhere.
My appartement certainly isn't !
>E. Holiday:
>The holy day of the Muslims is Friday. It is considered to be sacred, and
>the Day of Judgement will take place on Friday. Muslims join together
>shortly after noon on Friday for the Friday congregational prayer in a
>Mosque. A leader (Imam) gives a sermon (khutbah) and leads the
>congregational prayer.
>
>F. Distribution of Muslims in North America:
>There are approximately five million Muslims in North America and are
>distributed all around the continent, including major cities.
>
>G. Contributions in North America:
>Muslims are now established in North America. The Sears Tower and John
>Hancock buildings in Chicago were designed by a Muslim chief architect,
>originally from Pakistan. Muslims have established academic institutions,
>community centers and organizations, schools and places of worship. They
>live in peace and harmony among themselves and among other groups of
>people in the society. The rate of crime among Muslims is very minimal.
>Muslims in North America are highly educated and have added to the success
>of American scientific and technological fields.
>
>The Muslims of the early period of the Islamic era were pioneers in
>medicine,
>geography, navigation, arts, poetry, mathematics, algebra, logarithms,
>calculus,
>etc. They contributed to the Renaissance of Europe and world civilization.
I dunno but has God got anything to do with this ?
>IX. Non-Muslims
>Muslims are required to respect all those who are faithful and God conscious
>people, namely, those who received messages. Christians and Jews are called
>People of the Book. Muslims are asked to call upon the People of the Book
>for
>common terms, namely, to worship One God, and to work together for the
>solutions of the many problems in the society.
Then why did you lot invade Europe in the middle ages ? They where
Christians at the time !
>Christians and Jews lived peacefully with Muslims throughout centuries in
>the
>Middle East and other Asian and African countries. The second Caliph, Umar,
>did not pray in the church in Jerusalem so as not to give the Muslims an
>excuse
>to take it over. Christians entrusted the Muslims, and as such, the key of
>the
>Church in Jerusalem is still in the hands of Muslims.
>
>Jews fled from Spain during the Inquisition, and they were welcomed by the
>Muslims. They settled in the heart of the Islamic Caliphate. They enjoyed
>positions of power and authority. Throughout the Muslim World, churches,
>synagogues and missionary schools were built within the Muslim
>neighborhoods. These places were protected by Muslims even during
>the contemporary crises in the Middle East.
>by Ahmad H. Sakr, Ph.D.
Nowadays they are just being bombed daily by Muslims but hey ...
>For other such informative articles, please visit,
>The Institute of Islamic Information: http://www.iiie.net/
Nope ...
>For more Authentic information on Islam, please visit:
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
Any proof of it's authenticity ?
>Discover Islam: http://www.discoverislam.com/
>It is the Truth: http://www.it-is-truth.org/
>Be Convinced: http://www.beconvinced.com/
>Islaam: http://www.islaam.com/
>Islamic City: http://www.islam.org
>Converts for Humanity: http://www.convertstoislam.org/
>New Muslims: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/newmuslims/
>Women Issues: http://www.jannah.org
>The Muslim Woman: http://members.aol.com/TrueIsOne/index.html
Nha ....
DupDup ...
God didn't create man , Man created god .
Michael Alexander
news:93293290...@news.remarQ.com...
> I. Islam and Muslims
>
> The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam,
means
> peace.
I have heard that this is a lie that Muslims use to convince non-Muslims
that they are nice people.
> IV. Muhammad
>
> Muhammad was chosen by God to deliver His Message of Peace, namely Islam.
> He was born in 570, C.E.* in Makkah, Arabia. He was entrusted with the
> Message of Islam when he was at the age of forty years. The revelation
that
> he received is called the Qur'an, while the message is called Islam.
Muhammad was a warrior who killed hundreds of people. This Message of Peace
stuff is B.S..
> Muhammad is the very last Prophet of God to mankind. He is the final
> Messenger of God.
Doesn't this restrict God? You are saying that God doesn't have the power
to send a prophet.
> Muhammad is considered to be the summation and culmination of all the
> prophets and messengers that came before him. He purified the previous
> messages from adulteration and completed the Message of God for all
> humanity. He was entrusted with the power of explaining, interpreting and
> living the teachings of the Qur'an.
And how do you know that his message wasn't corrupt as well?
> V. Sources of Islam
>
> The legal sources of Islam are the Qur'an and the Hadith. The Qur'an is
the
> exact words of God; its authenticity, originality and totality are intact.
Muslims may believe this, but they are wrong. The Qur'an isn't any more
authentic than the Bible or ancient Greek and Roman legends.
> B. Oneness of mankind:
> People are created equal in front of the Law of God. There is not
> superiority
> of one race over another. God made us of different colors, nationalities,
> languages and beliefs so as to test who is going to be better than
others.No
> one can claim that he is better than others. It is only God Who knows who
is
> better. It depends on piety and righteousness.
Many Islamic countries don't practice this. There are places in the Koran
that have different rules for believers, non-believers, and apostates. As
near as I can tell, all is legal for the purpose of promoting Islam
including murder, slavery, and lying.
> Muslims believe in Noah,
> Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Moses, David, Jesus and Muhammad. The
> Prophets of Christianity and Judaism are indeed the Prophets of Islam.
You believe a bunch of stupid legends like the legend about Noah. I can
understand why Mohammad didn't know any better, because he lived 1400 years
ago, but what's your excuse?
> F. State and Religion:
> Muslims believe that Islam is a total and a complete way of life. It
> encompasses
> all aspects of life. As such, the teachings of Islam do not separate
> religion from
> politics. As a matter of fact, state and religion are under the obedience
of
> Allah
> through the teachings of Islam. Hence, economic and social transactions,
as
> well
> as educational and political systems, are a part of the teachings of
Islam.
This is why many Islamic countries are screwed up.
> people in the society. The rate of crime among Muslims is very minimal.
> Muslims in North America are highly educated and have added to the success
> of American scientific and technological fields.
The rate of crime among atheists is very minimal.
> IX. Non-Muslims
> Muslims are required to respect all those who are faithful and God
conscious
> people, namely, those who received messages. Christians and Jews are
called
> People of the Book. Muslims are asked to call upon the People of the Book
> for
> common terms, namely, to worship One God, and to work together for the
> solutions of the many problems in the society.
What about me? I am not God conscious. Do you respect me? Many Muslims
don't respect Christians and Jews.
Christopher A. Lee
cross-posted to, or are you trying to start another
cross-posting flame war?
In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>,
American_Muslim <America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I. Islam and Muslims
>
>The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam, means
>peace. Salam is also part of the greeting of peace among Muslims. In
>addition, one of the beautiful names of God is As-Salam, meaning "The
>Peace." The word, however, means much more than just "peace." It means
>submission to the One God, as well as to live in harmony with other people
>and with the environment. A Muslim is, therefore, any person, anywhere in
>the world, whose obedience, allegiance and loyalty are to God, Lord of the
>Universe, and who strives to live in accordance with God's laws.
What "One God" would that be? Until you've demonstrated that
is is anything more than a fantasy of your imagination you've
got nothing to say on the subject.
Here's a big clue: While it might be relevent on the Arabic
and Islamic newsgroups, it's off-topic and rude on an atheist
group. WE DON'T WANT YOUR PREACHING, and you didn't even try to
find any shared common understanding to start from.
If we want to fiond out about Islam, we know where to look
rather than having yet another religion shoved down our throats
as though it were some kind of absolute truth.
Why can't you just live-and-let-live? That way leads to *real*
peace.
DJ Nozem
<America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I. Islam and Muslims
Shalom!
:-)
>The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam, means
>peace. Salam is also part of the greeting of peace among Muslims. In
>addition, one of the beautiful names of God is As-Salam, meaning "The
>Peace." The word, however, means much more than just "peace." It means
>submission to the One God, as well as to live in harmony with other people
>and with the environment. A Muslim is, therefore, any person, anywhere in
>the world, whose obedience, allegiance and loyalty are to God, Lord of the
>Universe, and who strives to live in accordance with God's laws.
>II. Muslims and Arabs
>The followers of Islam are called Muslims. We should not confuse Muslims
>with Arabs. Muslims may be Arabs, or they may be Turks, Persians, Indians,
>Pakistanis, Indonesians, Europeans, Africans, Americans, Chinese, or any
>other nationality. Islam is not limited to any nationality or race.
Still, one of the pillars of the Islamic faith was to pray with the
face to Mecca, and you should also go there once in your life if you
have the ability.
What is the symbolic purpose of the pilgrimage to Mecca and the
praying with your face to Mecca?
>Arabs,also,
>are not limited to only one religion. An Arab may be a Muslim, a Jew, a
>Christian, an atheist, or part of any other belief system. Any person who
>adopts the Arab language as his or her mother tongue is called an Arab.
>While there are over one billion Muslims in the world, there are about 200
>million Arabs, among whom about ten percent are not Muslim. Thus, Arab
>Muslims constitute only about twenty percent of the Muslim population of the
>world.
The others are mainly in South - & South East Asia, and Turkey ads
another 40 million or so, just guessing wild on that one.
>The language of the Qur'an, the Holy Book of Islam, is Arabic. Muslims all
>over the world try to learn Arabic so that they may be able to read the
>Qur'an and understand its meaning. They pray in the language of the Qur'an,
>but supplications to God may be in any language.
>III. Allah, the One and Only God
>Allah is the name of the One and Only God. Allah has ninety-nine beautiful
>names, such as: The Gracious, the Merciful, the Beneficent, The Creator, The
>All-Knowing, the All-Wise, The Lord of the Universe, The First, The Last,
>and many others. He is the Creator of all human beings. He is the God for
>the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists, the Hindus and all
>others, including those who do not even believe in Him. Muslims worship
>God, and put their trust in Him as they seek His help and guidance.
Kewl! So I don't have to believe in Allah to go to heaven?
That's one advantage over Christianity......
>IV. Muhammad
>Muhammad was chosen by God to deliver His Message of Peace, namely Islam.
>He was born in 570, C.E.* in Makkah, Arabia. He was entrusted with the
>Message of Islam when he was at the age of forty years. The revelation that
>he received is called the Qur'an, while the message is called Islam.
Thought Muhammad everyone dying with the sword in the hand would go to
heaven, the Jihad was the unofficial 6th pillar of the Islam, I
thought, though more recently it's been reduced to 'spreading the
word', or something like that.
Explanations, please......
>Muhammad is the very last Prophet of God to mankind. He is the final
>Messenger of God. His message was and is still to all of mankind,
>including the Christians and Jews. He was sent to those religious people
>to inform them about the true mission of Jesus, Moses, David, Jacob,
>Isaac and Abraham.
So in principle if Muhammed were not the final messenger and a new one
would come around you'd all go follow him(/her?)
Yeah, I think the next one should be a female, would be about time, we
don't need to suppress them anymore now that we're finally civilised,
say AM.... do you think women should cover their bodies completely for
everyone but their husbands? ( just cutting down on your
convert-appeal )
>Muhammad is considered to be the summation and culmination of all the
>prophets and messengers that came before him. He purified the previous
>messages from adulteration
(.........)
> and completed the Message of God for all
>humanity. He was entrusted with the power of explaining, interpreting and
>living the teachings of the Qur'an.
So did Muhammed write it down?
(small snip)
>VI. Some Islamic Principles
>A. Oneness of God:
>He is One and the Only One. He is not two in one or three in one. This means
>that Islam rejects the idea of trinity or such a unity of God which implies
>more
>than one God in one.
You guys threw away a good instrument of indoctrinating doublethink
there, the trinity, 3 but still one.
>B. Oneness of mankind:
>People are created equal in front of the Law of God. There is not
>superiority
>of one race over another. God made us of different colors, nationalities,
>languages and beliefs so as to test who is going to be better than others.No
>one can claim that he is better than others. It is only God Who knows who is
>better. It depends on piety and righteousness.
This one creates a major advantage over christianity.
>C. Oneness of Messengers and the Message:
>Muslims believe that God sent different messengers throughout the history of
>mankind. All came with the same message and the same teachings. It was the
>people who misunderstood and misinterpreted them. Muslims believe in Noah,
>Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Moses, David, Jesus and Muhammad. The
>Prophets of Christianity and Judaism are indeed the Prophets of Islam.
>D. Angels and the Day of Judgement:
>Muslims believe that there is a Day of Judgement when all people of the
>world
>throughout the history of mankind till the last day of life on earth, are to
>be
>brought for accounting, reward and punishment.
For what? His life or his faith?
>E. Innocence of Man at Birth:
>Muslims believe that people are born free of sin. It is only after they
>reach
>the age of puberty and it is only after they commit sins that they are to be
>charged for their mistakes. No one is responsible for or can take
>responsibility for the sins of others. However, the door of forgiveness
>through true repentance is always open.
You're standing in the way of research for genetic causes of "sin"
there.
>F. State and Religion:
>Muslims believe that Islam is a total and a complete way of life. It
>encompasses
>all aspects of life. As such, the teachings of Islam do not separate
>religion from
>politics. As a matter of fact, state and religion are under the obedience of
>Allah
>through the teachings of Islam. Hence, economic and social transactions, as
>well
>as educational and political systems, are a part of the teachings of Islam.
Well, that's another negative part.
>VII. Practices of Islam.
>God instructed the Muslims to practice what they believe in. In Islam there
>are five pillars:
>A. Creed (Shahadah):
>The verbal commitment and pledge that there is only One God and Muhammad
>is the Messenger of God, is considered to be the creed of Islam.
>B. Prayers (Salat):
>The performance of the five daily prayers is required of Muslims.
>C. Fasting (Saum):
>Fasting is total abstinence from food, liquids and intimate relations from
>dawn to sunset during the entire month of Ramadan.
In celebration of what is the Ramadan?
>D. Purifying Tax (Zakat):
>This is an annual payment of a certain percentage of a Muslim's property,
>which is distributed among the poor or other rightful beneficiaries.
It's not church officials, I hope, I like this law.
>E. Pilgrimage (Hajj):
>The performance of pilgrimage to Makkah is required once in a lifetime if
>the means are available. Hajj is, in part, a memorial to the trials and
>tribulations of Prophet Abraham, his wife Hagar and his eldest son,
>Prophet Ishmael.
>VIII. Other Related Aspects.
(Snip)
>For other such informative articles, please visit,
>The Institute of Islamic Information: http://www.iiie.net/
Interesting thing while I was reading the hilarious ( islamic women
have the right to go outside their house! ) article about women's
rights in islam:
The islamic faith blames Satan for humans going out of paradise.
Please explain that American Muslim.....
>For more Authentic information on Islam, please visit:
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Discover Islam: http://www.discoverislam.com/
>It is the Truth: http://www.it-is-truth.org/
>Be Convinced: http://www.beconvinced.com/
>Islaam: http://www.islaam.com/
>Islamic City: http://www.islam.org
>Converts for Humanity: http://www.convertstoislam.org/
>New Muslims: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/newmuslims/
>Women Issues: http://www.jannah.org
>The Muslim Woman: http://members.aol.com/TrueIsOne/index.html
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
******************************************************
DJ Nozem, rebel from the waist up!
D...@rzwagerman.demon.nl
Atheist (freethinker) #1465
Sing along with Pink Floyd....
Hey preachers!
Leave those kids alone.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
******************************************************
maff91
seeker) wrote:
[snip]
>Science in the Quran http://www.al-muslim.org/science/sc1_main.htm
>
>Muslim Scientists and Islamic Civilization http://www.erols.com/zenithco/
Ibn Roshd
http://x37.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=392393753
Muslim/ Hindu creationists
http://x21.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=457469222
>
>Islamic & Arabic arts and architecture http://islamicart.com/
--
L.P.#0000000001
Crimespeak
Oh, well then let's take a vote...oh I forgot there are no
votes in Islam....
As I said before I am a Zionist Newsgroup Infiltrator out
to corrupt and destroy the Ummah...
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Frank Wustner
has been posted to my news group, I have a few questions.
What is CAIR? What writer wrote the smear article? What did
the writer say, exactly?
--
The Deadly Nightshade
http://members.tripod.com/~deadly_nightshade
|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|
|"Advice is a form of nostalgia. | Atheist #119 |
|Dispensing it means fishing the | Knight of BAAWA! |
|past from the disposal, wiping it |-----------------------------------|
|off, painting over the ugly parts, | Want to email me? Go to the URL |
|and recycling it for more than | above and email me from there. |
|it's worth." Mary Schmich |-----------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------|
The seeker
Wustner) wrote:
>Forgive me for leaping into this conversation. But since it
>has been posted to my news group, I have a few questions.
>
>What is CAIR? What writer wrote the smear article? What did
>the writer say, exactly?
>
>--
>The Deadly Nightshade
>http://members.tripod.com/~deadly_nightshade
CAIR is the Council on American-Islamic Relations
you can view the article at http://www.cair-net.org
----
Science in the Quran http://www.al-muslim.org/science/sc1_main.htm
Muslim Scientists and Islamic Civilization http://www.erols.com/zenithco/
Islamic & Arabic arts and architecture http://islamicart.com/
ath...@home.com
<America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I. Islam and Muslims
>
>The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam, means
>peace.
Islami, Salami, Baloney.
Amen
Stephen Knight
<America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam, means
>peace.
Uh huh.
I have a cotton mine I'll let you have, cheap. I'll also throw in a
chocolate milk cow to sweeten the deal.
Thanks for the post. Alt atheism loves being a catch basin for
every knucklehead with a cause. Go fuck your camel.
Steve Knight #855
Knight of BAAWA
-nemo-
<snip a bunch of shit about Allah and his idiot errand boy>
Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
Perhaps you should read some of our material
Enjoy!
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
http://home.att.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
**************************************************
Nothing works like prayer!
Corollary:
Prayer works like nothing! Exactly like it!
**************************************************
AmericanMuslim
>In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>, "American_Muslim"
><America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
>or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
>
>Perhaps you should read some of our material
I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
to other forums.
Thank you.
Michael Alexander
thought most of the atheist responses were much more mature than yours.
Atheists have techniques for determining what is true and what is false.
What do you have? A bunch of silly myths.
AmericanMuslim <America...@spamfree.com> wrote in message
news:93303875...@news.remarQ.com...
Afsar Mahmood
atheist, but I don't believe this person (AmericanMuslim) had the right to go
and start preaching on your ng. I'm sure you people have had quite a few
visitors of his type and would like to see him on his way ASAP. Thanks.
Christopher A. Lee
AmericanMuslim <America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>-nemo- wrote in message ...
>>In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>, "American_Muslim"
>><America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
>>or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
>>
>>Perhaps you should read some of our material
>
>I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
If you had abusive replies you brought them on yourself. This
is a (theoretically) theism-free zone for atheists to get together
with other atheists to discuss our own issues. Yet you didn't
repect that: you came here to "discuss" your religion using
premises you already knew weren't granted here.
>have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
>rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
>of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
Any decent and rational person wouldn't have behaved as
thoughtlessly as you.
>By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>to other forums.
Like you didn't?
-nemo-
> -nemo- wrote in message ...
> >In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>, "American_Muslim"
> ><America...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
> >or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
> >
> >Perhaps you should read some of our material
>
>
> I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
> have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
> rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
> of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
>
> By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
> other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
> to other forums.
Pardon moi?! I was responding to YOUR post into alt.atheism! What sort of
idiot posts some blather into a group where he knows it won't be welcome,
then complains when it isn't well-received? A flipping idiot theist,
that's the sort!
>
> Thank you.
Any time. Welcome to my killfile!
<plonk>
Stephen Knight
<America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>-nemo- wrote in message ...
>>In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>, "American_Muslim"
>><America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
>>or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
>>
>>Perhaps you should read some of our material
>
>
>I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
>have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
>rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
>of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
>
"Atheism produces"? What a laugh. When was the last time a group of
atheists blew up women and children in a 747? Drove a van packed with
explosives into an Army barrack? Hijacked and tortured people in
airplanes? Threw hand grenades into buses?
>By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>to other forums.
>
It was you post, dimwit. I have plenty of respect for people. I
despise superstitions that are anti-life and full of hate and
punishment. So take your sick religion somewhere else.
yang hu
> uh....guys. Can you keep your quarrels within your own ng's please? I'm no
> atheist, but I don't believe this person (AmericanMuslim) had the right to go
> and start preaching on your ng. I'm sure you people have had quite a few
> visitors of his type and would like to see him on his way ASAP. Thanks.
a Muslim :-)
later.
--
Yang
a.a.#28
EAC mole and other furry creatures
rev #-273.15, high priest of the most frigid church of Kelvin
"I don't see Star Wars as profoundly religious. I see Star Wars as
taking all the issues that religion represents and trying to
distill them down into a more modern and easily accessible construct
--that there is a greater mystery out there. I remember when I was
10 years old, I asked my mother, "If there's only one God, why are
there so many religions?" I've been pondering that question ever
since, and the conclusion I've come to is that all the religions
are true."
George Lucas, Time Magazine, 4/17/1999
David G Dick
AmericanMuslim wrote in message <93303875...@news.remarQ.com>...
>I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
>have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
>rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
>of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
If you actually took the time to read the FAQ or lurk for any amount of time
in alt.atheism, you would know that proselytisation is totally unacceptable
there. Posts which do NOT involve preaching and bleating are usually
treated better. It's the same exact response you would get if someone
posted quotes from Mein Kampf in a Jewish newsgroup. You brought it on
yourself. Next time confine your posts to newsgroups that allow your
drivel.
>By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>to other forums.
We DO respect your way of life. It is YOU, hypocrite, who do not respect
OUR way of life. You proved that by preaching at us when you should have
known we don't want to hear it. YOU invaded OUR newsgroup, not the other
way around. So don't start crying now.
--
David G Dick
"A man without religion is like a fish without a bicycle."
Petteri Sulonen
> uh....guys. Can you keep your quarrels within your own ng's please? I'm no
> atheist, but I don't believe this person (AmericanMuslim) had the right to go
> and start preaching on your ng. I'm sure you people have had quite a few
> visitors of his type and would like to see him on his way ASAP. Thanks.
I wish we had more theist visitors like you (not that jerk AmericanMuslim).
(Followups set to alt.atheism only.)
-- Petteri
--
"You know what? I'm happy." | EAC, Commissar
-- Droopy | a.a #1442. BAAWA!
Remove spamblock to reply by E-mail. |
Jeremiah McAuliffe
<anon...@web.remarq.com> wrote:
><<I do not believe him either>>
>
>Oh, well then let's take a vote...oh I forgot there are no
>votes in Islam....
Funny. We vote in our masjid.
>
>As I said before I am a Zionist Newsgroup Infiltrator out
>to corrupt and destroy the Ummah...
>
Bud, you aren't even *that* bright. <laughing>
Al Klein
seeker) wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jul 1999 12:37:48 +0100, see...@for.email.com (Frank
> Wustner) wrote:
> >Forgive me for leaping into this conversation. But since it
> >has been posted to my news group, I have a few questions.
> >What is CAIR? What writer wrote the smear article? What did
> >the writer say, exactly?
> CAIR is the Council on American-Islamic Relations
> you can view the article at http://www.cair-net.org
The only question remaining is:
Is the accusation she made true or not?
--
Al - aklein at villagenet dot com
Ingrid Hainy
>And ask me if it was my fault I was born into
>privledge, that I in fact choose to be born in a
>certain place and a certain circumstance that
>happened to be better than most in the world.
>Blame your god, not me. I never asked to exist.
>
Ummm..... well buddhists would believe otherwise,
>I feel no guilt for being American, though I
>can't say that American government and people
>have always been particularly helpful in
>alleviating the situations of those you spoke of,
>though it is a question how much they can be said
>to be responsible.
>
The American government 'alleviated' vietnam then?
>My lack of firsthand experience does not prevent
>me from theorizing that Islam is of utterly no
>help except in fooling the people that maybe
>there is a next life which isn't as crappy as the
>one "Allah" has decreed to give them. I can
>observe its Jewish and Christian counterparts
>before me...<
Well your blasphomy will give you the honour of a fatwah on your head, and
FOOLING, muhammed (Blessings be on him forever) was real, he is no different
than Jesus (Allah bless him) both were holy prophets and if you view islam
to be FAKE then look at hinduism, Elephant for a head god (No disrestpect
Ganesh) and Hanuman leaping acroos the ocean to lanka , Sadiq go take up
buddhism, follow the teachings of buddha, it seemed to make me see the world
from a unique perspective before returning to Islam, I now no-longer take my
relgion for granted, and I feel better for it.
You should calm down and not be so insulting to others.
Crimespeak wrote in message
Crimespeak
Don't feel the need to respect my views, this is the
internet. Maybe my views are hogwash, certainly there are
those who would agree with that generalization here. I'd
certainly like them to explain why it was hogwash- but they
probably have better things to do, like kiss God's
heiney... If you disagree to the utmost extent, then go
ahead and disagree to the utmost extent. If trying to
convince others that your view on a particular matter is
correct or closer to the correct view then feel free to do
so.
<<Blame your god, not me. I never asked to exist.[]
Ummm..... well buddhists would believe otherwise, >>
Well certainly the Buddhists in the crowd can then try to
convince us of this. Look, I have no memory of a life
before this one. Maybe I need past life regression
therapy, or to donate a million to the Dalai Lama,
or...right now that past choice isn't accessible to my
memory. As such it is fiction until shown otherwise.
If you remember choosing to live before this life, then
please share your experience- to say the least it would be
interesting.
<<
The American government 'alleviated' vietnam then? >>
I am not a spokesman for the American government. I wasn't
alive when Vietnam happened, and I also am unsure of what I
think of the morality of the Gulf War. But hey, I still
haven't learned enough about Norway, or Canada, maybe they
would be better examples to utilize...I dunno.
<<Well your blasphomy will give you the honour of a fatwah
on your head>>
I can only hope so! Maybe Allah in his grace will give me
a best-seller to boot! [You see only people who believe
that God will give them brownie points in the hereafter,
are able to sincerely hope for other's
welfare. "Materialists" only care about Materials, and
Spiritualists about their ever so spiritual religions.
Thank god for the Dichotomies of Theism, simple minded in
every way...]
,<< and FOOLING, muhammed (Blessings be on him forever) was
real, he is no different than Jesus (Allah bless him) both
were holy prophets>>
And Joseph Smith was no different from Jesus and Muhammad,
Praise God! Let's just respect everyone who calls
themselves a prophet, if enough people buy it. Are the
Millions of Mormons enough reason to declare Joe the "real
deal?"
<<and if you view islam to be FAKE then look at hinduism,
Elephant for a head god (No disrestpect Ganesh) and Hanuman
leaping acroos the ocean to lanka >>
I would never take my paganism from any devoted monotheist,
no OFFENSE to you. Ahmed Deedat loves mocking them, though
there can be great depth to much of pagan thought, ignored
by the tunnel vision of the TAWHEEDIAN WORLDVIEW. :-)
I indeed think there are dangers to paganism, and the
weakening of rational thought, but I am not aware of too
many pagans trying to take over the world and start a
Theocracy. But for that I'd have to understand some of the
more Hindu nationalist politics...
<< Sadiq go take up buddhism, follow the teachings of
buddha, it seemed to make me see the world from a unique
perspective before returning to Islam, I now no-longer take
my relgion for granted, and I feel better for it.>>
You feel better for being a kafir- that I don't understand,
at least within the Muslim worldview.
But again, why Buddha? Why can't I just sit at a street
corner and preach to people- telling them that I know the
ANSWER! " I tell thee I knoweth the ANSWER! Follow Me,
for I will give you an ANSWER that can be Condensed with a
Few Simple Rules- Four Noble Truths, Shahadah, Shema, Ten
Commandments..." So, come on follow the Prophet Sadiqi,
God wants you to.
<<You should calm down and not be so insulting to others. >>
People full of horse shit, shouldn't be acting like they
know what they know not. Dr. Jihad and his heavy o'shit is
a case in point. An esteemed graduate of the University of
Shitowne (oh no, don't tell me it's part of the IVY league,
or at least within the top 10. What its not on the
map...you don't have 70 nobel prize winners? To bad Dr.
Jihad didn't become a seminarian..) Nowheresville PA
he has found the ANSWER. But he doesn't want to give the
ANSWER to neither me not Common Sense nor anyone who has
confronted him with the unpleasant parts of the fiqh of
Islam and the outright stupidities.
If I have any Jihad, it is the struggle to throw down the
gaunlet to all who think they have within their possession
unadulturated truth from on high. And sometimes humor and
mockery is quite valid in the use of this objective, even
the use of the scatological sciences. Case in point my
refutation of the scientific miracle of the Qur'an...
If people are insulted if I say the Prophet Muhammad was a
big dummy, then I can only reply with the words of my
Savior Bob- " Fuck'em if they can't take a joke." A wise
philosophy, as those who can't take a joke probably would
just as easily laugh at their own doctrines if they didn't
have the aura of seriousness about their whole religious
endevors.
James Veverka
"Atheism produces"? What a laugh. When was the last
time a group of atheists blew up women and children in a 747? Drove a
van packed with explosives into an Army barrack? Hijacked and tortured
people in airplanes? Threw hand grenades into buses?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Excellent! hahahahahahahah!
One of the reasons we atheists are so vehemently anti-christian
reconstructionist is we donyt want anything resembling a bunch of
screaming banshee, bombthrowing praying assholes terrorizing or
governing our country. We have enough problems with people like Tom
Delay who believes daycare causes kids to kill kids and Newt who blamed
"godless" liberalism for Susan Smith drowning her kids and Bob Barr who
said the 10 commandments on the school walls would have prevented
Columbine. We can see Islamic theocracy so we know how evil christians
could get. They used to be the same as you in centuries past.
Excuse my fucking ass but we have enough superstitious idiots and
psychos. We dont need any more. Go back to your ng or stay and get a
dose of blunt reality.......jim #1563
James Veverka
James Veverka
Address:http://www.cair-net.org/Changed:10:03 AM on Tuesday, July 13,
1999
ALLAH THE COMPASSIONATE?????
You have to be thinking you are talking to insects when you say that,
Muslims.
That is as good as Jesus Loves you and if you dont believe it you will
burn in hell for fucking ever!.........jim#1563
Crimespeak
I'll remember when I splice, your loving Tawheedian
words...you really brought the peace of Islam
signing off
AmericanMuslim
>> other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>> to other forums.
>
>idiot posts some blather into a group where he knows it won't be welcome,
>then complains when it isn't well-received? A flipping idiot theist,
>that's the sort!
The manners of atheists who have contributed to this thread shows
the truly undesirable nature of Atheism and the affect it generally has
on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of Atheism
appealing. Sadly, some of them appear to be no more than some
self-righteous and insecure individuals, who lack rationality in their
thought and decency in their manners.
Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
postings individually, I will answer them in the following way:
1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone. I replied to
one with my article, because I had quite enough of arrogant
and ignorant people pretending to know Islam and God. I
changed the title and posted one reply, rather than answering
each and every foolish posting individually. The way I see it,
you should be thanking me;
2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
have brought to this world...
China is right now gathering tens of thousands of people in
their land - such is the gift of atheism to mankind;
3- Atheists are not "free-thinkers", as some have suggested.
Rather, they are individuals who are unable to think beyond
what their animal senses can convey to them. They are
following the religion invented by some misguided individuals
and have deceived themselves into thinking they are "original
thinkers"!
4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
this short existence;
5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
healthier, more productive, and longer life;
6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
profanities and vulgar replies: I am certain of my way of life, do not
feel threatened by your objections, and do not need to use profanity
and attack those who differ with me. I hope this time, you all will pull
your resources together, put your head together, and do not feel
the urge to repeat what one of you has already said to serve your
ego. That way, you guys will not post dozens of answers to all these
Muslim forums, while objecting to one posting coming the other way!
Peace.
Jeremiah McAuliffe
<anon...@web.remarq.com> wrote:
>
>People full of horse shit, shouldn't be acting like they
>know what they know not. Dr. Jihad and his heavy o'shit is
>a case in point. An esteemed graduate of the University of
>Shitowne (oh no, don't tell me it's part of the IVY league,
>or at least within the top 10. What its not on the
>map...you don't have 70 nobel prize winners? To bad Dr.
>Jihad didn't become a seminarian..) Nowheresville PA
>he has found the ANSWER.
I must be pretty good to get you so upset, where this is the best you
can do. <laughing>
Not born during Vietnam? Obvious bud, really obvious....... lessee can
you find the Atlantic on a map?
DJ Nozem
<America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>-nemo- wrote in message ...
>>In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>, "American_Muslim"
>><America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
>>or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
>>Perhaps you should read some of our material
>I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
>have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
>rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
>of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
When two atheists sound a bit rude, say that atheism leads to bad
things!
>By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>to other forums.
The irony, the irony, the irony.
>Thank you.
Well then AM, since I asked a couple of serious questions (along with
some laughs) in my post I'd suggest you go and reply to it, to show
that you do have respect for my lifestyle and are willing to learn me
more about yours, I like to know my enemies.
And if you choose not to show respect for our position then you should
stop posting here. Simple and clear. Bye!
******************************************************
DJ Nozem, rebel from the waist up!
D...@rzwagerman.demon.nl
Atheist (freethinker) #1465
Fair is fair.....
If you do what the church says, you'll go to heaven.
If you say what the church does, you'll go to hell.
******************************************************
Christopher A. Lee
like Bobby Mozdumber, or does he sound like Bobby Mozdumber?
In article <rpso56$0$37nspbj$7...@news.supernews.com>,
AmericanMuslim <America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>-nemo- wrote in message ...
>>In article <93303875...@news.remarQ.com>, "AmericanMuslim"
>><America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>>
>>> By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>>> other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>>> to other forums.
>>
>>Pardon moi?! I was responding to YOUR post into alt.atheism! What sort of
>>idiot posts some blather into a group where he knows it won't be welcome,
>>then complains when it isn't well-received? A flipping idiot theist,
>>that's the sort!
>
>The manners of atheists who have contributed to this thread shows
>the truly undesirable nature of Atheism and the affect it generally has
You really are despicable. *Y*O*U* came here, we didn't go
looking for you. And once here *Y*O*U* behaved inapproriately.
When you start cross-posting you have to be aware of the
sensitivities of ALL your audience. Instead you preached,
talked as though your doctrines were universally granted
etc.
In other words showing total disregard for your audience and
their point of view - whatever it is, you don't care because
you think your beliefs and your message are too important for
that.
>on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of Atheism
What "invented and hopeless religion of atheism" would that be,
o bearer of false witness? What does the Koran have to say about
those who bear false witness?
>appealing. Sadly, some of them appear to be no more than some
>self-righteous and insecure individuals, who lack rationality in their
>thought and decency in their manners.
You still don't get it, do you? *Y*O*U* initiated a disrespectful
and off-topic cross-posting to a (theoretically) thheism-free
zone.
This newsgroup (Alt.atheism) was set uo BY ATHEISTS, FOR ATHEISTS
TO DISCUSS OUR OWN ISSUES. Yet you couldn't be bothered to respect
that.
You showed zero respect for your involunary audience by preaching
at us and talking at us as though your doctrinal axioms were
universally granted.
You were treated with exactly the same contempt that you showed us.
And now you compound your original rudeness by lying about us and
our reaction. Every time you post you make it worse.
You are a disgusting, despicable liar. What does the Koran say
about bearing false witness in the tablets given to Moses?
If you don't like being treated like an asshole, don't be a
rectal orifice
>Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
>postings individually, I will answer them in the following way:
Translation: instead of recognising that you made a mistake
and finding common ground as a basis for discussion you will
continue to attack those who would otherwise have never heard
of you nor bothered to look for you.
> 1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
> please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
> to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone. I replied to
And Moslems are cross-posting lots of articles to atheist
newsgroups. Neither of which is appropriate because the groups
have very little in common. And *Y*O*U* have escalated it by
initiating a cross-post which is extremely disrespectful to
its intended audience.
> one with my article, because I had quite enough of arrogant
> and ignorant people pretending to know Islam and God. I
The only arrogance and ignorance in this thread is yours.
> changed the title and posted one reply, rather than answering
> each and every foolish posting individually. The way I see it,
> you should be thanking me;
No, liar. *Y*O*U* initiated this thread. We don't give a flying
fuck about Islam or its deity. They're just somebody else's
wacky belief to us - *BUT* if we wanted to know about it we'd
ask on the appropriate newsgroup. And unlike you, we would have
the courtesy to tacitly accept the default position on your
newsgroup - which is of course the presumption of Islam and its
doctrines. The reason you got treated as a jerk is that you
presumed the Islamic doctrines as being applicable in a
non-Islamic newsgroup.
If you really have to cross-post between such disparate newsgroups
you have to find a common shared subset of perspective and keep
the discussion within that.
> 2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
> have brought to this world...
> China is right now gathering tens of thousands of people in
> their land - such is the gift of atheism to mankind;
No, liar. Atheism does not equate to communism. You Moslems
get extremely upset when Islam is equated with terrorism.
So why do the equivalent to others who haven't done it to
you yet? UNTIL YOU OFFENDED US.
The courteous thing to do is accept that you caused offence
even if you don't understand why, and make an effort not to
do it again. But instead you went on the attack.
> 3- Atheists are not "free-thinkers", as some have suggested.
> Rather, they are individuals who are unable to think beyond
> what their animal senses can convey to them. They are
> following the religion invented by some misguided individuals
> and have deceived themselves into thinking they are "original
> thinkers"!
No, liar. It is the simple absence of being theist. It's not
a religion, but the absence of the defining property of most
western and some eastern religions. There was nothing to
invent - we simply don't share your beliefs.
> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
> None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
> a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
> morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
> this short existence;
You don't know what a freethinker is, You've set up a strawman
freethinker to attack out of ignorance. ATHEISM ISN'T A WAY OF
LIFE.
> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
And this somehow proves deity? The only reason atheists are
under the kind of stress that causes health problems is
because of nastiness from such as you.
> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
No, liar. Atheism isn't invented, it's the simple absemnce of the
property theism. We have zero reason even to consider sharing
your theistic belief.
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
No, liar, that's another strawman. The positive claim is yours.
Until you prove it there is zero reason to believe it. Why should
your deity-belief be exempt from the normal burden of proof?
>That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
It answers nothing, liar. Just confirms just how little
consideration religion pushers like you have, who feel that
their message overrides the normal human courtesies that
enable folk to live together in peace. And then attack the
people they've offended for reacting negatively.
>profanities and vulgar replies: I am certain of my way of life, do not
>feel threatened by your objections, and do not need to use profanity
You're really stupid, aren't you? WE DIDN'T GO LOOKING FOR YOU,
YOU CAME TO US AND SHOWED CONTEMPT FOR YOUR AUDIENCE. YOU HAVE
NO COMPLAINT WHEN YOU AND YOUR BELIEFS ARE TREATED WITH THE
SAME CONTEMPT.
You knew you were posting to people who don't share your
beliefs. Yet you talked about things like God as though
your INVOLUNTARY audience granted its existence.
>and attack those who differ with me. I hope this time, you all will pull
No, liar - WE RESPONDED. If we had gone looking for that would have
been an attack.
>your resources together, put your head together, and do not feel
>the urge to repeat what one of you has already said to serve your
No, liar. That's *Y*O*U*R* ego talking. We simply responded
to your rudeness.
>ego. That way, you guys will not post dozens of answers to all these
>Muslim forums, while objecting to one posting coming the other way!
>
>Peace.
The way to peace is by allowing others to live and let live, and by
respecting their point of view to the point of not pshing your own.
And realising when you have caused offence and trying not to do it
again. NOT BUY ATTACKING THOSE WWHOM YOU HAVE OFFENDED.
The biggest problem with the religious loonies - whatever their
religion - is that they can't live and let live. Whether they
are Moslem, Christian or anything else.
Stephen Knight
<America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>The manners of atheists who have contributed to this thread shows
>the truly undesirable nature of Atheism and the affect it generally has
>on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of Atheism
>appealing.
>
So essentially, atheism "makes" you an undesirable person because a
few of them, (myself included) have replied to your preaching in a
negative manner. That's a little harsh on the fine atheists (the
majority here) that do not use foul language. You display a common
trait among theists, not knowing anything about something (atheism)
and leaping to any excuse to attack and blackwash them with evil.
>Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
>postings individually, I will answer them in the following way:
>
> 1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
> please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
> to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone. I replied to
> one with my article, because I had quite enough of arrogant
> and ignorant people pretending to know Islam and God. I
> changed the title and posted one reply, rather than answering
> each and every foolish posting individually. The way I see it,
> you should be thanking me;
>
We don't thank people for preaching in alt.atheism. If you had
bothered to be respectful, you would have read our FAQ before posting.
This NG is supposed to be a meeting place for atheists. We talk about
atheism among ourselves.
> 2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
> have brought to this world...
> China is right now gathering tens of thousands of people in
> their land - such is the gift of atheism to mankind;
>
That's alarmist bull. You should stop and think about what
Secularism has given you. And quite frankly, dragging up the communism
angle is typical theist mis-information about atheism. Atheism is a
logical and rational way of life without a deity. Communism is a
political system that is in a power struggle with religion.
> 3- Atheists are not "free-thinkers", as some have suggested.
> Rather, they are individuals who are unable to think beyond
> what their animal senses can convey to them. They are
> following the religion invented by some misguided individuals
> and have deceived themselves into thinking they are "original
> thinkers"!
>
My Irony-O-Meter just pegged. You are a slave to superstition. You
know no other way and could care less about Free Thinkers. You can
stare into the cold face of logic and reason and gibber like a robot
chanting superstitious dogma.
> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
> None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
> a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
> morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
> this short existence;
>
Self delusion. Nothing more, nothing less. You believe what you are
taught to believe. You cannot even accept or respect the fact that
atheists have as much right to their "belief" as you do. If you find
atheists arrogant and hostile, it's because we have every right to be,
given how religions protect themselves by declaring us immoral, evil
demons that should be burned at the stake.
> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
>
Completely, utterly untrue.
> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
>
Atheism is as natural as it gets. It's a growing up process. We
cast off the shackles of superstition and blind ignorance in the
belief of the unbelievable. Yet you call it "bad".
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
>
I knew this demand was coming. It's the final failure of theism and
relied on as the last word to win a debate. Here's the same old
answer, answered a million times on this NG, you make the claim of
there being a god. It a positive assertion and since you made it, you
have to prove it. If you can do that, you will have done something no
one has done for thousands of years. Example time. I know magic pixies
live in every garage on Earth, prove me wrong. The beauty is, I can
use the same alleged proof you do to prove your god exists.
>That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
>profanities and vulgar replies:
snip
I guess that makes you better, doesn't it.
-nemo-
Petteri...@helsinki.DIE.SPAM.DIE.fi (Petteri Sulonen) wrote:
> In article <379D19F8...@ntr.net>, zep...@ntr.net wrote:
>
> > uh....guys. Can you keep your quarrels within your own ng's please? I'm no
> > atheist, but I don't believe this person (AmericanMuslim) had the
right to go
> > and start preaching on your ng. I'm sure you people have had quite a few
> > visitors of his type and would like to see him on his way ASAP. Thanks.
>
> I wish we had more theist visitors like you (not that jerk AmericanMuslim).
>
I agree completely. Why do we get so much worthless material from so many
jerks, while the truly interesting, decent people stay away? Is it our
body odor? I personally bathe at least once a week,, whether I need it or
not! {;-)
> (Followups set to alt.atheism only.)
>
> -- Petteri
--
David G Dick
AmericanMuslim wrote in message ...
>The manners of atheists who have contributed to this thread shows
You mean the manners of A MINORITY OF ATHEISTS. You can't go jumping to
conclusions that all atheists are bad-mannered just because you meet a
couple who are. I personally know of a couple of Muslims who are bigoted
and narrow-minded, but I don't go saying that EVERY Muslim is bigoted and
narrow-minded. Although you seem to be.
>the truly undesirable nature of Atheism and the affect it generally has
It is only undesirable in your opinion, no more and no less. And it has no
effects [sic] at all - it is not a dogma.
>on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of Atheism
>appealing.
Atheism is not invented any more than Islam is, and it is definitely not a
religion. Please get your facts straight before you try to tell us what we
think.
> Sadly, some of them appear to be no more than some
>self-righteous and insecure individuals, who lack rationality in their
>thought and decency in their manners.
Some of them, perhaps. But by no means all of them. If you post something
that specifically says in the FAQ of alt.atheism says be treated badly, you
should expect to be treated badly!!! Like I said before, its similar to
posting anti-semitic material in a Jewish newsgroup. That really IS the
height of bad manners, and your post was not far behind.
>Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
>postings individually, I will answer them in the following way:
Translation : I don't have enough reasoning capacity to take on board the
points made, so I will preach a bit more.
> 1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
> please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
> to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone. I replied to
> one with my article, because I had quite enough of arrogant
> and ignorant people pretending to know Islam and God. I
> changed the title and posted one reply, rather than answering
> each and every foolish posting individually. The way I see it,
> you should be thanking me;
I have never posted to any religious group except alt.atheism, except as a
reply to people who cross-posted it here in the first place. There are some
atheists who cross-post to other religious groups, but I am not one of
them. And of all the cross-posted atheist posts I have seen, I have yet to
see one where atheists invade a religious group to try to convert them to
atheism, in the rude manner you tried to convert us to Islam.
> 2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
> have brought to this world...
> China is right now gathering tens of thousands of people in
> their land - such is the gift of atheism to mankind;
That is quite simply a **** L I E ****.
Atheism is I N N O W A Y E Q U A L T O C O M M U N I S M.
Some atheists are communists, but that doesn't mean they all are. You are
making the same conclusion as if I were to see a few Muslims on telly
killing each other in a religious war, and conclude that they are all
warlike religious fanatics. I don't make bigoted snap judgements like that,
but you seem to.
> 3- Atheists are not "free-thinkers", as some have suggested.
> Rather, they are individuals who are unable to think beyond
> what their animal senses can convey to them.
That is again, NOTHING MORE THAN YOUR OPINION, and a prejudiced one at
that, it would appear. Please either back it up with some facts, or keep
it to yourself.
> They are
> following the religion invented by some misguided individuals
> and have deceived themselves into thinking they are "original
> thinkers"!
Once again, atheism is not a religion. Please don't tell us what we think.
And there is a difference between "original thought" and "free thought".
Your argument just doesn't stand up.
> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
> None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
> a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
> morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
> this short existence;
Fine, go ahead. But never preach to us to convert to your religion. If
you want to discuss particular issues, then fine, but don't just waltz
into our newsgroup and tell us to come away from atheism to join your cult.
Atheism is not a way of life. It is just one opinion among many that each
individual atheist has. That is the essence of free-thinking, NOT, as you
seem to have told yourself, the ability to come up with new and wonderful
ideas all on your own.
> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
Got any figures to back that up, that can't be easily refuted? I doubt it.
There are medical benefits of having a healthy state of mind, and if your
religion gives you false hope that could be where the benefit comes from.
NOT from god, but from your own brain working psychosomatically.
> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
OPINION ONLY.
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
WRONG!!!
You got that the wrong way round, my friend. If you want to convert us to
Islam, you need to prove to us you are right. If we wanted to convert you
to atheism, then yes we would need to prove we are right, but then again I
don't want to convert you to atheism so I need prove nothing.
>That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
>profanities and vulgar replies: I am certain of my way of life, do not
>feel threatened by your objections, and do not need to use profanity
>and attack those who differ with me.
Neither, as you can see from my post, do I. Even when you make what
appear to be prejudiced assumptions about me, I do not reply in kind, or
with profanity. So please do not make such generalisations again.
-nemo-
> uh....guys. Can you keep your quarrels within your own ng's please? I'm no
> atheist, but I don't believe this person (AmericanMuslim) had the right to go
> and start preaching on your ng. I'm sure you people have had quite a few
> visitors of his type and would like to see him on his way ASAP. Thanks.
>
I apologize to all who were offended by the exchange with AmericanMuslim.
I generally respect all people, and try not to offend, which is why I
don't initiate cross-posts. Being an atheist, I feel no need to respect
the religion itself, but I do regret offense given to people who follow
nettiquette and mind their own business.
Peace be with you.
Tom Kennedy
alt.atheism to the thread for some unknown reason. Others have continued the
thread in all innocence without removing alt.atheism from the follow-ups.
The simple solution to this ongoing - and pointless - slanging match is to set
follow-ups to exclude alt.atheism.
FU for this reply is an example.
Liz
>-nemo- wrote in message ...
>>In article <93303875...@news.remarQ.com>, "AmericanMuslim"
>><America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
I apologize to everyone in the above groups with the exception of
"AmericanMuslim". Not knowing from which group he has posted, I am
replying to all. Followups have been set to alt.atheism only.
>>
>>> By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>>> other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>>> to other forums.
>>
>>Pardon moi?! I was responding to YOUR post into alt.atheism! What sort of
>>idiot posts some blather into a group where he knows it won't be welcome,
>>then complains when it isn't well-received? A flipping idiot theist,
>>that's the sort!
>
>
>The manners of atheists who have contributed to this thread shows
>the truly undesirable nature of Atheism and the affect it generally has
>on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of Atheism
>appealing.
Your ignorance about atheism abounds. The word atheism need not be
capitalized. It is not a proper noun nor is it the name of a
religion.
> Sadly, some of them appear to be no more than some
>self-righteous and insecure individuals, who lack rationality in their
>thought and decency in their manners.
You are the one who lacks manners by posting your off-topic message to
a group which has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.
>
>Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
>postings individually, I will answer them in the following way:
>
> 1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
> please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
> to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone.
You are the one who started this thread. Any replies you receive are
on your head. If others have started off-topic threads in Muslim
groups, do seem to feel it necessary to retaliate in kind. By posting
long and insulting messages to atheist newsgroup, you not only want to
retaliate but escalate. Not only do you show your ignorance of
atheism, but also of newsgroup etiquette. If you want to stop the
type of replies you are receiving, stop posting to alt.atheism. It is
really quite simple.
Patient: "Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I do this."
Doctor: "Then stop doing that."
> I replied to
> one with my article, because I had quite enough of arrogant
> and ignorant people pretending to know Islam and God. I
> changed the title and posted one reply, rather than answering
> each and every foolish posting individually. The way I see it,
> you should be thanking me;
As far as I can tell, you replied to no article, but started a new
cross-posted off-topic thread. There were no quotes in your original
article to show that it was a reply. I rarely thank people for their
rude behavior. Why would you think that your comments were of
general interest in this newsgroup?
> 2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
> have brought to this world...
> China is right now gathering tens of thousands of people in
> their land - such is the gift of atheism to mankind;
Again, you show your ignorance. You complain about people "pretending
to know Islam and God" yet you do not bother to find out about the
topic you condemn. I am an atheist so you have automatically found
me evil. Thank you for your bigotry.
> 3- Atheists are not "free-thinkers", as some have suggested.
> Rather, they are individuals who are unable to think beyond
> what their animal senses can convey to them. They are
> following the religion invented by some misguided individuals
> and have deceived themselves into thinking they are "original
> thinkers"!
So you post another insult as to atheists' intelligence. Do you
really want to convey the message that all Muslims' are arrogant,
prejudice individuals who don't bother to investigate other ways of
life before they condemn those who are not like them. That seems
quite a distance from a "free-thinker". It seems to perpetuate the
stereotype of religious fanatics.
>
> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
> None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
> a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
> morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
> this short existence;
"Just because I refuse to buy into a bunch of fairy tales about gods
and devils does not mean that I lack ethics." -- Nolan Voyde
>
> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
That is very nice for you, however some of us can't choose to believe
in something which has no evidence for its existence no matter what
carrots, be they better health or an afterlife filled with either
regenerating virgins or eternal bliss, are used to entice us to join
the ranks of the faithful.
> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
The existence of god can neither be proved or disproved so whether or
not god was invented is moot. You believe in it despite lack of
evidence. This is called faith. I don't believe in it because of the
lack of evidence. This is called atheism.
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
I don't claim that there is no god, neither the one you believe in nor
any other. I just don't believe you have proven your case that there
is an existing god. Until you can offer such evidence (note that I
said evidence, not proof -- and please don't suggest that a holy book
such as the Q'uran or the Bible are evidence of anything but the
thoughts of the faithful) I am fully justified in my disbelief of your
claims of special revelation about a deity which can not be detected
by any but subjective, "spiritual" means.
>That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
>profanities and vulgar replies:
Neither do I.
> I am certain of my way of life, do not
>feel threatened by your objections, and do not need to use profanity
>and attack those who differ with me.
However, you will use insults to attack those who differ from you. I
don't see that one should give you a medal for your behavior.
> I hope this time, you all will pull
>your resources together, put your head together, and do not feel
>the urge to repeat what one of you has already said to serve your
>ego.
I assume that then you will no longer be starting off-topic threads,
especially sanctimonious cross-posts in alt.atheism.
> That way, you guys will not post dozens of answers to all these
>Muslim forums, while objecting to one posting coming the other way!
Ah, AM, you started the thread. You continue the thread. You post
insults and yet you claim impunity from the results of your actions.
This is especially ironic when you have claimed that as a Muslim that
you are more moral than atheists. What I find extraordinarily amusing
is your original claim was that the root of Islam is "peace" yet you
have done your best to foment a flame war.
>
>Peace. <----------
As I said, quite contradictory to your present behavior.
Liz #658 BAAWA
Many people never grow up. They stay all their lives with
a passionate need for external authority and guidance,
pretending not to trust their own judgement. - Alan Watts
Crimespeak
I'm God's PINKY! WORSHIP ME EVERYONE! I the finger God
picks his nose with...
Jesus ADMITTED- yep the Gospels are VERBATIM, that's why
four are needed...
Yawn
AmericanMuslim <America...@spamfree.com> wrote in article
<rpso56$0$37nspbj$7...@news.supernews.com>...
> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
Wonderful! All I have to do is convert? That's great! Now which is the
true faith? Which God did you have in mind?
Can your claim be backed up by a study in a refereed medical journal? A
claim without substantive evidence is useless.
> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
So how do explain Jupiter, Sol Invictus, Mithra, Thor & the gang, et al?
Were they invented, or were they real? In an earlier point in this post,
you wrote:
> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
I think you've answered the question already.
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
Er, no. Why should God be exempt from the same burden of proof everything
else goes through? You've made a claim, you should back it up. If I were
to claim that all Muslims were born with three testicles, you'd ask for
evidence of that claim, wouldn't you?
>
> That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
> profanities and vulgar replies: I am certain of my way of life, do not
> feel threatened by your objections, and do not need to use profanity
> and attack those who differ with me.
Quite so. It is precisely that sort of thinking that has created the idea
of Islam as a sexist, warmongering religion. An image, you'd agree - I'm
sure, that is not true. So why use the same sloppy thinking toward
atheists that you claim they use toward you?
*Yawn*
Petteri Sulonen
> -nemo- wrote in message ...
> >In article <93303875...@news.remarQ.com>, "AmericanMuslim"
> ><America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
> >
> >> By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
> >> other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
> >> to other forums.
> >
> >Pardon moi?! I was responding to YOUR post into alt.atheism! What sort of
> >idiot posts some blather into a group where he knows it won't be welcome,
> >then complains when it isn't well-received? A flipping idiot theist,
> >that's the sort!
>
>
> The manners of atheists who have contributed to this thread shows
> the truly undesirable nature of Atheism and the affect it generally has
> on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of Atheism
> appealing. Sadly, some of them appear to be no more than some
> self-righteous and insecure individuals, who lack rationality in their
> thought and decency in their manners.
How nice of you to tell us that. Because of the request from your sane
coreligionist, I've set the followups to alt.atheism only -- if you want
to talk with us, stop your cross-posting nonsense.
> Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
> postings individually, I will answer them in the following way:
>
> 1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
> please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
> to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone. I replied to
> one with my article, because I had quite enough of arrogant
> and ignorant people pretending to know Islam and God. I
> changed the title and posted one reply, rather than answering
> each and every foolish posting individually. The way I see it,
> you should be thanking me;
You'd have to go back _years_ for that -- and a fat lot of good would it
do, unless you have a 'blood-feud' mentality. Do you?
> 2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
> have brought to this world...
> China is right now gathering tens of thousands of people in
> their land - such is the gift of atheism to mankind;
Communism does not equal secularism. Communism does not equal atheism. The
first Communists were Christian, y'know.
> 3- Atheists are not "free-thinkers", as some have suggested.
> Rather, they are individuals who are unable to think beyond
> what their animal senses can convey to them. They are
> following the religion invented by some misguided individuals
> and have deceived themselves into thinking they are "original
> thinkers"!
Atheism is not a religion. As to the rest of this point, it's not even
worthy of an answer.
> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
> None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
> a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
> morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
> this short existence;
In other words, you admit that your faith is based on wishful thinking and
social pressure. How honest of you.
> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
...never mind if the faith is true or not. Great intellectual
justification, again.
> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
Care to back up this assertion?
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
Fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. The burden of proof is *always*
on the positive existential claimant. You say there is a God, it's up to
you to demonstrate it, not up to us to demonstrate that there isn't. To
illustrate: I claim that there's an invisible leprechaun sitting on my
shoulder as I type this -- you prove that there isn't!
> That answers all your points. You will understand, if I do not use
> profanities and vulgar replies: I am certain of my way of life, do not
> feel threatened by your objections, and do not need to use profanity
> and attack those who differ with me. I hope this time, you all will pull
> your resources together, put your head together, and do not feel
> the urge to repeat what one of you has already said to serve your
> ego. That way, you guys will not post dozens of answers to all these
> Muslim forums, while objecting to one posting coming the other way!
Gee, you sure sound secure, don't you!
DupDup
<America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>-nemo- wrote in message ...
>>In article <93293290...@news.remarQ.com>, "American_Muslim"
>><America...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>Why bother atheists about your myths? We reject all ideas concerning god
>>or gods, and we mean ANY of them.
>>
>>Perhaps you should read some of our material
>
>
>I've done that. But, with the kind of immature and abusive replies we
>have seen from people on Atheism forum, I believe any decent and
>rational person can see the clear disadvantage of Atheism and the kind
>of individuals atheism will inevitably produce over time.
Ahhh ... now you brought it on yourself didn't you ? I don't know
anyone here who goes off to alt.christian or alt.islam and bugger them
with "***INTRODUCING ATHEISM***" messages . This forum is made by and
for atheists to discuss our common issues and not for dim-wit's like
yourself to come and spam us with "Islam" crap .
Decent and rational ? C'mon , I think that anyone who still thinks
that Muhammad's words are still intact after 1400 years is certainly a
person of good and objective judgement ... read a few physics books
and burn that damn Qur'an toiletpaper .
>By the way, if you guys do not like to hear or respect the way of life
>other people have chosen, then you should not cross-post your articles
>to other forums.
Jimeny Yillickers Batman ! Now wasn't it you who crossposted this msg.
to FIVE different NG's ? And it was you who came in here and
disrespected our way of living with you Islam bullsh*t !
>Thank you.
Thank you for giving us some insight into the lies of Islam .
God didn't create man , Man created god .
'Isa
this is quite a thread, since i happen to be Muslim, i would have never
stumbled onto it because i happen to not go into the atheism groups. anyway
i did read the whole thing so far and have just one question:
> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
the above line is a but onesided and i can see how you people could easliy
say-prove that there is a God.
but my question is...
What would you all do if, through science, God was proven to exist?
and please don't reply with any 'that would never happen' type things.
thanks
Drake
>hi,
>
>this is quite a thread, since i happen to be Muslim, i would have never
>stumbled onto it because i happen to not go into the atheism groups. anyway
>i did read the whole thing so far and have just one question:
>
>> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
>
>the above line is a but onesided and i can see how you people could easliy
>say-prove that there is a God.
>
>but my question is...
>
>What would you all do if, through science, God was proven to exist?
I'd collect some samples of God and analyze them to find out what makes Him
immortal and perfect. Then, I'd use the data I collect to try and make
medicines that could help people who are sick or dying, since Mr. God
doesn't feel the need to lift his immortal and benevolent finger to help
them.
--
-Drake Born-again Pagan
http://crsluna.home.texas.net
"I worship the ground I walk on"
AmericanMuslim
>
> [Most of this Personally abusive posting is being ignored, as it
> was free of objectivity, courtesy and rationality.]
I am not surprised at the lack of manners and apparent double-standard
apparent in the postings of the atheist contributors. Sadly, even those
atheists who claim that the believers should not judge all atheist by the
abusive postings of some, end up being vulgar in their own postings!
Apparently, they can not help being what they have become...
Now, for all those individuals who are quick at accusing others of
hypocrisy and object at the "offensive article" that somehow "justified"
the downright vulgarity of their Atheist brethren, I suggest that they do
not even understand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy"!
Since these people are so sensitive about one cross-posted reply,
which did not attack or mention atheism, I wonder why they have not
objected to dozens upon dozens of "abusive cross-posting" by their
fellow brethren to all these Muslim forums?! Yesterday alone, for
instance, there were several postings in the thread titled "Re: CAIR:
Writer Smears Muslim Community", which directly attacked God and
the way of life of the believers. For days, some Atheists have been
posting their unwelcomed anti-God and anti-Islam conjecture on all
these Muslim forums and not one of these "open-minded" and "free-
thinking" atheists has objected to it! Why do you think it is?
The truth of the matter is that the followers of all cults are similarly
programmed to react against the Truth; what they reacted was not
an anti-atheism posting, but one about Islam. By comparison,
everyday, we Muslims get all sort of people on Muslim forum who
contribute about their respective way of life; but, does anyone react
to their providing information about their way of life with vulgarity?
Thank God, we do not! I guess this attitude also proves which
doctrine causes close-mindedness and breeds insecure individuals
who feel threatened by mere information about other ideologies...
Peace.
AmericanMuslim
>> AmericanMuslim wrote in message ...
>> The manners of atheists who have contributed to this
>
> You mean the manners of A MINORITY OF ATHEISTS.
> You can't go jumping to conclusions that all atheists are
I do not believe my article suggested that! I said:
"The manners of atheists who have contributed to this
thread shows the truly undesirable nature of ATHEISM
and the affect it GENERALLY has on people..."
I realize that some Atheists are new converts to Atheism and
carry the non-Atheist standards they were raised with; others
can not help but be influenced by the morality and standards
of the society at large; those, in turn, finds their basis in
religious teachings... So, not all people who profess to be
Atheists are vulgar, at this moment.
> I personally know of a couple of Muslims who are bigoted
> and narrow-minded, but I don't go saying that EVERY
> Muslim is bigoted and narrow-minded. Although you
> seem to be.
I am afraid Atheists appear unable to resist from personally
offending others! This is exactly what I was referring to when
I objected to Atheism. For instance, what would prevent an
Atheist, besides fear of being caught and punished in this life,
from acting upon their animalistic urges and resort to any evil
to "get the most of this only existence"?! You see, it would
be very easy for the believers to also personally attack others
and use vulgar words, if we did not believe in a hereafter and
accountability before God. Apparently, Atheists do not have a
similar restriction.
By the way, if you indeed know any weak and sinful Muslims
(provided they are more than simply "Muslims" by name), you
should also know that what they allegedly do is against the
teachings of Islam and is rather an aberration. On the other
hand, we seem to have the opposite with the Atheists on
alt.atheism forum! Is this a greatly skewed aberration? If
so, what principles indicate that Atheists should not engage
in the kind of behavior we have seen? Does Atheism even try
to make better individuals, families, and societies?
>> on people who find the invented and hopeless religion of
>> Atheism appealing.
> Atheism is not invented any more than Islam is, and it is
> definitely not a religion. Please get your facts straight
> before you try to tell us what we think.
I like to point out what you wrote further down:
"I have never posted to any religious group except alt.atheism"
Which one is it?! In fact, I believe that Atheism, just like
Satanism, is a religious doctrine, one that denies the existence
of God and perhaps raises other entities or concepts ("Mother
Nature", "big bang", "evolution", "us") to the level of gods.
>> Sadly, some of them appear to be no more than some
>> self-righteous and insecure individuals, who lack
>> rationality in their thought and decency in their manners.
> Some of them, perhaps. But by no means all of them.
> If you post something that specifically says in the FAQ of
> alt.atheism says be treated badly, you should expect to
> be treated badly!!!
So, it this the way atheists try to justify the use of vulgar
and abusive language by their brethren?!
> Like I said before, its similar to posting anti-Semitic
> material in a Jewish newsgroup. That really IS the height
> of bad manners, and your post was not far behind.
Your analogy is incorrect. Anti-Semitic material, by definition,
should be dealing with a specific topic. If someone were to
post information about Hinduism, without making any reference
to Jews on that forum, would he be guilty of presenting "anti-
Semitic" literature? Of course not! The extremist view you have
presented would suggest that we should all be closed-minded and
view any ideology which differs from ours as an attack on our
way of life!
Mr. David, by the same token, my article was not against Atheism;
rather, it was about Islam: a topic often written of by very
unqualified people on Atheism forum and cross-posted to Muslim
forums.
>> Instead of answering every one of their repeat and unproductive
>> postings individually, I will answer them in the following
>> way:
> Translation : I don't have enough reasoning capacity to
> take on board the points made, so I will preach a bit
> more.
Actually, I was trying to avoid posting too many replies, seeing
that many people on Atheist forum are closed-minded and insecure.
>> 1- To see who started posting to various newsgroups first,
>> please pay close attention at dozens of postings by Atheists
>> to these Muslim newsgroups this week alone....
> I have never posted to any religious group except
> alt.atheism, except as a reply to people who
> cross-posted it here in the first place. There are some
> atheists who cross-post to other religious groups, but I
> am not one of them.
Of course no one suggested this, but this is a convenient attempt
to insist upon one's mistaken attitude.
> And of all the cross-posted atheist posts I have seen, I
> have yet to see one where atheists invade a religious group
> to try to convert them to atheism, in the rude manner you
> tried to convert us to Islam.
Funny! Using profanity, attacking God, Prophets, and the way
of life of the believers is not seen as rude by You, but replying
with an informational article about what Islam really is must be
viewed as an attempt at conversion and rude?! Mr. David, mine was
not an attempt to convert anyone, but save those people who may
be affected by the anti-Islamic propaganda of some people.
>> 2- Height of Atheism = Communism/Secularism and the evil they
>> have brought to this world...
> Atheism is I N N O W A Y E Q U A L T O C O M M U N I S M.
> Some atheists are communists, but that doesn't mean they all
> are. You are making the same conclusion as if I were to see
> a few Muslims on telly killing each other in a religious war,
> and conclude that they are all warlike religious fanatics. I
> don't make bigoted snap judgements like that, but you seem to.
And I said, "Height of", if you only paid closer attention.
Regardless, this was reply to the individual who said: 'when
was the last time you saw an Atheist (commit some kind of evil)'.
>> 4- As social beings, we are influenced by what is around us:
>> None of us can claim to be a freethinker. If I have to follow
>> a way of life, I would rather follow one that teaches me
>> morality and gives me hope that there is something beyond
>> this short existence;
> Fine, go ahead.
Thank you!
> But never preach to us to convert to your religion.
Who did?! But, guess who looks insecure and closed-minded,
when he/she does not even want to learn alternatives to his/her
way of life...
> If you want to discuss particular issues, then fine, but
> don't just waltz into our newsgroup and tell us to come away
> from atheism to join your cult.
I do not believe I did that. I realize that some Atheists are
the brainwashers and some have been completely indoctrinated by
the cult they belong to. Obviously, this is why they have such
an abrupt reaction to being exposed to other ideologies, while
they like to freely attack and ridicule the faith of others on
a daily basis!
>> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
>> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
>> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
>> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
> Got any figures to back that up, that can't be easily refuted?
Coming up, in a separate article, God willing. As far as I am
concerned, statistically and medically significant data are not
"easily refuted". After all, this is the same way we have been
conducting medical and pharmaceutical research. But, you are
free to ignore solid facts.
>> 6- God is not invented; it is rather Atheism which is invented;
> OPINION ONLY.
Perhaps, but it is the answer to the "opinion" that God is
invented.
>> 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
> WRONG!!!
> You got that the wrong way round, my friend. If you
> want to convert us to Islam, you need to prove to us you
> are right...
This was the answer to those who said, there is no God.
Once again, I just posted an article to show the truth about
Islam. If I had wanted to "convert" anyone, I would definitely
spend my time to discuss the issues and "prove" that a religious
life is better than a non-religious one. My purpose was more to
set the record straight and not allow the kind of misinformation
which leads to prejudice and blind hatred of others...
As far as converting others, that is not my job. My duty is
only to tell others of the alternative and let them chose for
themselves. Muslims do not convert people.
Peace.
AmericanMuslim
> [subjective and rather personally abusive posting cut]
I am afraid I do not see any use in trying to answer to your frustrated
attacks point by point. That simply would make you feel more threatened
and agitated... I will only discuss one point, which may benefit those not
fully indoctrinated by the Atheist cult.
>> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
>> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
>> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
>> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
> Completely, utterly untrue.
Below, please find a brief review of some of the recent medical
research journal articles, which support the assertion that faith
and spirituality have a direct impact on the quality and length
of life, physical and mental health, prevention, ability to deal
with traumatic experiences, outlook on life and death, recovery/
survival from disease, etc... Far from a "delusional and useless
idea", the benefits of faith, beyond the obvious hope of an after
life and promoting morality and values, are supported by data in
secular medical circles.
Individuals who ignore this aspect of our being and psyche --
regardless of whether they chose (as usual) to attribute it to
"evolution" or do recognize the Hand of God in it -- are only
denying themselves from a uniquely beneficial facet of our well-
being. People who withhold faith from their children are at best
very neglectful parents, at worst morally criminal in their
shortsighted decision.
Of course, we know that the normal reaction of the followers of
any cult is to deny the clear and objective evidence and try to
put together any kind of argument to avoid admitting to the
Truth. Regardless, I hope some will benefit from this posting
and begin to reflect upon the false ideas and notions they have
been raised with. I am certain we can all easily find many more
articles, if we care to spend the time and look them up!
==============================================================
Religious involvement and subjective well-being.
Ellison CG
J Health Soc Behav, 32(1):80-99 1991 Mar
CONCLUSION:
"The positive influence of religious certainty on well-being,
however, is direct and substantial: individuals with strong
religious faith report higher levels of life satisfaction,
greater personal happiness, and fewer negative psychosocial
consequences of traumatic life events."
==============================================================
Religious commitment and health status: a review of the research
and implications for family medicine.
Matthews DA; McCullough ME; Larson DB; Koenig HG; Swyers JP;
Milano MG
Arch Fam Med, 7(2):118-24 1998 Mar-Apr
CONCLUSION:
"A large proportion of published empirical data suggest that
religious commitment may play a beneficial role in preventing
mental and physical illness, improving how people cope with
mental and physical illness, and facilitating recovery from
illness."
==============================================================
Religion's role in promoting health and reducing risk among
American youth.
Wallace JM Jr; Forman TA
Health Educ Behav, 25(6):721-41 1998 Dec
CONCLUSION:
"Relative to their peers, religious youth are less likely to engage
in behaviors that compromise their health (e.g., carrying weapons,
getting into fights, drinking and driving) and are more likely to
behave in ways that enhance their health (e.g., proper nutrition,
exercise, and rest). Multivariate analyses suggest that these
relationships persist even after controlling for demographic factors,
and trend analyses reveal that they have existed over time.
Particularly important is the finding that religious seniors have
been relatively unaffected by past and recent increases in marijuana
use."
==============================================================
Believing in patients' beliefs: physician attunement to the
spiritual dimension as a positive factor in patient healing
and health.
Hamilton DG
Am J Hosp Palliat Care, 15(5):276-9 1998 Sep-Oct
CONCLUSION:
"The spiritual dimension has been demonstrated by research to be
an important and fundamental aspect of human functioning, one
that positively affects healing and health and should be mobilized
as an active part of the health care of persons. Moreover,
physicians have an obligation to acknowledge the potential role
of spirituality in the health and healing of patients and to form
a therapeutic alliance with patients that takes their spirituality
into account and affirms its importance. Questions about persons'
spiritual beliefs and practices, their values, and what they
consider meaningful in their lives should become part of the
initial medical interview and an ongoing focus in the physician-
patient relationship."
==============================================================
The role of private prayer in psychological recovery among midlife
and aged patients following cardiac surgery.
Ai AL; Dunkle RE; Peterson C; Bolling SF
Gerontologist, 38(5):591-601 1998 Oct
CONCLUSION:
"This study addressed multifactorial determinants of postoperative
psychological recovery and the effects of private prayer, a form
of spiritual coping, on the recovery of 151 older patients. Results
show that most patients pray about their postoperative problems and
that private prayer appears to significantly decrease depression
and general distress one year post-CABG."
==============================================================
The relation between religiosity, selected health behaviors, and
blood pressure (BP) among adult females.
Hixson KA; Gruchow HW; Morgan DW
Prev Med, 27(4):545-52 1998 Jul-Aug
"RESULTS: The direct effects of religiosity on SBP and DBP were
more substantial than the indirect effects through the intermediate
health variables, suggesting that religiosity may be associated
with lower levels of BP via a direct pathway, such as improving
the ability to cope with stress. In general, DBP was more
influenced by religiosity than SBP and the dimensions of "intrinsic
religiosity" and "religious coping" were most influential. Results
also indicated that "religious experiences" may exert a greater
beneficial effect on DBP in older (50-80 years) age groups."
==============================================================
Measuring the results of faith
Hudson T
Hosp Health Netw, 70(18):22-4, 26-8 1996 Sep 20
CONCLUSION:
"Guiding patients to health takes more than technological wizardry,
wonder drugs, and pleasantly decorated surroundings. In fact, to
an increasing number of institutions, faith is the missing
ingredient. Faith in a higher power. Faith in oneself. Faith in
the possibilities for recovery. Welcome, then, to the new high-
tech, high-touch world, where pastoral care meets managed care.
The results may startle you."
==============================================================
Spiritual well-being, religiosity, hope, depression, and other
mood states in elderly people coping with cancer.
Fehring RJ; Miller JF; Shaw C
Oncol Nurs Forum, 24(4):663-71 1997 May
"CONCLUSION: Intrinsic religiosity and spiritual well-being are
associated with hope and positive mood states in elderly people
coping with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses
must assess and support intrinsic religiosity and promote
spiritual well-being in elderly people coping with cancer."
==============================================================
The relationship between a patient's spirituality and health
experiences
McBride JL; Arthur G; Brooks R; Pilkington L
Fam Med, 30(2):122-6 1998 Feb
"CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest an association between
intrinsic spirituality and a patient's experience of health and
pain. Assessment of spirituality may be important for family
physicians to consider as a supplement to patient interviews."
==============================================================
Attitude and disposition: do they make a difference in cancer
survival?
Creagan ET
Mayo Clin Proc, 72(2):160-4 1997 Feb
CONCLUSION:
"A social support system and an element of spirituality and
religion seem to be the most consistent predictors of quality
of life and possible survival among patients with advanced
malignant disease."
==============================================================
Correlates of spiritual well-being in terminally ill persons with
AIDS and terminally ill persons with cancer.
Pace JC; Stables JL
J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care, 8(6):31-42 1997 Nov-Dec
CONCLUSION:
"Findings in this study and similar future studies can better enable
health care providers to allocate time and resources to various
terminally ill patient populations to achieve higher quality care
outcomes in general and greater spiritual well-being in particular."
==============================================================
Medical student and patient attitudes toward religion and
spirituality in the recovery process.
Goldfarb LM; Galanter M; McDowell D; Lifshutz H; Dermatis H
Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse, 22(4):549-61 1996 Nov
CONCLUSION:
"It may be clinically relevant to train medical students in the
potential importance of spirituality in addiction treatment so
that they can incorporate spirituality into the treatment of
addictions."
==============================================================
Religiosity as a predictor of well-being and moderator of the
psychological impact of unemployment.
Shams M; Jackson PR
Br J Med Psychol, 66 ( Pt 4)():341-52 1993 Dec
CONCLUSION:
"Furthermore, the hypothesis of religiosity as buffering the
impact of unemployment was confirmed. Results are interpreted
in terms of transactional models of stress, and the benefits
of religious belief and practice for unemployed people..."
==============================================================
Religious well-being in noninstitutionalized elderly women.
Zorn CR; Johnson MT
Health Care Women Int, 18(3):209-19 1997 May-Jun
CONCLUSION:
"Spirituality is recognized as an important component of health
care practice with elderly people... Descriptive research
revealed a high level of religious well-being among the participants
and significant positive correlation between religious well-being
and the variables of social support and hope (p < .001)."
==============================================================
Health locus of control and helpfulness of prayer.
Saudia TL; Kinney MR; Brown KC; Young-Ward L
Heart Lung, 20(1):60-5 1991 Jan
CONCLUSION:
"Findings suggest that prayer is perceived as a helpful, direct-
action coping mechanism and warrants support by health personnel."
==============================================================
The religion-health connection: evidence, theory, and future
directions.
Ellison CG; Levin JS
Health Educ Behav, 25(6):700-20 1998 Dec
==============================================================
Religious activity improves quality of life for ill older adults
Reyes-Qrtiz CA; Ayele H; Mulligan T
J Am Geriatr Soc, 44(9):1139 1996 Sep
==============================================================
Getting religion seen as help in being well
Mitka M
JAMA, 280(22):1896-7 1998 Dec 9
==============================================================
There are hundreds of similar articles which have appeared in
respected medical journals in the last decade alone.
AmericanMuslim
> snip...
I hope you have your dissatisfaction with the empty existence Atheism
teaches out of your system. By the standard set by so many other
"devote Atheists", your demeanor and your posting presents you as a
"good" and "perfect" Atheist! Is being abusive, vulgar, and self-righteous
inherent in Atheism?
Webster's Dictionary: Atheism
2. Ungodliness, Wickedness (I guess this nowadays is called
being mean-spirited).
Peace.
AmericanMuslim
>
>I'd collect some samples of God and analyze them to find out what makes Him
>immortal and perfect. Then, I'd use the data I collect to try and make
>medicines that could help people who are sick or dying, since Mr. God
>doesn't feel the need to lift his immortal and benevolent finger to help
>them.
In the meanwhile, some of us have realized that all of us will taste death,
some in sleep, others by illness, etc. There is no reason for us to be
arrogant about what is natural by design.
By the way, do you think you will live forever?
Drake
WTF are you talking about? What did I say that made you think I was being
arrogant about death? I was answering the question 'What if science proved
the existence of God'. And I said I'd figure out what makes him immortal
and use it to help others since 'God' doesn't do it himself. I was
half-joking dammit.
>By the way, do you think you will live forever?
I fucking hope not.
Liz
<America...@spamfree.com> in alt.atheism wrote:
>Liz wrote in message <379fea67...@news.concentric.net>...
>> snip...
Again, I apologize for the cross-post, but AmericanMuslim has insisted
on starting several new threads and re-adding all of the Islamic
groups. Followups set to alt.atheism -- again.
>I hope you have your dissatisfaction with the empty existence Atheism
>teaches out of your system.
On what basis do you conclude that my existence is empty? There is
no "system" to atheism. Every atheist finds his or her own way in the
world without belief in the supernatural, devoid of myths, doing
his/her best, living and loving each day to the fullest knowing that
this life is to be savored and enjoyed with the other finite beings
who inhabit our beautiful planet.
> By the standard set by so many other
>"devote Atheists", your demeanor and your posting presents you as a
>"good" and "perfect" Atheist!
Atheism has no standards, no dogma and no beliefs. All that is
required to be an atheist is to lack a belief in god(s). We need
have nothing else in common.
> Is being abusive, vulgar, and self-righteous
>inherent in Atheism?
No. These are individual traits of individual atheists. I would
never conclude that your individual traits of prejudicial
generalization, rude behavior, ignorance, lack of net etiquette,
intolerance, and self-righteous moralizing are inherent to Islam.
Based on the more polite posts that I have seen from other Muslims, I
must conclude that these are your personal traits which seem
hypocritical for someone who claims moral superiority.
>Webster's Dictionary: Atheism
> 2. Ungodliness, Wickedness (I guess this nowadays is called
> being mean-spirited).
LOL Of course, I am ungodly. I lack a belief in gods. Do you
have anything to discuss or do you merely wish to call atheists names
and pretend you are virtuous?
>
>Peace. <----------------
<heh> You are not acting in a peaceful manner. I understand that
you don't feel obligated to be polite to an infidel woman, but if you
would objectively examine your own behavior, you might understand why
your effort to spread the "truth" about Islam is not being well
received. You have shown us ungodly atheists much more than you ever
intended.
Love the irony of the title of this thread by the way. :)
Liz #658 BAAWA
Moral indignation permits envy or hate to be acted out
in the guise of virtue. -- Erich Fromm
Liz
alt.atheism wrote:
>hi,
[----]
>but my question is...
>
>What would you all do if, through science, God was proven to exist?
If a god were scientifically proven to exist, I would believe that god
exists. I would then try to scientifically determine if the proven
god wanted and was worthy of my worship.
>and please don't reply with any 'that would never happen' type things.
What if a god were proven and it wasn't the one in which you believed?
and please don't reply with any "that would never happen" type things.
Liz #658 BAAWA
Many...freely confess that they believe what it makes them
feel good to believe. Evidence doesn't play much of a role.
They are alleviating their fear of randomness by identifying
regularities that are not there. - Murray Gell-Mann
Liz
<America...@spamfree.com> in alt.atheism wrote:
[deleted cross-post]
<snip self-righteous justification>
Is anyone else struck by the similarity between AM's rantings and
those of the fundy xians that more familiarly post here? If the
references to a specific religion were stripped from the post, I would
be unable to tell the difference between AM and xian such as Cory
Collins. It seems that if you are a True Believer®, it doesn't
really make a difference what you truly believe.
<shakes head sadly>
Liz #658 BAAWA
Among life's perpetually charming questions is whether the
truly evil do more harm than the self-righteous and wrong.
-- Jon Margolis
Stephen Knight
<America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>> Stephen Knight
>> [subjective and rather personally abusive posting cut]
>
>I am afraid I do not see any use in trying to answer to your frustrated
>attacks point by point. That simply would make you feel more threatened
>and agitated... I will only discuss one point, which may benefit those not
>fully indoctrinated by the Atheist cult.
>
>>> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
>>> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
>>> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
>>> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
>
>> Completely, utterly untrue.
>
>Below, please find a brief review of some of the recent medical
>research journal articles, which support the assertion that faith
>and spirituality have a direct impact on the quality and length
>of life, physical and mental health, prevention, ability to deal
>with traumatic experiences, outlook on life and death, recovery/
>survival from disease, etc..
snip
You quote references taken from a believers POV. Your objectivity
is narrow minded. You mentioned only "true believers" as receiving a
medical benefit from belief. What about the Japanese or Buddhist
countries? What about Dianetic's? You make it sound like a god is
taking a personal interest in those that believe, and specifically,
believe in "your" god. OTOH, if you mean having a delusional placebo
to prop up your natural ability to fight disease, then of course it
works, be it Allah, Dianetic's, or the Easter Bunny.
Check the site below.
http:\\atheists.org/flash.line/health1.htm
Christopher A. Lee
AmericanMuslim <America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>> Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>
>> [Most of this Personally abusive posting is being ignored, as it
>> was free of objectivity, courtesy and rationality.]
>
>I am not surprised at the lack of manners and apparent double-standard
What "lack of manners and apparent double standard" would that
be, liar? I'll remind you that *Y*O*U* initiated this by posting a
brand-new thread to an atheist newsgroup where it is off-topic
and offensive. Where you already know that we don't share your
most basic religious beliefs. Did you respect this and look for
shared understanding? No - instead you talked about your deity
as though its existence were mutually granted.
Have you never heard the expression "what goes around comes around"?
Whether or not you are capable of understanding it, your post
was extremely disrespectful. But you are so tied up with your
religious beliefs that you don't realise this. But instead of
acknowledging this and trying not to do it again, you attack
the very people you offended. And you're compounding your
offence with every p[ost you make.
You and your beliefs were simply treated with equivalent
disrespect. If you feel hard done by, then you're learning
group dynamics: you offended a lot of people. If half of
them reply in kind that's still a lot of people. Yet they
would never have heard of you let alone been rude to you
if you hadn't been so thoughtlessly rude yourself.
My initial response to you was polite and restrained considering
your rudeness - because I knew it was being cross-posted.
>apparent in the postings of the atheist contributors. Sadly, even those
You still don't get it, do you?
Stop for a moment to asK yourself why ordinary decent folk
whose only difference from you, is that they don't happen
to share your beliefs, reacted the way they did. Remembering
that the reason they got together with each other was to
discuss atheist issues in a theoretically theism-free
environment (although you wouldn't guess that given the
noise to signal ratio here).
What you posted was the sort of thing we're here to get away
from. We're not particularly interested in Islam because it's
just somebody else's religion. And the way you described it
presumed that atheists grant the existence of its deity and
other doctrines that you take for granted.
Well, we don't. IF you were interested in any kind of
discussion, you would have talked about it as what you
believe, acknowledging that we don't - instead of talking
as though they were universally acknowledged facts.
>atheists who claim that the believers should not judge all atheist by the
>abusive postings of some, end up being vulgar in their own postings!
>Apparently, they can not help being what they have become...
What goes around comes around. We reacted to your thoughtless
rudeness. But instead of acknowledging this you attacked us
and blamed *us* which makes it worse each time you do this.
>Now, for all those individuals who are quick at accusing others of
>hypocrisy and object at the "offensive article" that somehow "justified"
>the downright vulgarity of their Atheist brethren, I suggest that they do
>not even understand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy"!
Why put the word offensive in quotes? Just because *you* don't
find it offensive doesn't mean that your audience didn't.
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that the
residents of a theoretically deity-belief zone don't
like to be preahced at when they've gone there to escape
from it. Or that it is extremely disrespectful to talk
as though they shared your doctrinal presumptions.
Quite frankly, it takes an idiot to do that because it's
pretty obvious that a dialog has to be from shared
understanding.
>Since these people are so sensitive about one cross-posted reply,
Are you black? How would you like it if somebody posted an article
calling you niggers? and then attacked you for takking offence?
It's the same kind of thoughtlessness.
And if it was a reply, why didn't you make that clear in the
subject line? Eg "About Islam. (was Re: previous title". Most
of us would have killfiled the previous thread anyway, and if
this article had scraoped through it would have been obvious
and we'd have killed it, too.
Instead it reached everybody as a brand-new thread. Of the kind
which does not belong in alt.atheism which you would have known
if you'd read the charter or the FAQ for the newsgroup.
>which did not attack or mention atheism, I wonder why they have not
Except that it was a brand new thread not a reply, and IT
PRESUMED ISLAMIC DOCTRINES AS FACT. Which you know aren't
TO YOUR AUDIENCE.
Your original article and the responses are a perfect example
of why cross-posting between such disparate newsgroups is a bad
idea. What is good, decent and even holy on one is offensive
on the other. AND VICE VERSA. So folk you've offended on their
newsgroup respond in kind, to show you how it feels.
>objected to dozens upon dozens of "abusive cross-posting" by their
>fellow brethren to all these Muslim forums?! Yesterday alone, for
I don't see them - except for brand new threads like yours. And
I suspect this gooes for a lot of other folk here. Have you ever
thought that these flamewars might be started from outside? Since
usenet escaped the academic etc ivory towers whhere it was
first used, there have been folk who get their fun from doing
that. I thought you were one originally which is why my first
response was moderate and aimed at everybody.
But it was just a thoughtless act on your part. Look what it's
escalated to: you offended a lot of people and they reacted. And
you took offence at their reaction. Which made things worse.
>instance, there were several postings in the thread titled "Re: CAIR:
>Writer Smears Muslim Community", which directly attacked God and
There you go again. You're talking about God as though
we shared your belief that it actually existed. To people
you know don't share that belief. To us there's nothing to
attack. And you know that.
You might just as well be talking about Santa Claus because
that's all it means in the forum I'm replying from. It's
tactless at best, insulting at worst.
I did some research on the CAIR thread and this is the first time
I've seen it.
It looks as though it first appeared on alt.atheism cross-posted
by Sadiqi Az-Zindiki <crime...@xoomail.com> on Friday July 23rd.
It was a fairly neutral one from an ex-Moslem bemoaning the
(justified by the Hadiths) death sentence for apostates
which included him. And pointed out that one had been
issued on Salman Rushdie. Which had made Islam look silly
in the rest of the world because civilised people don't
do that.
And *none* of the Moslem leaders etc spoke out against it.
What sort of impression did that give the rest of the world?
Can you blame people for thinking that sort of behaviour is
part of being Moslem?
The first atheist response was from a guy who said that was
why he hated Islam, because it disn't matter if it was one
person or 100 doing the religion-ordered killing he would still
be dead.
It wend downhill from there. A classic case of cross-post malaise:
EACH SIDE was in the right - in their own group. And each side
took offence at what was OK in the other group.
>the way of life of the believers. For days, some Atheists have been
>posting their unwelcomed anti-God and anti-Islam conjecture on all
>these Muslim forums and not one of these "open-minded" and "free-
>thinking" atheists has objected to it! Why do you think it is?
What "anti-God" conjecture? YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE IN IT TO BE
ANTI- IT. We're no more anti-God than you are anti-Santa.
>The truth of the matter is that the followers of all cults are similarly
>programmed to react against the Truth; what they reacted was not
More stupidity. It's dishonest to call a religious belief
"the truth" because it ain't. It's JUST SOMEBODY ELSE'S
RELIGIOUS BELIEF THAT NON-MOSLEMS WOULDN'T GIVE A FREAK ABOUT.
It's also a transparent false dichotomy. Because believers
aren't going to say it's false therefore it must be true.
Except that there's an excluded middle: it's only Moslems
who see their religion as "truth. Just as christians, Jews,
Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists etc *all* see their own religions
as "truth".
>an anti-atheism posting, but one about Islam. By comparison,
WHICH WAS OFF-TOPIC FOR THE ATHEIST NEWSGROUPS. And you
*still* don't understand how thoughtlessly rude it is to
talk *at* us (not with us, otherwise you would use shared
understanding) about your god called "God" as though
your audience granted its existence.
>everyday, we Muslims get all sort of people on Muslim forum who
>contribute about their respective way of life; but, does anyone react
Is that one of the purposes of the Moslem forum? It's *not*
the purpose of alt.atheism.
>to their providing information about their way of life with vulgarity?
You *still* don't get it. Whether or not you understand how,
your off-topic posting was *extremely* disrespectful. Which
means *Y*O*U* were disrespectful even if you didn't intend
be.
>Thank God, we do not! I guess this attitude also proves which
>doctrine causes close-mindedness and breeds insecure individuals
>who feel threatened by mere information about other ideologies...
You're an egotistical idiot who has no consideration for
others and thinks his message overrides normal courteous
behaviour.
WE'RE NOT "THREATENED BY MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OTHER IDEOLOGIES",
LIAR.
Why do you think there are so many different newsgroups, each
with their own topic?
I'll give you a clue: it's so subscribers don't have to sort
through all the irrelevant stuff to get to the articles that
are the reason they're on usenet in the first place.
>Peace.
But not so long as people like you can't live and let live.
Christopher A. Lee
alt.islam.sufism and uk.religion.islam.
I don't know which group this guy is posting from, but I do
know that most of you have more consideration for others
than he has. It is unfortunate that I have to leave your
newsgroups in the list in orderthat he see sthe reply.
In article <rpv6dp$0$37nspbj$n...@corp.supernews.com>,
AmericanMuslim <America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
>Liz wrote in message <379fea67...@news.concentric.net>...
>> snip...
>
>I hope you have your dissatisfaction with the empty existence Atheism
>teaches out of your system. By the standard set by so many other
>"devote Atheists", your demeanor and your posting presents you as a
>"good" and "perfect" Atheist! Is being abusive, vulgar, and self-righteous
>inherent in Atheism?
We've already explained that atheism doesn't teach anything,
that it's merely the individual's absence of theism. Why
do you continue to ignore this and keep attacking strawmmen
of your own devising?
>Webster's Dictionary: Atheism
> 2. Ungodliness, Wickedness (I guess this nowadays is called
> being mean-spirited).
I see. You insult us and hide behind a dictionary. But what
was definition 1? You know, the primary definition?
Let's see, I don't have a Webster to hand but how about this?
For example: my Oxford American Dictionary published
by Avon Books, ISBN 0-380-51052-9 says:-
a-the-ist (ay-thi-ist) n. a person who does not believe in
the existence of a god or gods. a-the-ism n. a-the-ist-ic
(ay-thi-is-tik) adj,
Which describes us accurately.
>Peace.
You're joking.
David G Dick
AmericanMuslim wrote in message ...
>I do not believe my article suggested that! I said:
>
> "The manners of atheists who have contributed to this
> thread shows the truly undesirable nature of ATHEISM
> and the affect it GENERALLY has on people..."
Point taken. Perhaps I should rephrase my objection. Not every atheist who
contributed to this thread has bad manners.
>I realize that some Atheists are new converts to Atheism and
>carry the non-Atheist standards they were raised with; others
>can not help but be influenced by the morality and standards
>of the society at large; those, in turn, finds their basis in
>religious teachings... So, not all people who profess to be
>Atheists are vulgar, at this moment.
Am I to understand that you perceive atheism as something which slowly turns
people vulgar? I was born an atheist, and have never followed any
religion. Yet I have not used a single profanity in this thread, indeed I
never use profanity on the internet except in reply to more profanity.
Atheism is not some kind of "society" that promotes bad behaviour. It is
simply one opinion, namely the opinion that there is no god. There is not
a single other thing that links all atheists.
>> I personally know of a couple of Muslims who are bigoted
>> and narrow-minded, but I don't go saying that EVERY
>> Muslim is bigoted and narrow-minded. Although you
>> seem to be.
>
>I am afraid Atheists appear unable to resist from personally
>offending others!
So in reply to an accusation of bigotry, you make a bigoted, blanket
statement about atheists. Not very convincing, I'm afraid.
> This is exactly what I was referring to when
>I objected to Atheism. For instance, what would prevent an
>Atheist, besides fear of being caught and punished in this life,
>from acting upon their animalistic urges and resort to any evil
>to "get the most of this only existence"?!
Any number of reasons. My #1 reason is that if I do as I please, I would
end up with no friends. My main saving grace is that I am a very honest
person, yet I do not subscribe to any religion. Religion is not needed in
order to be a bascially good person at heart.
On the other hand, if the only reason YOU do not do as you please without
any thought for others is because god will punish you, then I put it to you
that YOU are the one who is rotten at heart, kept in check only by your
belief in eternal punishment.
> You see, it would
>be very easy for the believers to also personally attack others
>and use vulgar words, if we did not believe in a hereafter and
>accountability before God. Apparently, Atheists do not have a
>similar restriction.
Where have I been vulgar? Please stop making such bigoted generalisations,
it is only hurting your case.
Again, though, it seems the only thing stopping you from using profanity
at every turn is the fear of God's punishment.
>By the way, if you indeed know any weak and sinful Muslims
>(provided they are more than simply "Muslims" by name),
No True Muslim, right? In that case, I claim that all the so-called
"atheists" who used vulgar terms against you are only "atheists" by name.
No TRUE atheist would use vulgarity. Using your own arguments, I have
proven your previous point wrong.
> you
>should also know that what they allegedly do is against the
>teachings of Islam and is rather an aberration. On the other
>hand, we seem to have the opposite with the Atheists on
>alt.atheism forum! Is this a greatly skewed aberration? If
>so, what principles indicate that Atheists should not engage
>in the kind of behavior we have seen? Does Atheism even try
>to make better individuals, families, and societies?
Of course it doesn't. Because atheism is not a religion, a philosophy, or
even a way of life. It is only one opinion. Does your opinion that
'atheists are vulgar' try to make better individuals, families and
societies? Of course not, yet you still hold that opinion. This argument
leads nowhere.
>> Atheism is not invented any more than Islam is, and it is
>> definitely not a religion. Please get your facts straight
>> before you try to tell us what we think.
>
>I like to point out what you wrote further down:
>
> "I have never posted to any religious group except alt.atheism"
>
>Which one is it?!
Slip of the tongue. More properly, I should have said "religion-related".
Are you really that nit-picky?
> In fact, I believe that Atheism, just like
>Satanism, is a religious doctrine, one that denies the existence
>of God and perhaps raises other entities or concepts ("Mother
>Nature", "big bang", "evolution", "us") to the level of gods.
Well, fine, go ahead and hold that opinion. Just be aware that virtually
all of the people who call themselves atheists consider that opinion very,
very wrong. And after all, those are the people you are talking about.
I could say that Islam, just like Satanism, is a religious doctrine, one
that promotes the existence of an evil god. (I wouldn't, but I'm just
putting it forward as hypothetical) I'm sure all Muslims would disagree,
but how would you convince me? You couldn't, because it's only an opinion.
So go ahead, think what you like, but if you say (write) it out loud, you
should expect to get called for it because nobody you are talking about
agrees with you.
It's called a "straw man". It's like getting a man made out of straw,
putting a sign on it saying "I am an atheist", and then throwing your voice
to make it sound as if you are having an argument with an atheist when
actually it's only your opinion of what an atheist might say.
>> Some of them, perhaps. But by no means all of them.
>> If you post something that specifically says in the FAQ of
>> alt.atheism says be treated badly, you should expect to
>> be treated badly!!!
>
>So, it this the way atheists try to justify the use of vulgar
>and abusive language by their brethren?!
Why do they need to justify it? If someone came into alt.religion.islam and
said the worst possible things about Islam, would you not react harshly?
Speaking ill about Islam sometimes brings much worse than just vulgar
language. Just ask Salman Rushdie.
>> Like I said before, its similar to posting anti-Semitic
>> material in a Jewish newsgroup. That really IS the height
>> of bad manners, and your post was not far behind.
>
>Your analogy is incorrect. Anti-Semitic material, by definition,
>should be dealing with a specific topic. If someone were to
>post information about Hinduism, without making any reference
>to Jews on that forum, would he be guilty of presenting "anti-
>Semitic" literature? Of course not!
Yeah, analogies always have flaws. But the basic point behind it remains
the same.
> The extremist view you have
>presented would suggest that we should all be closed-minded and
>view any ideology which differs from ours as an attack on our
>way of life!
I'm sorry if you interpreted what I said wrongly. What I meant was that if
you insist on speaking to a group of people about something you know fine
well they actively do not wish to hear, the error is yours. You have no
right to complain.
>Mr. David, by the same token, my article was not against Atheism;
>rather, it was about Islam: a topic often written of by very
>unqualified people on Atheism forum and cross-posted to Muslim
>forums.
Perhaps the original post was not specifically anti-atheism. Nonetheless
the point remains that you should have known that preaching is VERY bad
manners in this newsgroup. True, some atheists might cross-post to Muslim
forums. But I have never done so except in response to posts on alt.atheism
which are cross-posted. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Incidentally it's Mr. Dick; David is my first name.
>Actually, I was trying to avoid posting too many replies, seeing
>that many people on Atheist forum are closed-minded and insecure.
In your opinion, nothing more. I could well say the same about your group,
but I won't, because that would be bad manners. You obviously do not have
the same manners.
>Of course no one suggested this, but this is a convenient attempt
>to insist upon one's mistaken attitude.
What mistaken attitude is that?
Some atheists cross-post to your group, and in revenge you cross-post to
ours. Does that make your action justified?
If a murderer went up in court and said "but someone else did the same thing
before me", would he get away with it?
Two wrongs don't make a right.
>> And of all the cross-posted atheist posts I have seen, I
>> have yet to see one where atheists invade a religious group
>> to try to convert them to atheism, in the rude manner you
>> tried to convert us to Islam.
>
>Funny! Using profanity, attacking God, Prophets, and the way
>of life of the believers is not seen as rude by You,
Profanity and attacks on god are a different matter entirely, I never
mentioned them. What I was talking about was proselytisation. You were
promoting your religion. That is specifically warned against in the FAQ,
as well as repeatedly noted in various threads on this group.
The things you say would probably indeed be rude, in your newsgroup. Two
wrongs do not make a right.
> but replying
>with an informational article about what Islam really is must be
>viewed as an attempt at conversion and rude?! Mr. David, mine was
>not an attempt to convert anyone, but save those people who may
>be affected by the anti-Islamic propaganda of some people.
That was not the way it came across. "Introducing Islam". You make it
sound as if we have never heard of it before. And if you really think there
is "anti-Islamic propaganda" in this newsgroup, why not reply to those
individual posts? That would make far more sense.
>> Atheism is I N N O W A Y E Q U A L T O C O M M U N I S M.
>> Some atheists are communists, but that doesn't mean they all
>> are. You are making the same conclusion as if I were to see
>> a few Muslims on telly killing each other in a religious war,
>> and conclude that they are all warlike religious fanatics. I
>> don't make bigoted snap judgements like that, but you seem to.
>
>And I said, "Height of", if you only paid closer attention.
I apologise, perhaps if your post was shorter my attention might not
wander.
Anyway, then, you are both wrong, and your case here has no point.
You are wrong because : The "height" of atheism is a matter of personal
opinion. In my opinion the height of atheism was Ingersoll's vow. You seem
to have a more bellicose approach however.
And your case has no point because : Even if communism IS the "height" of
atheism, the great majority of atheists on this newsgroup are NOT
communists, and do not agree with communist manifestoes.
>Regardless, this was reply to the individual who said: 'when
>was the last time you saw an Atheist (commit some kind of evil)'.
Ah, I see. That was not made clear in your post.
Actually, that is the first good thing you have said about us. If the last
act of evil you saw being done by an atheist was also by a communist, that
must mean us non-communist atheists are decent people.
>Thank you!
You're welcome.
>> But never preach to us to convert to your religion.
>
>Who did?!
It sure sounded like preaching to me. You might not have seen it as such,
but then that might be because you hear it all the time.
> But, guess who looks insecure and closed-minded,
>when he/she does not even want to learn alternatives to his/her
>way of life...
I HAVE learned about the alternatives, (all the ones I have heard of, at
least) and discarded them. That is why I do not want to hear it all over
again. But you have this preconceived notion that atheism is a religion,
and insist on close-mindedly refusing to see it any other way.
>I do not believe I did that.
Well, then, sorry. I honestly thought you were preaching. It looked very
very much that way to me.
> I realize that some Atheists are
>the brainwashers and some have been completely indoctrinated by
>the cult they belong to.
Wrong on both counts. When have you ever heard about an "atheist
brainwashing cult" on the news? There is no such thing. Atheism is not a
religion, it is an opinion.
> Obviously, this is why they have such
>an abrupt reaction to being exposed to other ideologies,
I have already been exposed to Islam, thanks very much. My reaction was to
your bleating tone, and apparent preaching and proselytisation, not to
your ideology itself. I have nothing against Islam as a whole.
> while
>they like to freely attack and ridicule the faith of others on
>a daily basis!
Which we are allowed to do in the privacy of our own newsgroup. You exposed
yourself to that, and then come crying to us.
>> Got any figures to back that up, that can't be easily refuted?
>
>Coming up, in a separate article, God willing. As far as I am
>concerned, statistically and medically significant data are not
>"easily refuted". After all, this is the same way we have been
>conducting medical and pharmaceutical research. But, you are
>free to ignore solid facts.
You are being presumptuous, when you think I will ignore facts. If you
show figures then I will read them and check the source if I can. If the
source is reliable, and the research methods are sound, I will believe
you. It doesn't sound so far fetched to me. I am a strong believer in the
power of the human mind.
>Perhaps, but it is the answer to the "opinion" that God is
>invented.
Fine, but you did not state that originally. You simply said that atheism
was invented, as if it was a fact.
>This was the answer to those who said, there is no God.
Again, you did not make that clear. In its proper context, you are
correct. But you did not provide the context.
>Once again, I just posted an article to show the truth about
>Islam. If I had wanted to "convert" anyone, I would definitely
>spend my time to discuss the issues and "prove" that a religious
>life is better than a non-religious one. My purpose was more to
>set the record straight and not allow the kind of misinformation
>which leads to prejudice and blind hatred of others...
Very well. Perhaps you should work on your communication skills though,
because judging by the large reaction, that is not the way you came across
to most of us. Apologies if I took your post the wrong way, but I hope you
can see my point of view. You really did look like one of the many
preachers who enter our newsgroup.
For starters, perhaps you could use subject lines such as : "I wish to set
the record straight about misconceptions of Islam" instead of "Introducing
Islam" which seems condescending.
We already know of the alternatives.
>Peace.
Yeah, peace man.
David G Dick
Hello Isa,
<snip>
>but my question is...
>
>What would you all do if, through science, God was proven to exist?
>
>and please don't reply with any 'that would never happen' type things.
Well, first of all you assume that there is only one God. But I will go
with that assumption, and also the assumption which you are also probably
making, that this God is the Muslim god.
If it was proven beyond doubt to exist, and not just be some elaborate joke
on the part of the scientists, I would then try to find out whether or not
we really should worship such a being.
If the answer was proven beyond doubt to also be yes, then I would bend my
knee with the best of 'em. More so in fact, since I might have some
catching up to do!
If the answer was not proven to be yes however, then I would continue on
mostly as normal, with the exception that I might try to get an interview
to get God's job! :)
However, I am fairly certain it will not be proved or disproved
scientifically in my lifetime. In the meantime, then, I just carry on
pretty much as if I had never even heard of God.
Hope that answers your question.
Cheers,
-nemo-
> hi,
>
> this is quite a thread, since i happen to be Muslim, i would have never
> stumbled onto it because i happen to not go into the atheism groups. anyway
> i did read the whole thing so far and have just one question:
>
> > 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
>
> the above line is a but onesided and i can see how you people could easliy
> say-prove that there is a God.
>
> but my question is...
>
> What would you all do if, through science, God was proven to exist?
>
> and please don't reply with any 'that would never happen' type things.
>
That would never happen!
(I apologize - I couldn't resist! {;-))
> thanks
I'd like to point out that while atheism would be out the window in the
case of some scientific "proof" of the existence of God, we'd still have
the problem of religion.
If God existed and was pinned down by scientists as being in the
"existing" category, we'd still have the BIG problem of figuring out WHICH
God it actually is. If it's any of the ones that have popped into human
brains over the millenia, that would be something, but it's just as likely
to be something we've never imagined. What would YOU do, in that case?
Pat McNeil
'Isa <adri...@enter.net> wrote in article <379f...@news3.enter.net>...
> hi,
>
> this is quite a thread, since i happen to be Muslim, i would have never
> stumbled onto it because i happen to not go into the atheism groups.
anyway
> i did read the whole thing so far and have just one question:
>
> > 7- If you claim there is no God, you need to prove it!
>
> the above line is a but onesided and i can see how you people could
easliy
> say-prove that there is a God.
>
> but my question is...
>
> What would you all do if, through science, God was proven to exist?
>
> and please don't reply with any 'that would never happen' type things.
Excellent Question!
I suppose I would ask God (assuming communication is possible) if any of
the crap written about him/her/it was true. (i.e. Did ya really have a
fling with that earth girl 2000 years ago?)
Also, I'd clear up a few points about the origin of the universe and his
own origins.
Finally, I'd ask God the one mysterious question that's been nagging me for
years : "Do you know where I can find a good drummer that can read music?"
<grin>
Pat McNeil
Pat McNeil
If there were no Atheists, I think Theists would be compelled to invent
them.
Eric Hoffer once wrote about a mass movement being possible without a god,
but one without a devil is impossible. I think he had a point. :)
Pat McNeil
Elf Sternberg
In article <rpv63a$0$37nspbi$n...@corp.supernews.com>
"AmericanMuslim" <America...@spamfree.com> writes:
>>> 5- Medical research shows that there is much benefit in having
>>> faith: generally people who have true faith in God (rather than
>>> those who are believers by name) leave a much cleaner,
>>> healthier, more productive, and longer life;
>
>> Completely, utterly untrue.
>
>Below, please find a brief review of some of the recent medical
>research journal articles, which support the assertion that faith
>and spirituality have a direct impact on the quality and length
>of life, physical and mental health, prevention, ability to deal
>with traumatic experiences, outlook on life and death, recovery/
>survival from disease, etc...
All of which prove nothing. Of all the studies done on
disease recovery, not *one* of them actually shows that religious
people recover from disease more often and more readily than atheists,
that they suffer less physically, or that they benefit physically from
their beliefs.
These studies show simply that strongly religious people have
a better support system than the average person. Why is this
surprising? That's what churches and mosques have traditionally
been-- community support centers, nexi of social organization. Big
deal.
Do your studies indicate that Moslems, by and large, benefit
greater than Buddhists? If not, why not? Wouldn't God play
favorites? What about people who are in large, tight-knit secular
communities? Have any studies been done that show that, say, injured
atheist firefighters suffer longer than their religious counterparts,
since both have the same rich communal support?
There are studies that show that married men spend less time
in hospitals and recover faster than single men-- again, this seems to
be just a side-effect of having a family that cares about them. But
no ethical person would suggest that one should get married for one's
own selfish desire to live longer.
If the mechanism for these reports is nothing more than
community support, then supposedly kind and loving people have a lot
to answer for when they refuse to support those with whom they
disagree. Their rejection prolongs human suffering and is not
tolerable.
Elf
--
Elf M. Sternberg, rational romantic mystic cynical idealist
If you're so smart, why aren't you naked?
A.A 1493 http://www.halcyon.com/elf/
Ingrid Hainy
but you are an non-religion, well how can you judge a religion if you have
none, I an half european half pakistani, I am a muslim, Buddhist for two
years. I have a unique perspective, Islam, false religion? may I remind you
there are ALOT more of us than SOME groups, you might have the honour of a
fadwah on your head if you keeping smearing a moral religion like this, I'd
like to say that although you may be right about the leaders, they are a few
of many, now I have felt hate, hate against you for smearing a peoples
beliefs. You talk of Islam and attrocoties, The EUROPEANs, stomped out
several civilizations in the Americas (Aztecs, Souix)
My father has a saying, watch your tongue or it may be bitten off... it
applies to this situation.
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Alexander <kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net>
Newsgroups:
soc.culture.arabic,alt.religion.islam,alt.islam.sufism,uk.religion.islam,alt
.atheism
Date: 25 July 1999 01:44
Subject: Re: CAIR: Writer Smears Muslim Community
>Jeremiah McAuliffe <ali...@city-net.com> wrote in message
>news:379a47a7...@news.city-net.com...
>> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999 07:26:18 -0700, "Michael Alexander"
>> <kest...@worldnet.att.xxx.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> I wonder what you say about African-Americans, who have a crime rate
>> >> higher than other groups in the States.
>> >>
>> >> Guess you hate them too......
>> >
>> >But they don't target apostates and the truth.
>>
>> Oh? So, tell us, who do they target? Whitey?
>
>I am more likely to blame leaders than followers. Many Islamic leaders
lead
>their flocks astray. They say that power corrupts and absolute power
>corrupts absolutely. Islamic leaders seem to be much more susceptible to
>this corruption than other religious leaders. When they control a country,
>they lead that country down a worse path.
>
>
>
Crimespeak wrote in message <9329392...@www.remarq.com>...
><<I do not believe him either>>
>
>Oh, well then let's take a vote...oh I forgot there are no
>votes in Islam....
>
>As I said before I am a Zionist Newsgroup Infiltrator out
>to corrupt and destroy the Ummah...
'Isa
>>What would YOU do, in that case?<<
these two questions are kind of answered together. first, if (and thats a
big IF) humanity somehow pulled off a scientific way to prove the existence
of God, the i would assume that they just proved that God (in the way i view
God, which is from a Islamic viewpoint) is the God that i worship. Now if
the 'proven' God wasn't anything like that of which i believe God to be,
then i would begin to question the scientific community. if the scientific
community did not play some big practical joke on the world, i would then
say that they proved something supernatural exists, but not God.
if science proved God existed, then i am sure the majority of the world
would be brainwashed by the news and media into thinking that this is THE
God, and yadda yadda yadda....(kind of like that show on FOX last
night-which btw i don't believe an once of, particularly the statues and
pictures crying, or the stigmata) if this was to happen, i would probably be
branded a heretic and blasphemer for standing up against this 'proven' God,
but if thats what would happen thats probably what i would do.
or maybe i would became an atheist ;)
peace.
Brad
<America...@spamfree.com> wrote:
> The truth of the matter is that the followers of all cults are similarly
> programmed to react against the Truth; what they reacted was not
> an anti-atheism posting, but one about Islam. By comparison,
> everyday, we Muslims get all sort of people on Muslim forum who
> contribute about their respective way of life; but, does anyone react
> to their providing information about their way of life with vulgarity?
> Thank God, we do not! I guess this attitude also proves which
> doctrine causes close-mindedness and breeds insecure individuals
> who feel threatened by mere information about other ideologies...
>
> Peace.
Oh so true. But I would amend that to "the followers of all RELIGIONS are
similarly programmed to react against the Truth" You have quite
accidentally stumbled upon one of the most obvious conclusions of a
rational mind. That is: all religions claim to provide the "truth".
While simultaniously holding all other religions to be untrue. The only
rational conclusion one might have is that they are all untrue; since the
only other possibility is that only one is true. And, since none can
provide the smallest iota of observable evidence, how could one possibly
know which one it is.
As to cross-posting. I read alt.atheism. If I feel compelled to reply I
do so. If it posts in all those groups you've posted to, that's your
fault, not mine. For some inexplicable reason, theists of all stripes
seem to list alt.atheism along with all the superstition groups. I can't
figure out why they would think that alt.atheism has any relationship to
alt.xtain or alt.muslim or any religious group.
Brad: atheist #666 (ooga booga)
To email omit "ily" from the name.
"you're older than you've ever been, and now you're older still" TMBG
yang hu
> Mr Alexander, I think you should drop it, Islam is older than christianity,
huh?
--
Yang
a.a.#28
EAC mole and other furry creatures
rev #-273.15, high priest of the most frigid church of Kelvin
"I don't see Star Wars as profoundly religious. I see Star Wars as
taking all the issues that religion represents and trying to
distill them down into a more modern and easily accessible construct
--that there is a greater mystery out there. I remember when I was
10 years old, I asked my mother, "If there's only one God, why are
there so many religions?" I've been pondering that question ever
since, and the conclusion I've come to is that all the religions
are true."
George Lucas, Time Magazine, 4/17/1999
Therion Ware
wrote in alt.atheism:
>Ingrid Hainy wrote:
>
>> Mr Alexander, I think you should drop it, Islam is older than christianity,
>
>
>huh?
Probably means "True Islam"...
- ----- ------
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
------ <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
ICQ: 29168081
Mike Ruskai
>Ingrid Hainy wrote:
>
>> Mr Alexander, I think you should drop it, Islam is older than christianity,
>
>huh?
Quite right to question.
Christianity is older than Islam by about 500 years.
However, both are based on the old Semitic tribal religions which also
created what we call Judaism today. That is, the roots of Judaism, Islam,
and Christianity are the same - polytheistic nomadic barbarian tribes.
Before Islam, Arabs were still primarily worshipping multiple gods. Whether
Allah is one of those multiple gods, or simply a label for the Judaic and
Christian god, isn't really clear. If the latter, however, then the single
largest religions on the planet (Christianity and Islam) are worshipping a
storm god (Yahweh).
Yet they mock the idea of worshipping Thor. Stupid people.
- Mike
SA/AG#1106
Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.
Elf Sternberg
"Ingrid Hainy" <Ing...@harcourt81.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
>Mr Alexander, I think you should drop it, Islam is older than
>christianity...
Really. Islam, the worship of the Allah, the principles of
which were given to Mohammed some 1400 years ago, is *older* than
Christianity, which happened some 2000 years ago.
Ignorance is such an ugly thing, Ingrid.
>Islam, false religion? may I remind you there are ALOT more of us
>than SOME groups, you might have the honour of a fadwah on your head
>if you keeping smearing a moral religion like this.
"Beware my cosmic space monkey! His minions are a threat to
your very existence." Any religion that needs to threaten unbelievers
with death hardly qualifies as "moral"; more like, "dangerous."
Paul King
yang hu <yangh@***uci***.edu.> wrote:
>
>Ingrid Hainy wrote:
>
>> Mr Alexander, I think you should drop it, Islam is older than christianity,
>
>
>huh?
>
IIRC Muslims believe that Moses and Jesus were Muslims but their teachings
were corrupted.
oving
Paul King heeft geschreven in bericht ...
That hoax is already corrupted...
Peace,
Oving.
Michael Alexander
news:7ntb1n$6mn$1...@lure.pipex.net...
> I have question I'd like to ask any atheists out there: wasn't Dostoevsky
> right when he wrote that without God all is allowed? Life would be trully
> awful if the implications of atheism held sway. People would have to
invent
> a god to prevent chaos (the Social Contract?).
Atheists tend to be nice law abiding people. Judging from how many
countries are run, it looks like under Islam, all is allowed. In
Afghanistan, women starve to death because they aren't allowed to work.
Slavery was outlawed in Saudi Arabia in 1962, but some Saudi princes still
haven't gotten the word. Islam in general seems quite abusive to women.
Islam outlaws a great deal, but at the same time, much abuse is allowed.
Many people believe that all moral standards come from religion. Many
Muslims take this seriously. I mean that in a bad way. Their moral
standards come from religion instead of from conscience. Many Muslims have
a pathological lack of conscience. Most atheists have a conscience and are
more moral than Muslims. Of course, I'm using my own standards to judge
people.
I have read portions of the Quran and studied Mohammad's life. I am not
impressed. There are lots of religions out there, so I'm not going to waste
my time reading the rest of the Quran and Hadith. You talk about open
mindedness. Aren't people who change religions more open minded than people
who just adopt their parent's religion?
Jeff Heidman
MOHAMMED HANIF wrote:
> This is my first email on the net so I apologise for any faux pas.
>
> To proceed...religious claims need to be evaluated as do all truth claims.
> Islam provides its own test for validating its truth claims: namely, read
> the Quran and study the life-example of the Prophet Muhammad. If you are at
> all open-mined then you shall perceive the truth.
Kind of a circular test isn't it? You want to test the truth of Islam by
assuming that it is true so you can then get the answer that it is true?
> Of course, you might read a poor translation of the quran or come across an
> incident from the life of the prophet that sticks against you're idea of
> what a man of God should be like. In such a case a sincere seeker of the
> truth should go to a knowledgeable Muslim to clarify any doubts.
I see. Let me see if I have this right:
1. Islam is true.
2. If you find something that seems like it might show #1 to be in error, goto
#3.
3. See #1.
> For me (based upon my life experience and studies I have done) the Quran and
> the Prophet stand upto whatever criticism that has been thrown against them.
So, based on the book written by a bunch of men, the book written by those men
is true. What a revelation.
So you believe that all the other religions are false, right? Except for yours?
> I have question I'd like to ask any atheists out there: wasn't Dostoevsky
> right when he wrote that without God all is allowed?
Well, since "without God" is an accurate statement of reality, look around and
see if that is true.
> Life would be trully
> awful if the implications of atheism held sway.
Yeah, people not believing in God. That is the *only* implication of atheism.
> People would have to invent
> a god to prevent chaos (the Social Contract?).
People HAVE invented God, and claimed that it was for exactly that reason. Of
course, the reality is that it was usually so *some* people could control and
enslave other people. Or kill them if that was more convenient.
If all morality comes from God, and some particular God at that (in this case
Allah), how do you explain that societies that do not subscribe to your
particular God belief are not "chaotic"? Certainly many societies with wildly
divergent from Islam god beliefs manage to be quite moral. Maybe not as moral as
your particular belief system defines morality, but hardly "chaotic".
Now if you define *your* moral system as the only valid one, then that becomes
another issue entirely, but hardly very enlightening. And of course, *your*
moral system came from a bunch of men anyway.
Jeff
MOHAMMED HANIF
To proceed...religious claims need to be evaluated as do all truth claims.
Islam provides its own test for validating its truth claims: namely, read
the Quran and study the life-example of the Prophet Muhammad. If you are at
all open-mined then you shall perceive the truth.
Of course, you might read a poor translation of the quran or come across an
incident from the life of the prophet that sticks against you're idea of
what a man of God should be like. In such a case a sincere seeker of the
truth should go to a knowledgeable Muslim to clarify any doubts.
For me (based upon my life experience and studies I have done) the Quran and
the Prophet stand upto whatever criticism that has been thrown against them.
I have question I'd like to ask any atheists out there: wasn't Dostoevsky
right when he wrote that without God all is allowed? Life would be trully
awful if the implications of atheism held sway. People would have to invent
a god to prevent chaos (the Social Contract?).
hanif.
Brad wrote in message ...
Stephen Knight
<aax...@hemscott.net> wrote:
>This is my first email on the net so I apologise for any faux pas.
>
>To proceed...religious claims need to be evaluated as do all truth claims.
>Islam provides its own test for validating its truth claims: namely, read
>the Quran and study the life-example of the Prophet Muhammad. If you are at
>all open-mined then you shall perceive the truth.
>
Amazing. The christians say the same thing. All you have to do is
read the bible and you'll believe it. But you have to believe it
before you can believe it.
Even more amusing, you use the word, "open-minded" and "truth" the
same way they do.
>Of course, you might read a poor translation of the quran or come across an
>incident from the life of the prophet that sticks against you're idea of
>what a man of God should be like. In such a case a sincere seeker of the
>truth should go to a knowledgeable Muslim to clarify any doubts.
>
Christians call it Apologetic's.
>For me (based upon my life experience and studies I have done) the Quran and
>the Prophet stand upto whatever criticism that has been thrown against them.
>
Oh? Why are women treated like breeder animals?
>I have question I'd like to ask any atheists out there: wasn't Dostoevsky
>right when he wrote that without God all is allowed? Life would be trully
>awful if the implications of atheism held sway. People would have to invent
>a god to prevent chaos (the Social Contract?).
>
People did invent god(s). The pathetic fact is, the superstitious
think having a judgmental deity is the only thing stopping them from
being murderers and sex fiends.
To me, being an atheist means I have to accept responsibility for
my actions and live within the structure of my society. I am not in
any way influenced by religious morality. I know right from wrong
because it is a trait of my species to be a social animal.
You may consider this a spiritual emptiness but I see it as
accepting the truth of who and what I am.
Electro
>
>To proceed...religious claims need to be evaluated as do all truth claims.
>Islam provides its own test for validating its truth claims: namely, read
>the Quran and study the life-example of the Prophet Muhammad. If you are at
>all open-mined then you shall perceive the truth.
Arguing in a circle a bit, are you not?
>Of course, you might read a poor translation of the quran or come across an
>incident from the life of the prophet that sticks against you're idea of
>what a man of God should be like. In such a case a sincere seeker of the
>truth should go to a knowledgeable Muslim to clarify any doubts.
Appealing to authority?
>For me (based upon my life experience and studies I have done) the Quran and
>the Prophet stand upto whatever criticism that has been thrown against them.
And I'm sure the Quran tells you that you can trust the Quran.
>I have question I'd like to ask any atheists out there: wasn't Dostoevsky
>right when he wrote that without God all is allowed? Life would be trully
>awful if the implications of atheism held sway. People would have to invent
>a god to prevent chaos (the Social Contract?).
This is the conclusion of all serious philosophers (meaning pre-20th century),
that God exists necessarily. Debates over whether or not this existing God is
personal or impersonal are the only debates driven by purpose. Atheism, as the
people who call themselves "atheists" will tell you without a smirk of irony,
has no purpose.
-Electro-
Theism - (noun) - the ill effect of habitual excess in tea drinking.
[from Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary]
Douglas Brooker
Judaism, is seen in some quarters to have first appeared in Egypt, most
actively promoted by the Pharoah Akenaton.
> the roots of Judaism, Islam,
>and Christianity are the same - polytheistic nomadic barbarian tribes.
>SA/AG#1106
>
AmericanMuslim
> Point taken. Perhaps I should rephrase my objection. Not every
> atheist who contributed to this thread has bad manners.
This is better, but since I did not made any accusation of the
kind, I still fail to see what would you be exactly objecting to!
> Am I to understand that you perceive atheism as something which
> slowly turns people vulgar?
Let us think of it like this: If the attitude of the entire society
were that this life is it (we have to get as much as we can out of
it) and there is no accountability for our actions in the hereafter,
what do you think would happen? Mind you, I am not speaking of
single individuals, I am speaking of the population at large. What
would the have-nots do and how would they react to their "desperate"
condition?
> I was born an atheist, and have never followed any religion.
So, you do not speak based on experience, when you reject faith
in God?!
> Atheism is not some kind of "society" that promotes bad behaviour.
No, but it is an ideology that has the potential of leading to it.
You need to ask yourself, "what prevents the average person on the
street from committing the same evil acts as criminals out there?"
> It is simply one opinion, namely the opinion that there is no god.
> There is not a single other thing that links all atheists.
Would it be accurate to say, Atheism is like a box of chocolate,
you never know what you are going to get?!!!
>>> I personally know of a couple of Muslims who are bigoted
>>> and narrow-minded, but I don't go saying that EVERY
>>> Muslim is bigoted and narrow-minded. Although you
>>> seem to be.
>>
>> I am afraid Atheists appear unable to resist from personally
>> offending others!
>
> So in reply to an accusation of bigotry, you make a bigoted,
> blanket statement about atheists. Not very convincing, I'm afraid.
I point out again that I said "Atheists APPEAR unable"; hardly a
blanket statement! Furthermore, based on the postings we have seen
it was not exactly unjustified.
>> This is exactly what I was referring to when
>> I objected to Atheism. For instance, what would prevent an
>> Atheist, besides fear of being caught and punished in this life,
>> from acting upon their animalistic urges and resort to any evil
>> to "get the most of this only existence"?!
> Any number of reasons. My #1 reason is that if I do as I please,
> I would end up with no friends. My main saving grace is that I
> am a very honest person, yet I do not subscribe to any religion.
All these things may be wonderful, but they do not address my
question about the inherent problem with Atheism!
> Religion is not needed in order to be a bascially good person at
> heart.
Of course, but without religious standards we may not even agree
on what "good" is!!!
> On the other hand, if the only reason YOU do not do as you please
> without any thought for others is because god will punish you,
> then I put it to you that YOU are the one who is rotten at heart,
> kept in check only by your belief in eternal punishment.
Thank God, that is not the ONLY case with me. However, is there
any doubt that all people do need a little check and some extra
help, at various time in their lives? Mr. Dick, why do you suppose
we have so many Laws in these modern "secular" systems? Is it
because rich people want to keep the poor under check and protect
their wealth or is it because citizens have realized that some people
(GENERALLY those without fear of God) need fear of earthly punishment
to stay in check? I wonder if the entire society then can be accused
of having "rotten hearts"?!
>> You see, it would
>> be very easy for the believers to also personally attack others
>> and use vulgar words, if we did not believe in a hereafter and
>> accountability before God. Apparently, Atheists do not have a
>> similar restriction.
> Where have I been vulgar? Please stop making such bigoted
> generalisations, it is only hurting your case. Again, though, it
> seems the only thing stopping you from using profanity at every
> turn is the fear of God's punishment.
Mr. Dick, once more I believe you have taken my phrase out of
context. Firstly, I did not make a statement about you. Secondly,
within the context of my prior statements, this was a reference to
the shortcomings of Atheism and the abuse we have seen. Finally,
yes I do fear God's punishment, just as I feared punishment (either
in form of physical punishment or denial of love) from my Father
as a child (not that he ever punished me), or someone may fear
legal action from his wife (in case he is caught cheating) or the
government (in case he breaks the law). In fact, Fear in God is
one of the prerequisites of "true faith".
We need to realize that Fear is an integral part of our lives: people
fear hunger, loosing loved ones, disappointment/rejection, loosing
job, poverty, incarceration, prison, the authorities, death, high
places, (you get the picture!) etc. All men do need fear and do rely
on it to some degree to protect themselves emotionally, mentally and
physically. The society also relies on fear to control individual
members and keep them in check. Fear, whether by accident or design,
is an intrinsic quality of personal/societal life and not a
necessarily evil.
>> By the way, if you indeed know any weak and sinful Muslims
>> (provided they are more than simply "Muslims" by name),
> No True Muslim, right? In that case, I claim that all the so-
> called "atheists" who used vulgar terms against you are only
> "atheists" by name. No TRUE atheist would use vulgarity. Using
> your own arguments, I have proven your previous point wrong.
I would hardly call this a proof! A "True Muslim" is someone who,
by definition, follows the teachings of Islam; so, at least we
have a basis, an ideal if you will, to compare people who claim
to be Muslims against. Someone whose name is "Muhammad", but lives
and acts like an unbeliever and neither knows nor cares to know
anything about the teachings of Islam can not be called a Muslim.
I hope this is clear and agreeable.
On the other hand, I believe the only criteria to be an Atheist is
to deny the existence of God! What basis would you apply to see if
someone is a true Atheist?! How would someone's use of profanities
disqualify him/her from being considered Atheists, specially if
s/he is launching attacks against God and the believers?
>> you
>> should also know that what they allegedly do is against the
>> teachings of Islam and is rather an aberration. On the other
>> hand, we seem to have the opposite with the Atheists on
>> alt.atheism forum! Is this a greatly skewed aberration? If
>> so, what principles indicate that Atheists should not engage
>> in the kind of behavior we have seen? Does Atheism even try
>> to make better individuals, families, and societies?
> Of course it doesn't.
Thus, you have refuted your prior "proof".
> Because atheism is not a religion, a philosophy, or even a way
> of life.
Atheism affects the life-style and attitude of its adherents at
a fundamental level. Quite frankly, not having a fear of God has
the potential of leading to many personal and social problems
(i.e. addiction, infidelity, theft, rape, murder, etc.). Once more,
we are not speaking of individuals, but of an ideology and way of
life and what would happen, if all the people in a society were to
sincerely embrace it.
> It is only one opinion. Does your opinion that 'atheists are
> vulgar' try to make better individuals, families and societies?
Please note that I did not say so.
>> I like to point out what you wrote further down:
>>
>> "I have never posted to any religious group except alt.atheism"
>>
>> Which one is it?!
>
> Slip of the tongue. More properly, I should have said "religion-
> related". Are you really that nit-picky?
No, but I just wanted to highlight what I have also heard quite a
few Atheists, at least at a subconscious level, say.
>> In fact, I believe that Atheism, just like Satanism, is a
>> religious doctrine, one that denies the existence of God and
>> perhaps raises other entities or concepts ("Mother Nature",
>> "big bang", "evolution", "us") to the level of gods.
> Well, fine, go ahead and hold that opinion. Just be aware that
> virtually all of the people who call themselves atheists consider
> that opinion very, very wrong. And after all, those are the
> people you are talking about... So go ahead,
> think what you like, but if you say (write) it out loud,
> you should expect to get called for it because nobody you are
> talking about agrees with you.
> It's called a "straw man". It's like getting a man made out of
> straw, putting a sign on it saying "I am an atheist", and then
> throwing your voice to make it sound as if you are having an
> argument with an atheist when actually it's only your opinion of
> what an atheist might say.
This is indeed why I said, "I believe", indicating it to be my view.
I never suggested that all Atheists would necessarily hold that view,
because, as you have admitted, Atheism teaches nothing but the fact
that one should reject the existence of God. In fact, I believe your
objection to my view may be seen contradictory to your earlier
statement that Atheism puts no restriction on what one likes to
think or do (except rejection of God)! In that context, I guess some
may chose to admit that Atheism is a religion, because it intends
to affect the life of its members at a fundamental level. As far
as Islam is concerned, Atheism is a religion: one that rejects God.
>>> Some of them, perhaps. But by no means all of them.
>>> If you post something that specifically says in the FAQ of
>>> alt.atheism says be treated badly, you should expect to
>>> be treated badly!!!
>>
>> So, it this the way atheists try to justify the use of vulgar
>> and abusive language by their brethren?!
>
> Why do they need to justify it?
Even if I had been guilty of posting an article to invite people to
Islam, would that call for vulgarity and abusive words? The mere
fact that some people have been trying to discount the reaction we
have seen is an indication that they are trying to justify it. Quite
frankly, I can not see anyone justifying such language.
> If someone came into alt.religion.islam and said the worst
> possible things about Islam, would you not react harshly?
Once more, this is an incorrect analogy. My posting "* Introducing
Islam *" did not say the "worst possible thing about Atheism". It
did not even mention the word Atheism! Secondly, in your example,
I may reject the writing of that individual or expose the falsehood
of his/her argument, if it is based on clear deception and
misrepresentation of the teachings of Islam, but I would not use
profanities and vulgar language in doing so: that would be against
my faith.
>> Your analogy is incorrect. Anti-Semitic material, by definition,
>> should be dealing with a specific topic. If someone were to
>> post information about Hinduism, without making any reference
>> to Jews on that forum, would he be guilty of presenting "anti-
>> Semitic" literature? Of course not!
> Yeah, analogies always have flaws. But the basic point behind it
> remains the same.
My posting still did not mention "Atheism"...
>> The extremist view you have
>> presented would suggest that we should all be closed-minded and
>> view any ideology which differs from ours as an attack on our
>> way of life!
> I'm sorry if you interpreted what I said wrongly. What I meant
> was that if you insist on speaking to a group of people about
> something you know fine well they actively do not wish to hear,
> the error is yours. You have no right to complain.
My complaint was about the use of profanities and vulgarity by
some people. I believe any civilized person would be justified in
complaining about such things. By analogy, if you were sitting
in a Calculus lecture, you heard some people shout from across the
hall some nonsense about it, and you reply by telling them what
Calculus is, would it be justified for them to abuse you with
Profanities?! Would you not be justified in complaining about
their use of Profanities?
>> Mr. David, by the same token, my article was not against Atheism;
>> rather, it was about Islam: a topic often written of by very
>> unqualified people on Atheism forum and cross-posted to Muslim
>> forums.
> Perhaps the original post was not specifically anti-atheism.
> Nonetheless the point remains that you should have known that
> preaching is VERY bad manners in this newsgroup. True, some
> atheists might cross-post to Muslim forums. But I have never
> done so except in response to posts on alt.atheism which are
> cross-posted. Two wrongs do not make a right. Incidentally it's
> Mr. Dick; David is my first name.
Point well taken. But, I wish that, just as Muslims did not flame
atheism forum and allowed "some atheists" to get away with posting
their specifically and directly anti-Islamic claims, I would also
have received the same courtesy, when I merely tried to set the
record straight. At the very least, I did not expect profanities.
Quite frankly, I find the entire idea of "flaming" irrational and
unproductive. But, that is only my opinion and based on the
teachings of my faith.
>> Actually, I was trying to avoid posting too many replies, seeing
>> that many people on Atheist forum are closed-minded and insecure.
> In your opinion, nothing more.
Perhaps, but it is one that is somewhat justified by the postings
we have seen. Isn't it, Mr. Dick?!
> I could well say the same about your group, but I won't, because
> that would be bad manners. You obviously do not have the same
> manners.
Speaking in generalities, specially if one has some reason to make
the statement, is definitely less abusive than if one were to
attack an individual, point fingers, and engage in name calling.
That also is a teaching of my faith.
>> Of course no one suggested this, but this is a convenient attempt
>> to insist upon one's mistaken attitude.
> What mistaken attitude is that?
> Some atheists cross-post to your group, and in revenge
I never said this was in "revenge"! If it were revenge, would you
have expected one single posting in response to dozens of postings
by "some" Atheists to Muslim forums?
> you cross-post to ours. Does that make your action justified?
More importantly, it indicates that the abusive reaction of some
Atheists was truly unbecoming, specially when one puts the entire
episode in prospective. Did any Muslim send your forum profanities
or vulgarity, because of the postings by "some Atheists"?!
> If a murderer went up in court and said "but someone else did
> the same thing before me", would he get away with it?
Depends! If he did so in self-defense or to stop someone who was
walking around shooting people indiscriminately, then he is well
justified in what he did.
> Two wrongs don't make a right.
Perhaps the Atheists who replied with Profanities should have held
their peace and realized that three "wrongs" will even make less
of a right!
>>> And of all the cross-posted atheist posts I have seen, I
>>> have yet to see one where atheists invade a religious group
>>> to try to convert them to atheism, in the rude manner you
>>> tried to convert us to Islam.
>>
>> Funny! Using profanity, attacking God, Prophets, and the way
>> of life of the believers is not seen as rude by You,
> Profanity and attacks on god are a different matter entirely, I
> never mentioned them. What I was talking about was proselytisation.
> You were promoting your religion. That is specifically warned
> against in the FAQ, as well as repeatedly noted in various threads
> on this group. The things you say would probably indeed be rude,
> in your newsgroup. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I guess our standards of rudeness and proselytizing are different.
When an Atheist writes, "God does not exist" or ridiculous Islam and
its teachings, I believe he/she is engaged in proselytizing. What
else would he need say to promote Atheism?! Thus, "some Atheists"
were engaged in proselytizing on Muslim forums, but you did not
realize that was exactly what they were doing.
Regardless, please note that I have not read the FAQ of Atheism
forum nor any of the threads there, I only replied to what some
Atheists had posted to Muslim forums. Perhaps, on such a minor
offense, the more appropriate thing would have been for Atheists
to make the best assumption about the intention of an individual
who had never posted in their forum! After all, I did not mention
"Atheism" nor made a comparison between it and Islam in the
article I posted.
In all fairness, I still can not see why so many people, who had
been witnessing all the cross-posting by "some Atheists" to Muslim
forums and said nothing, would react so harshly to one posting by
a believer! These individuals, who were aware of the policy of
their own forum and should also know about the anti-vulgarity
policy of the internet, still are more guilty, because they did
what they did with full knowledge and premeditation.
> For starters, perhaps you could use subject lines such as : "I
> wish to set the record straight about misconceptions of Islam"
> instead of "Introducing Islam" which seems condescending.
I will keep that in mind, thank you. However, with the kind of
postings we had received from Atheism forum, I got the impression
that many Atheism are deluded into thinking they know Islam and
they needed an "Introduction to Islam"!
Incidentally, I did not find any explanation for the title of
your article! What is exactly the basis for claiming I have
double standards? Did I say or do something and objected to
others doing the same? Did I - God forbid - use vulgar language
and objected to others using it? Did I ... What was it exactly?
Peace.
AmericanMuslim
>> research journal articles, which support the assertion that faith
>> and spirituality have a direct impact on the quality and length
>> of life, physical and mental health, prevention, ability to deal
>> with traumatic experiences, outlook on life and death, recovery/
>> survival from disease, etc..
> Stephen Knight <night...@earthlink.net>
> You quote references taken from a believers POV.
I only reported what so many learned researchers have published.
Do you suppose they were publishing their articles from a believer's
POV? If so, why do you? By the same token, is your posting only
from an unbeliever's POV?
> Your objectivity is narrow minded.
Perhaps, if I were to dismiss hundreds of research articles, I would,
more justifiably, could be accused of being narrow minded and biased.
> You mentioned only "true believers" as receiving a medical benefit from
> belief. What about the Japanese or Buddhist countries? What about
Dianetic's?
A "true believer" is someone whose faith reflects in his actions
and life style, regardless of the revealed faith system s/he
subscribes to. Nowadays, there are quite some "Christians", "Jews",
"Muslims", etc. who are religious by ID or association, but whose
life has no sign of faith. For instance, a "Muslim", whose choices
causes him/her not to worship and commit immoral/unhealthy acts,
is not a "true" or sincere believer...
The important fact is that when we speak of a population of
believers, rather than a single individual, we can have a good idea
of the type of life-style we can expect them to engage in and we
can quantify, at least as a norm over the entire population, the
kind of personal and social benefit they can gain from their faith.
For instance, devote believers will avoid practices that put one's
health at risk (promiscuity, consumption of in drugs/alcohol, etc.),
even if such things may appear alluring at different stages of one's
life.
Unfortunately, such generalizations can not be made about an Atheist
population sample, as Atheism neither attempts nor can possibly
attempt to define a good life-style, beyond prejudicing individuals
against a religious one. In effect, Atheism abandons its adherents,
regardless of their socio-economic status, cultural background and
life-skills, to fend for themselves. The society shows to us what
this results in, whether among those who are Atheists or those who
are "believers" in name only.
> You make it sound like a god is taking a personal interest in
> those that believe, and specifically, believe in "your" god.
I never suggested that God is taking a special interest in anyone;
I suggested that being religious is inherently good for us: our
psyche, outlook on life and life-challenges, relationship with
family/society, and health are all benefited by faith and the
life-style it results in. Our life hereafter is another important
aspect for me, but one that I will not emphasize, as I know some
people are willing to listen to any speech, but find the mention
of the words "Creator God" to be the height of rudeness!
> OTOH, if you mean having a delusional placebo to prop up your
> natural ability to fight disease, then of course it works, be
> it Allah, Dianetic's, or the Easter Bunny.
I am well aware of the placebo effect, but I would hardly accept
the conjecture that all of the research results produced to date
(some listed below) can be discounted by the placebo effect.
After all, if faith can have such a uniquely strong effect on all
these aspects of life, then it is something that should be embraced,
not shunned, based on conjecture. Specifically, even if we were to
accept the placebo explanation, we would still be faced with the
reality that a devotedly religious life does result in the benefits
(either because of "placebo effect" or "God's design for man: faith
leads to righteousness and success in this and next life") I've
listed.
I suppose some individuals may claim they can choose (by sheer will
or trial/error) to follow "some" life-style that would allow them to
achieve some of the same desirable benefits in their lives! That MAY
be the case for some special people, but we lack any data to support
that hypothesis. In fact, the society at large and human history
indicate that this can not possibly hold true for any sizable number
of people, during their entire life and across the entire socio-
economic spectrum. In fact, even those who claim (but perhaps
temptations causes them to bend their long-term "beneficial choices")
they can "choose" such a beneficial life-style, still can only limit
their hypothesis to earthly benefits. Their alleged benefits, if
they can indeed achieve and maintain them for any significant length
of time, will be mostly limited to such things as marriage, clean
life, good diet, proper interpersonal relationship, morality, etc.
This is only if such people can indeed "choose" (identify) the right
path and stick to it, solely based on their sheer "choice": a feat
that at least I have yet to see accomplished on any sizable scale.
However, the proven fact remains that sincere faith does inherently
produce these desirable results, as well as many other unquantifiable
benefits (i.e. ease of adherence to that life-style, better outlook
on life/death, ability to better deal with disasters/disappointments,
etc.). This is all even without giving due consideration to what has
brought mankind this far and has the potential of helping each and
every one of its true adherents: God does exist and there is a
hereafter; Those who adhere to the way of life, to the instruction
manual, given to us by God are benefited by their "choice" in many
ways.
You mentioned Easter Bunny! I wonder if faith in Easter Bunny will
comfort terminally ill patients and their families! I also like to
see how belief in such a thing could boast the morale/mental health
of an individual, who may be "unsuccessful" in earthly life and
holds to the belief that this life is all he/she will get? Will
"failure in life" affect his psyche positively or negatively? You
may like to take a close look at the list of articles below to see
a partial listing of the various facets of life (personal and
social), beyond what I am limiting myself to in this posting, that
can be benefited by a sincere faith in God.
The fact of the matter is that faith has the potential of affecting
our very existence and benefit our lives in more ways than curing
physical diseases. Not only it helps us, consciously & subconsciously,
with various aspects of life already mentioned, it also has a positive
effect on our attitude and outlook on personal and social life. On the
other hand, it appears difficult to find any sizable population of
unbelievers who, by choice alone and life-style decisions, have been
able to successfully achieve the same benefits for any significant
period of time. Hypothesis is good, but where is the evidence?! Is it
not obvious that the unbelievers, as a population, encounter great
difficulty in adhering to the "strict" life-style (self-control)
needed to produce these "beneficial" effects and fall way short, even
on those few measurable aspects of a believer's life-style they can
hope to copy?
Please note that we are not discussing individual cases, as there
are individuals who also choose to put a gun in their mouths and
pull the trigger! We are speaking of norms, averages, and patterns
that can be seen in populations holding to the same ideology. All
the studies conducted to date show that population of believers are
positively affected, even as far as health (mental, physical,
spiritual, interpersonal) goes, by their faith and their religious
life-style; they find it rather easy to adhere to such a life
(because of hope of hereafter, fear of God, or other reasons).
Believers receive such benefits naturally and almost subconsciously,
as the direct result of their faith.
> Check the site below:
> http:\\atheists.org/flash.line/health1.htm
Thank you, I did. I am afraid the article, written by an Atheist,
was rather inaccurate in its presentation of the original article
("Religion, spirituality, and medicine", R P Sloan, E Bagiella, T
Powell, Lancet, Vol 353, No 9153, p664-67, 20 Feb 99). Furthermore,
it seems to be "narrow minded", as it neither takes into account
hundreds of opposing articles, recognizes the fact that true faith
does lead to health benefits (even the article they allegedly quote
does mention that religious people are healthier, because of the
life-style they follow), and does not take into account benefits
of religious life, beyond direct physical treatment of illness.
Firstly, its title, "RESEARCHERS CHALLENGE CLAIMS LINKING RELIGIOUS
FAITH, HEALTH", is misleading and not supported by the sole Lancet
article they have used as a reference. The Lancet article in fact
deals with some unrealistic ethical concerns of the authors (that
physicians may force people to believe) and the desire to have more
empirical data to be able to link faith with direct treatment of
Physical diseases.
Indeed, the authors made it amply clear what they were considering
in the following way, "Here, we consider methodological issues that
pertain to studies of physical disease outcomes." Thus, we see they
did not even attempt to consider other kinds of benefit realized,
either in helping with disease, recovery, life/death issues, nor
with the overall issue of "health"! I wonder how could the Atheist
authors convey an impression which is not directly supported by the
article they refer to?! If you take a look at the research articles
I posted, you will see the exact opposite evidence.
The Lancet article does in fact hint that a religious life-style has
beneficial affects on Health, both Physical (in form of prevention)
and emotional/mental. However, I believe the authors have missed the
point, since, even within their area of concentration, they neither
considered every study conducted to date (for instance see the list
below) nor gave enough credit to the beneficial aspects of faith,
beyond direct physical disease treatment (I guess they are afraid of
the whole "faith healing" thing). For instance, faith, and the life-
style it mandates, helps in prevention, improved ability to cope with
terminal condition, promotion of positive relationship among
caretakers and caregivers, and psychological conditions, etc.
Usefulness of Faith in recovery/treatment and "health" need not be
limited to directly curing of the disease! Specifically, we need not
have empirical evidence to tell us that "faith" by itself can cure
terminal Cancer to accept the fact that faith can have a positive
affect on the treatment/recovery process and the overall mental
health and morale of the patient.
The authors of Lancet article must have been aware of the way all
medical drugs are taken through toxicity studies and clinical trials
and put in use. However, they express such extreme requirements for
faith based studies that makes me question their impartiality! For
instance, they write, "confounders such as behavioral and GENETIC
differences and stratification variables such as age, sex, education,
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and health status MAY have an
important role in association between religion and health." I
suppose such variables, particularly the GENETIC concern, MAY also
be very valid even for clinical trial of drugs. However, it is a
fact that such concerns do not commonly come into play, when we are
conducting trials on most medications! We do not even know of the
pathway in which most common medications work, but we still do use
them, because we can statistically see that individuals who are given
such medication (in a randomized trial) do better than those without
those treatments. Why would the authors have a different standard for
usefulness of "faith", when their results are also from randomized
trials?! Sadly, the authors of the Atheist review worsen the
situation by taking part of this quote and suggesting that all of
the studies checked by the Lancet authors suffered from design flaws.
Far from the truth, the authors of the Lancet article often admitted
that such variables had been taken into account, but discounted the
outcome by attributing it to such things as the life-style ("choices")
that devote believers (by the very definition) adhere to!
To their credit, the Lancet authors recognize that a rather large
portion of the population and physicians do realize that faith helps
or has a place in dealing with illness. However, they go overboard
when they try to exaggerate their unrealistic "ethical" concern that
the caretakers, instead of being aware of the faith and spiritual
needs of their patients, may become in effect preachers and dictate
that all patients should have a specific type of faith! Point well
taken, but one beyond consideration of the topic taken up by the
Atheist review.
The authors of the Lancet article do admit that many of the studies
on devotedly religious people did find reduction in morbidity and
mortality. However, they try to discount such findings by saying that
these may have been due to strict adherence of those people to "codes
of behavior that proscribe behaviors associated with risk" (smoking,
drug/alcohol consumption, free sexual activity, psychosocial stress,
etc.) or that, in specific studies, had only been proven for a woman
population!!! It looks to me that they are doing everything to avoid
admitting to the obvious: faith and the life-style it promotes do
benefit health, if not in directly treating all physical illnesses,
in prevention and supporting capacity - both physical and mental.
However, the authors of Lancet article do admit, "There is no ethical
objection to co-worshippers discussing medical issues in the context
of a shared faith. Indeed, a through understanding of a patient's
religious values can be extremely important in discussing critical
medical issues, such as care at the end of life... No one can object
to respectful support for patients who draw upon religious faith in
times of illness." I wonder why the authors of the Atheist article,
neglected to point out such writings and, instead, preferred to draw
on such fears and conjectures as "However, until the ETHICAL ISSUES
are resolved, suggestions that religious activity will promote health,
that illness is the result of insufficient faith, are unwarranted."
Indeed, I hope no one makes the mistake of equating illness with a
weakness in health.
Perhaps, the Lancet closing paragraph should have been the one
quoted by the Atheists, who apparently were over-eager to reject
the mountain of evidence supporting benefits of faith on health
(mental, physical, spiritual, interpersonal) and other personal/
societal issues: "However, between the extremes of rejecting the
idea that religion and faith can bring comfort to some people
coping with illness and endorsing the view that physicians should
actively promote religious activity among patients lies a vast
uncharted territory in which guidelines for appropriate behavior
are needed urgently." Obviously, the Lancet article is one trying
to deal with ethical issues of Physicians actively encouraging or
preaching any kind of belief, not one which "Challenges" all link
between faith and health benefits."
And now, you may read the following summaries and appreciate my
stance that neither the Lancet article nor the one written by the
Atheists have refuted the beneficial affect of true faith on health
(Physical, Spiritual, Mental, Social). You may also have a better
appreciation of why I tend to think of Atheism as a "faith" (in no
God) and a cult some of whose adherents resort to any unbecoming
measure to make sure they are not alone in their mistaken and self-
destructive way.
Peace.
==============================================================
Religious involvement and subjective well-being.
Ellison CG
J Health Soc Behav, 32(1):80-99 1991 Mar
CONCLUSION:
"The positive influence of religious certainty on well-being,
however, is direct and substantial: individuals with strong
religious faith report higher levels of life satisfaction,
greater personal happiness, and fewer negative psychosocial
consequences of traumatic life events."
==============================================================
Religious commitment and health status: a review of the research
and implications for family medicine.
Matthews DA; McCullough ME; Larson DB; Koenig HG; Swyers JP;
Milano MG
Arch Fam Med, 7(2):118-24 1998 Mar-Apr
CONCLUSION:
"A large proportion of published empirical data suggest that
religious commitment may play a beneficial role in preventing
mental and physical illness, improving how people cope with
mental and physical illness, and facilitating recovery from
illness."
==============================================================
Religion's role in promoting health and reducing risk among
American youth.
Wallace JM Jr; Forman TA
Health Educ Behav, 25(6):721-41 1998 Dec
CONCLUSION:
"Relative to their peers, religious youth are less likely to engage
in behaviors that compromise their health (e.g., carrying weapons,
getting into fights, drinking and driving) and are more likely to
behave in ways that enhance their health (e.g., proper nutrition,
exercise, and rest). Multivariate analyses suggest that these
relationships persist even after controlling for demographic factors,
and trend analyses reveal that they have existed over time.
Particularly important is the finding that religious seniors have
been relatively unaffected by past and recent increases in marijuana
use."
Use of hospital services, religious attendance, and religious affiliation.
Koenig HG; Larson DB
South Med J, 91(10):925-32 1998 Oct
CONCLUSIONS: Participation in and affiliation with a religious community is
associated with lower use of hospital services by medically ill older
adults,
a population of high users of health care services. Possible reasons for
this
association and its implications are discussed.
==============================================================
The relationship between religious activities and cigarette smoking in
older adults.
Koenig HG; George LK; Cohen HJ; Hays JC; Larson DB; Blazer DG
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 53(6):M426-34 1998 Nov
CONCLUSIONS: Religiously active persons are less likely to smoke cigarettes,
and if they do smoke, smoke fewer cigarettes. Given the association between
smoking and disease, and the widespread prevalence of both smoking and
religious activity, this finding has implications for public health.
==============================================================
The role of religion/spirituality in coping with caregiving for disabled
elders.
Chang BH; Noonan AE; Tennstedt SL
Gerontologist, 38(4):463-70 1998 Aug
This study examined how religious/spiritual coping was related to specific
conditions of caregiving and psychological distress among 127 informal
caregivers to community-residing disabled elders. Support was found for the
hypothesis that religious/spiritual coping influences caregiver distress
indirectly through the quality of the relationship between caregiver and
care recipient. Caregivers who used religious or spiritual beliefs to cope
with caregiving had a better relationship with care recipients, which was
associated with lower levels of depression and role submersion.
==============================================================
Research on religion and serious mental illness.
Koenig HG; Larson DB; Weaver AJ
New Dir Ment Health Serv, (80):81-95 1998 Winter
CONCLUSION:
According to this review, religion plays a largely positive role in mental
health; future research on severe mental disorders should include religious
factors more directly.
==============================================================
Believing in patients' beliefs: physician attunement to the
spiritual dimension as a positive factor in patient healing
and health.
Hamilton DG
Am J Hosp Palliat Care, 15(5):276-9 1998 Sep-Oct
CONCLUSION:
"The spiritual dimension has been demonstrated by research to be
an important and fundamental aspect of human functioning, one
that positively affects healing and health and should be mobilized
as an active part of the health care of persons. Moreover,
physicians have an obligation to acknowledge the potential role
of spirituality in the health and healing of patients and to form
a therapeutic alliance with patients that takes their spirituality
into account and affirms its importance. Questions about persons'
spiritual beliefs and practices, their values, and what they
consider meaningful in their lives should become part of the
initial medical interview and an ongoing focus in the physician-
patient relationship."
==============================================================
The role of private prayer in psychological recovery among midlife
and aged patients following cardiac surgery.
Ai AL; Dunkle RE; Peterson C; Bolling SF
Gerontologist, 38(5):591-601 1998 Oct
CONCLUSION:
"This study addressed multifactorial determinants of postoperative
psychological recovery and the effects of private prayer, a form
of spiritual coping, on the recovery of 151 older patients. Results
show that most patients pray about their postoperative problems and
that private prayer appears to significantly decrease depression
and general distress one year post-CABG."
==============================================================
The relation between religiosity, selected health behaviors, and
blood pressure (BP) among adult females.
Hixson KA; Gruchow HW; Morgan DW
Prev Med, 27(4):545-52 1998 Jul-Aug
"RESULTS: The direct effects of religiosity on SBP and DBP were
more substantial than the indirect effects through the intermediate
health variables, suggesting that religiosity may be associated
with lower levels of BP via a direct pathway, such as improving
the ability to cope with stress. In general, DBP was more
influenced by religiosity than SBP and the dimensions of "intrinsic
religiosity" and "religious coping" were most influential. Results
also indicated that "religious experiences" may exert a greater
beneficial effect on DBP in older (50-80 years) age groups."
==============================================================
Measuring the results of faith
Hudson T
Hosp Health Netw, 70(18):22-4, 26-8 1996 Sep 20
CONCLUSION:
"Guiding patients to health takes more than technological wizardry,
wonder drugs, and pleasantly decorated surroundings. In fact, to
an increasing number of institutions, faith is the missing
ingredient. Faith in a higher power. Faith in oneself. Faith in
the possibilities for recovery. Welcome, then, to the new high-
tech, high-touch world, where pastoral care meets managed care.
The results may startle you."
==============================================================
Spiritual well-being, religiosity, hope, depression, and other
mood states in elderly people coping with cancer.
Fehring RJ; Miller JF; Shaw C
Oncol Nurs Forum, 24(4):663-71 1997 May
"CONCLUSION: Intrinsic religiosity and spiritual well-being are
associated with hope and positive mood states in elderly people
coping with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses
must assess and support intrinsic religiosity and promote
spiritual well-being in elderly people coping with cancer."
==============================================================
Use of hospital services, religious attendance, and religious
affiliation.
Koenig HG; Larson DB
South Med J, 91(10):925-32 1998 Oct
Participation in and affiliation with a religious community is
associated with lower use of hospital services by medically ill
older adults, a population of high users of health care services.
Possible reasons for this association and its implications are
discussed.
==============================================================
The relationship between religious activities and cigarette smoking
in older adults.
Koenig HG; George LK; Cohen HJ; Hays JC; Larson DB; Blazer DG
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 53(6):M426-34 1998 Nov
CONCLUSIONS: Religiously active persons are less likely to smoke
cigarettes, and if they do smoke, smoke fewer cigarettes. Given the
association between smoking and disease, and the widespread
prevalence of both smoking and religious activity, this finding has
implications for public health.
==============================================================
The role of religion/spirituality in coping with caregiving for
disabled elders.
Chang BH; Noonan AE; Tennstedt SL
Gerontologist, 38(4):463-70 1998 Aug
This study examined how religious/spiritual coping was related to
specific conditions of caregiving and psychological distress among 127
informal caregivers to community-residing disabled elders. Support was
found for the hypothesis that religious/spiritual coping influences
caregiver distress indirectly through the quality of the relationship
between caregiver and care recipient. Caregivers who used religious or
spiritual beliefs to cope with caregiving had a better relationship
with care recipients, which was associated with lower levels of
depression and role submersion.
==============================================================
Research on religion and serious mental illness.
Koenig HG; Larson DB; Weaver AJ
New Dir Ment Health Serv, (80):81-95 1998 Winter
CONCLUSION:
According to this review, religion plays a largely positive role in
mental health; future research on severe mental disorders should
include religious factors more directly.
==============================================================
The relationship between a patient's spirituality and health
experiences
McBride JL; Arthur G; Brooks R; Pilkington L
Fam Med, 30(2):122-6 1998 Feb
"CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest an association between
intrinsic spirituality and a patient's experience of health and
pain. Assessment of spirituality may be important for family
physicians to consider as a supplement to patient interviews."
==============================================================
Attitude and disposition: do they make a difference in cancer
survival?
Creagan ET
Mayo Clin Proc, 72(2):160-4 1997 Feb
CONCLUSION:
"A social support system and an element of spirituality and
religion seem to be the most consistent predictors of quality
of life and possible survival among patients with advanced
malignant disease."
==============================================================
Correlates of spiritual well-being in terminally ill persons with
AIDS and terminally ill persons with cancer.
Pace JC; Stables JL
J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care, 8(6):31-42 1997 Nov-Dec
CONCLUSION:
"Findings in this study and similar future studies can better enable
health care providers to allocate time and resources to various
terminally ill patient populations to achieve higher quality care
outcomes in general and greater spiritual well-being in particular."
==============================================================
Medical student and patient attitudes toward religion and
spirituality in the recovery process.
Goldfarb LM; Galanter M; McDowell D; Lifshutz H; Dermatis H
Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse, 22(4):549-61 1996 Nov
CONCLUSION:
"It may be clinically relevant to train medical students in the
potential importance of spirituality in addiction treatment so
that they can incorporate spirituality into the treatment of
addictions."
==============================================================
Religiosity as a predictor of well-being and moderator of the
psychological impact of unemployment.
Shams M; Jackson PR
Br J Med Psychol, 66 ( Pt 4)():341-52 1993 Dec
CONCLUSION:
"Furthermore, the hypothesis of religiosity as buffering the
impact of unemployment was confirmed. Results are interpreted
in terms of transactional models of stress, and the benefits
of religious belief and practice for unemployed people..."
==============================================================
Religious well-being in noninstitutionalized elderly women.
Zorn CR; Johnson MT
Health Care Women Int, 18(3):209-19 1997 May-Jun
CONCLUSION:
"Spirituality is recognized as an important component of health
care practice with elderly people... Descriptive research
revealed a high level of religious well-being among the participants
and significant positive correlation between religious well-being
and the variables of social support and hope (p < .001)."
==============================================================
Health locus of control and helpfulness of prayer.
Saudia TL; Kinney MR; Brown KC; Young-Ward L
Heart Lung, 20(1):60-5 1991 Jan
CONCLUSION:
"Findings suggest that prayer is perceived as a helpful, direct-
action coping mechanism and warrants support by health personnel."
==============================================================
The religion-health connection: evidence, theory, and future
directions.
Ellison CG; Levin JS
Health Educ Behav, 25(6):700-20 1998 Dec
==============================================================
Religious activity improves quality of life for ill older adults
Reyes-Qrtiz CA; Ayele H; Mulligan T
J Am Geriatr Soc, 44(9):1139 1996 Sep
==============================================================
Getting religion seen as help in being well
Mitka M
JAMA, 280(22):1896-7 1998 Dec 9
==============================================================
AmericanMuslim
> "Atheism produces"? What a laugh. When was the last time a group of
> atheists...
Did you hear one of reasons offered by Chinese government for
banning the group they are arresting is that they have "anti-Atheist"
views?!!!
Incidentally, do you think the unfortunate soul who lost his mind due
to gambling in the markets and resulted in the death of 13 people
believed in God and a hereafter? Would someone who believes
and is aware of God and Hell/heaven have done so?! The problem
is that no one will say he was an Atheist, even though his actions
prove the contrary.
AmericanMuslim
>>By the way, do you think you will live forever?
>
>I fuc$^$%% hope not.
I say, praise to God for Death: it is the great equalizer, as every
tyrant and oppressor will also have to taste death.
AmericanMuslim
>On Wed, 28 Jul 1999 20:04:24 -0400, "AmericanMuslim"
><America...@spamfree.com> in alt.atheism wrote:
>
>Again, I apologize for the cross-post, but AmericanMuslim has insisted
>on starting several new threads and re-adding all of the Islamic
>groups. Followups set to alt.atheism -- again.
I wonder why someone, who believes this is all irrelevant to Islam
and/or Atheism, is a sign of "rudeness", and calls for personal
attacks, would continue with such cross-postings?
I, on the other hand, feel that all the postings, by those who profess
to be Atheist and advocate that their personal "choice" and "sheer
will" is enough to produce decent people and societies, is beneficial
to both sides, as it shows the claim in practice. I am certain many
will have realized another benefit of having faith and fear of God...
Peace.
AmericanMuslim
<7ntcmu$555$1...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
> Islam outlaws a great deal, but at the same time, much abuse is allowed.
Perhaps, you should realize that you are basing your view and judgment
based on your the value system and norms of the socio-economic class,
nation, and period of time you are raised in. I see it very abusive of
women that every couple of minutes a woman is raped in the United
States, every few minutes girls 13-15 year old give birth to another
unwanted child (not to mention adults), that over 60% of marriages ends
in divorce, that women are treated as sex objects in all walks of life, that
over 75% of American women would want to stay home, but can not
afford it, that some men abandon their families, that .... I guess we
just have different views and standards. The question is what do the
great majority of Muslim women, including new converts feel about the
life-style Islam advocates? Those who care may read it below:
Women Issues: http://www.jannah.org
The Muslim Woman: http://members.aol.com/TrueIsOne/index.html
=====================================================
maff91
wrote:
Why? There's no tithe or zakat to pay.
>
>
>peace.
Ibn Rochd (Averroes)
http://x37.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=392393753
--
L.P.#0000000001
MOHAMMED HANIF
Michael Alexander wrote in message
<7ntcmu$555$1...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>MOHAMMED HANIF <aax...@hemscott.net> wrote in message
>news:7ntb1n$6mn$1...@lure.pipex.net...
>> right when he wrote that without God all is allowed? Life would be trully
>> awful if the implications of atheism held sway. People would have to
>invent
>> a god to prevent chaos (the Social Contract?).
>
>countries are run, it looks like under Islam, all is allowed. In
>Afghanistan, women starve to death because they aren't allowed to work.
>Slavery was outlawed in Saudi Arabia in 1962, but some Saudi princes still
>Islam outlaws a great deal, but at the same time, much abuse is allowed.
>
>Muslims take this seriously. I mean that in a bad way. Their moral
>standards come from religion instead of from conscience. Many Muslims have
>a pathological lack of conscience. Most atheists have a conscience and are
>more moral than Muslims. Of course, I'm using my own standards to judge
>people.
My point was that without God there is no conscience; infact the whole moral
order falls down and is shown to be a sham. If humanity is the result of
blind chance then there is no responsibility -to others or to oneself- and
all attempts at preventing people from harming others is as oppressive as
the harming act.
Atheists should follow through the implications of their beliefs and discard
God-based morality if it is a lie. The objection that most athiests are kind
people and just wouldn't go around hurting people simply isn't pertinent:
this is an assertion that has to be established by evidence (how would one
test the evidence?) and what happens when the kind atheist is confronted by
the bigger, stronger atheist who wishes to harm him?
Without God to decide the moral order there is no possibility to judge
whether one act is good and another bad. Pain and pleasure are not
universally valid criteria because there are benighted souls who enjoy
inflicting and receiving pain or who just don't care.
Thus the athiest is forced to construct a lie and to oppress others so as to
be able to live alongside them.
It is no form of rational argument to generalise from ones own experience of
meeting unscrupulous Muslims (human beings!) to conclude that all Muslims
are unscrupulous or that their beliefs force them to be. In ordinary
language this is prejudice and bigotry and if it was in relation to a racial
or ethnic minority group it would be rank racism.
Our level of discourse should be more enlightened.
If the majority of Muslims you have met appear to you to be without a
conscience then perhaps your particular circumstances have forced you to
meet Muslims who have not felt the compunction to live by the ideals of
Islam, either premeditatively or because they have not been taught Islam
correctly. You should not argue from that to the whole of the Muslim world.
I haven't studied formal logic but I bet it would be covered under some such
rule as 'the Fallacy from Personal Experience'.
If I knew any atheists I might well say the same but then it would just be
childishness.
>I have read portions of the Quran and studied Mohammad's life. I am not
>impressed. There are lots of religions out there, so I'm not going to
waste
>my time reading the rest of the Quran and Hadith.
Have you ever thought that you read a poor or biased translation of the
Quran? Heaven knows there are very few good ones! You should also be aware
that Islam is unique in its relation to the West in being uniformly regarded
as the 'enemy' since it first announced itself on the consciousness of the
West. It is acknowledged by fair minded Western scholars that Islam alone of
all the other religions has consistently been subject to misinformation and
propaganda.
Have you ever thought that your reactions to Islam are clouded by what you
read and see from sources of information that are themselves inimical to
Islam? Penguin Books and Ted Turner are not the friends of the Muslims! How
can any judgement you make be considered fair minded if this is true?
I am truly sorry for you that you were not able to find the answer because I
believe (obviously) that the Quran and the 'life-example' of the Prophet are
true and the only path that will lead you to ultimate happiness.
Your stance is however irrational and intemperate. Atheist often use the
argument that with so many religions claiming to be the sole truth that
either they are all bunkum or there is no way of ascertaining which is true.
But in ordinary life we do not follow this line of reasoning. In a court
case there is a clash of claims by the disputung parties: the judge doesn't
simply wring his hands and say that neither party is correct, rather the
claims are judged and a decision made.
Similarly, the fact that there are roughly five major religions claiming to
be (solely) correct does not preclude one from in fact being truthful.
Each of the world's major religions produces evidence for what it preaches,
it is your task to look at this evidence and make a decision.
I say that it is your task to do this because, firstly, the questions that
religion pose to mankind deal with the fundamentals of life and any thinking
person should be concerned with them, and secondly, because you happen to
take a stance on the issue and are happy to publicise it.
>You talk about open
>mindedness. Aren't people who change religions more open minded than
people
>who just adopt their parent's religion?
It is true that the vast majority of present-day Muslims have adopted Islam
because it is the religion of their parents. But again, you are missing the
point. This forum is not about those people just as it is not about or for
those atheists who simply adopt the atheism of their parents or dominant
culture.
Those people couldn't be bothered with what we are doing here and would
consider it a sad waste of energy. It is we (yes even you!) who believe that
the unexamined life is a life not worth living that contribute to forums
such as these.
I adopted the religion of my parents and I am waiting open-mindedly to be
convinced by the arguments of any atheist. And if you're not in the job of
trying to convince me to your position (or even to chip just a little at my
beliefs) then you have no point in being here :o)
Finally, we can argue about the character of life Muslims lead in the world
today: whether Muslim women are oppressed or whether this or that Muslim
country is a nice place to be, but that is a wholly separate debate.
My concern was that atheists often smugly claim that theists engage in
wishful thinking when they themselves are prima facie guilty of the charge.
Dostoevsky (and Nietzsche) was right.
AmericanMuslim
>American_Muslim <America...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:93293290...@news.remarQ.com...
>> I. Islam and Muslims
>>
>> The name of this religion is Islam, the root of which, Silm or Salam,
>>means peace.
>
>I have heard that this is a lie that Muslims use to convince non-Muslims
>that they are nice people.
I do not believe it is prudent to accept things one has "heard"; would
you not agree? Perhaps, your understanding of the world "peace" is
not the same as mine! "Peace" does not imply surrender to evil or not
exposing falsehood. The concept of "faith" without action/deeds, as
promoted by some Christian denominations, is foreign to Islam.
It is unfortunate to see that some people are rather quick to accept such
stories, because the secular societies they live in mocks at religion in
various ways and, at least at a subconscious level, tries to convince the
general public that only individuals who are backwards, unlearned, weak,
etc. would be willing to accept faith in a Creator God! Obviously, that is
far from the Truth. I am glad to report that, in my experience, people
with sincere faith are better equipped to handle the challenges of life and
are not likely to seek professional psychological help! In a way, one can
say having faith has its advantages...
Peace.
Srivatsan Seshadri
MOHAMMED HANIF wrote:
> My point was that without God there is no conscience; infact the whole moral
> order falls down and is shown to be a sham. If humanity is the result of
> blind chance then there is no responsibility -to others or to oneself- and
> all attempts at preventing people from harming others is as oppressive as
> the harming act.
Two things: First, you have got to show that God is indeed responsible for moral
order. Secondly, you also have to show that life is not a blind chance when
pre-biotic chemistry suggests that it could well be so; that is, under right
atmospheric conditions, physio-chemical processes do take place to give rise to
lif as we know it.
>
>
> Atheists should follow through the implications of their beliefs and discard
> God-based morality if it is a lie. The objection that most athiests are kind
> people and just wouldn't go around hurting people simply isn't pertinent:
> this is an assertion that has to be established by evidence (how would one
> test the evidence?) and what happens when the kind atheist is confronted by
> the bigger, stronger atheist who wishes to harm him?
>
> Without God to decide the moral order there is no possibility to judge
> whether one act is good and another bad.
God cannot decide moral order for such an order as we know it is relative.
Furthermore, God is Absolute. He cannot decide anything.
> Pain and pleasure are not
> universally valid criteria because there are benighted souls who enjoy
> inflicting and receiving pain or who just don't care.
>
> Thus the athiest is forced to construct a lie and to oppress others so as to
> be able to live alongside them.
And this is exactly what theists do -- Oppress others by invoking God's
"commands". History is replete with such examples.
>
> I am truly sorry for you that you were not able to find the answer because I
> believe (obviously) that the Quran and the 'life-example' of the Prophet are
> true and the only path that will lead you to ultimate happiness.
And herein lies the problem. You use relativism to counter an atheist's argument
and then hide behind absolutism when you claim that "Quran and the
'life-example' of the Prophet are true and the only path that will lead you to
ultimate happiness." You have got to account for the fact that 84% of the
world's population doesn't care about Quran or Muhammad. So, only from your
perspective is what you believe is true; it could be downright false from
someone else's perspective.
>
>
> Your stance is however irrational and intemperate. Atheist often use the
> argument that with so many religions claiming to be the sole truth that
> either they are all bunkum or there is no way of ascertaining which is true.
..and the theists counter the atheists in exactly the same way. They claim that
only they possess the truth and no one else.
>
> But in ordinary life we do not follow this line of reasoning. In a court
> case there is a clash of claims by the disputung parties: the judge doesn't
> simply wring his hands and say that neither party is correct, rather the
> claims are judged and a decision made.
>
> Similarly, the fact that there are roughly five major religions claiming to
> be (solely) correct does not preclude one from in fact being truthful.
Huh? please explain this point.
>
>
> Each of the world's major religions produces evidence for what it preaches,
> it is your task to look at this evidence and make a decision.
>
> I say that it is your task to do this because, firstly, the questions that
> religion pose to mankind deal with the fundamentals of life and any thinking
> person should be concerned with them, and secondly, because you happen to
> take a stance on the issue and are happy to publicise it.
Religion does not have a monopoly over it. Infact, religion is quite irrelevant.
You can be perfectly irreligious and be concerned about fundamentals of life.
Not all great philosophers of the yester years were "religious." Buddha and
Mahavira were not religious. Buddha was agnostic and Mahavira an atheist.
Infact, the "religion" of Jainism is predominantly atheistic and Buddhism mainly
agnostic. They ponder about life as much as "religions" do.
[the rest snipped]
Elf Sternberg
In article <rq6aima...@corp.supernews.com>
"AmericanMuslim" <America...@spamfree.com> writes:
>Let us think of it like this: If the attitude of the entire society
>were that this life is it (we have to get as much as we can out of
>it) and there is no accountability for our actions in the hereafter,
>what do you think would happen?
Y'know, if fear is all that's keeping you from turning on your
fellow man and mistreating him, that's not really morality, is it?
That's simply fear, the way a dog fears being beaten with a stick. It
has nothing to do with how you want to be treated or how your fellow man
wishes to be treated. It has no _humane_ value to it at all. Your
"morality" is indistinguishable from "the law of the jungle," where the
biggest, baddest dude on the block (in this case, God) sets the laws and
you follow them or he hurts you.
I'm dismayed at your writing "we have to get as much as we can
out of this life" as if, somehow, that automatically translated to
material or hedonistic greed. It shows a deep and ugly mistrust of your
fellow whuman beings. Take a look at the Mars Pathfinder scientists, or
the non-religious Doctors Without Borders; these are people who act not
out of some religious compunction, but because "getting much out of
life" means exploring great questions or alleviating great human
suffering. These are men who act from the highest human principles, all
without God.
To the secular humanist atheist, the theist is the one carrying
on the traditions of intertribal mistrust, hatred, and warfare; theists
are the ones who speak with a position from which there is no room for
negotiation, no chance at reconciliation, no hope of appeal. Theists
live with a set of edicts dictated by the past and enforced by threat of
personal prosecution; atheists live with a set of morals reached by
consensus and maintained by voluntary participation.
>So, you do not speak based on experience, when you reject faith in
>God?!
I do not have experience with fire-breathing Dragons, but I
reject the notion that they exist. All I have to do is take a look
around me at the natural world and ask myself if it's reasonable, having
been to enough places, to suppose that these creatures might be hiding
somewhere.
The same is true about God.
>You need to ask yourself, "what prevents the average person on the
>street from committing the same evil acts as criminals out there?"
I presume that the average person prefers to live in a sane and
stable society. Criminals are a destabilizing influence and so, to the
best of our ability, by consensus we regulate some behavior and by
empower people to enforce those regulations. No God is required for
this to happen.
>Of course, but without religious standards we may not even agree
>on what "good" is!!!
Nonsense. "Treat your equals as you would want them to treat
you" is so fundamental to our personal beings that societies that have
tried to live without have literally been selected out of existence.
We have simply given a label, "good," to the behavior that most suits
our species as a social animal.
Elf Sternberg
"MOHAMMED HANIF" <aax...@hemscott.net> writes:
>This is my first email on the net so I apologise for any faux pas.
Well, it's not an 'email to the net,' it's a post to a newsgroup
on Usenet, but it'l your first time so we'll let it slide.
>To proceed...religious claims need to be evaluated as do all truth claims.
>Islam provides its own test for validating its truth claims: namely, read
>the Quran and study the life-example of the Prophet Muhammad. If you are at
>all open-mined then you shall perceive the truth.
That's a little bit contradictatory, isn't it? Islam demands
that you test it for the truth, but also sets the ground rules by which
you may know them. It's a bit of chasing its own tail. In the end, you
merely conclude that Islam is true because it says it is. That's not
logical.
>In such a case a sincere seeker of the truth should go to a
>knowledgeable Muslim to clarify any doubts.
And what if all efforts fail?
>I have question I'd like to ask any atheists out there: wasn't Dostoevsky
>right when he wrote that without God all is allowed?
That depends greatly on what you think is now forbidden. I
mean, yes, the Quran does forbid things, but Christianity is forbidden
different things, Hinduism has yet another list, Buddhism more, and so
on. Standing back and looking at this strange collection of "forbidden"
things, it looks like what is really forbidden is, well, nothing outside
what is physically impossible.
>Life would be trully awful if the implications of atheism held sway.
Given what we see happening in China, Khazakstan, Central
Africa, and Afghanistan, it would seem that at least one of the
implications of atheism is definitely holding sway: there is no all-
powerful, all-merciful being out there who is going to save people from
their suffering. If we are to alleviate suffering, we must do it
ourselves.
On the other hand, I find the implications of Islam to be truly
awful. Allah, the all-merciful, all-powerful, has set down a system by
which people get into paradise that has very little to do with whether
or not a person is good or not. I mean, sure, the edicts in the Quran
are intended to organize a working society and so they dictate a system
of interaction that tends to make people behave in a manner we call
"good," but there are many other societies full of decent, hard-working,
honest men and women who, nonetheless, end up in the burning place Allah
has set aside for unbelievers. This is neither wise nor merciful; it
feels like blackmail. A god who relies on blackmail to ensure to his
edicts is immoral and evil.
And there is no evidence, no proof, no rational reason to
believe that there is any survival after death, that there is a paradise
or a torment after death. Nobody has come back from the dead to tell us
of what they experienced, probably because there is nothing to
experience once the brain shuts down and blood stops flowing.
>People would have to invent a god to prevent chaos (the Social
>Contract?).
No, people would have to grow up as a society. A man within
must learn to treat his fellow man with respect, not because "Allah Says
So" but because it's simply the right thing to do, it sets the
groundwork by which he and everyone else is treated with respect as
well. It's the principle by which the happiness of as many as possible
is achieved at the limit of satisfying the selfishness of a few.
If the only thing holding you back from mistreating your family
and cheating your business associates is your fear of punishment, you're
"morality" is a very shallow one. It's really subjugation to a supposed
all-powerful being. "Might makes right" may work for mindless animals
and the humans who want to act that way, but for people who exercise the
capacity for thought, principle and human dignity are what really
matter.