This topic has probably been discussed before, but I don't visit this forum regularly, so please forgive me. I'm very worried about my future as a Muslim here in western Europe. There is so much anti-Islam propaganda, especially young people seem to hate Islam and Muslims to the extent that there can be no coexistence in the future......
That's my opinion based on what I see, hear and read. I believe a future Holocaust of Muslims is not as far-fetched as some people believe. All western children are brainwashed with anti-Islam propaganda by Islamophobes and atheo-fascists (Godless atheist bigots), so how could one be optimistic about the future?
I have to come to terms with the fact that I may have to migrate to a Muslim country. I can't imagine living in the West in the year 2030-2040.
Last edited by Argamemnon; 10-19-2009 at 11:08 PM.
Radical atheist can be definitely compared to fascism. The term islamo-fascism is baseless, as we can't compare religious doctrines more than 1 000 year old to modern, european doctrine which was born in beginning of XX century, which is fascism. The same way we could accuse many catholics of catholico- fascism and orthodox jews of judaism- fascism. To the term fascism better match people like Richard Dawkins, who think in totalitarian way,who want to control every aspect of our lifes, with despise to other's ways of life, exaclty like Benito Mussolini did.
This country is dying because of a lack of men, not a lack of programs.
To the term fascism better match people like Richard Dawkins, who think in totalitarian way,who want to control every aspect of our lifes, with despise to other's ways of life, exaclty like Benito Mussolini did.
That's pretty amazing. Do you really believe that Richard Dawkins wants to control every aspect of your life?
That's pretty amazing. Do you really believe that Richard Dawkins wants to control every aspect of your life?
Peace
Peace,
On his site, some atheists were saying that religion should be banned, and religious people "punished". I take them very seriously. Atheo-fascism certainly exists.
That's my opinion based on what I see, hear and read. I believe a future Holocaust of Muslims is not as far-fetched as some people believe. All western children are brainwashed with anti-Islam propaganda by Islamophobes and atheo-fascists (Godless atheist bigots), so how could one be optimistic about the future?
I have to come to terms with the fact that I may have to migrate to a Muslim country. I can't imagine living in the West in the year 2030-2040.
I sometimes feel this way too.
It seems that by chasing after this "free and fair" society, people want a society where there is no spiritual dimension, only material, social and scientific "progress" towards some unseen and ever-elusive goal of "happiness". Everything else that gets in the way of this is seen as regressive and undesirable.
As Eaton writes in his book, Remembering God:
"The Catholic philosopher Gustave Thibon compares modern civilization to train which is hurtling towards the buffers. With every mile it covers the air conditioning is improved and the seats get softer. It offers every convinience except for one. There is no alarm bell."
If the Muslims are assimilated or forced to migrate, who will ring the alarm bell? The laughable "ethics committees" of science? What is ethics without any faith in anything? I worry not just for Muslims in this society, but for this society in general. They don't know where they are going and are slowly being convinced that Muslims, or Islam, is to blame for all the world's problems.
On his site, some atheists were saying that religion should be banned, and religious people "punished". I take them very seriously. Atheo-fascism certainly exists.
The trouble is that "fascism" is little more than a catch-all pejorative term used to label any system of thought you don't like. If, instead, you use a dictionary definition of fascism and try to apply it to atheism, it's a bit of a stretch:
a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism. [dictionary.com]
Does that really describe atheism, or even the sorts of atheists you are talking about?
On the point you mention, I can almost understand what the "atheo-fascists" are getting at, but they are far too dogmatic about it. I think we would all be much better off without religion, and I fervently hope that we grow out of it as a species, but I don't have the right to stop anyone from believing in religion if that's what they want. Nobody should be punished just because they believe something that happens to be untrue. It's only if people's beliefs lead them to cause harm to others that punishment is appropriate.
In any case, none of this really addresses my question to Amadeus85, about his mystifying claim that Richard Dawkins wants to control every aspect of our lives. It's definitely the first time I've ever heard that one!
^^ Well, it's true that fascism is a governmental system. We could use the term fanaticism or extremism instead. I don't use the term fascism to label a system of thought I don't like. I have nothing against atheists as long as they leave me alone. I oppose fanaticism and bigotry and hatred.
The trouble is that "fascism" is little more than a catch-all pejorative term used to label any system of thought you don't like. If, instead, you use a dictionary definition of fascism and try to apply it to atheism, it's a bit of a stretch:
Does that really describe atheism, or even the sorts of atheists you are talking about?
On the point you mention, I can almost understand what the "atheo-fascists" are getting at, but they are far too dogmatic about it. I think we would all be much better off without religion, and I fervently hope that we grow out of it as a species, but I don't have the right to stop anyone from believing in religion if that's what they want. Nobody should be punished just because they believe something that happens to be untrue. It's only if people's beliefs lead them to cause harm to others that punishment is appropriate.
In any case, none of this really addresses my question to Amadeus85, about his mystifying claim that Richard Dawkins wants to control every aspect of our lives. It's definitely the first time I've ever heard that one!
Peace
If, when you say "we would all be much better without religion", do you seriously believe that, for one second, without religion there would be no wars? Wars have been, and always will be, by-and-large about one thing: natural resources. Considering that modern civilisation is the major consumer of these resources, I think that you can look forward to many more "wars in the name of consumerism" in the future.
Oh, but without religion (by which you mean Islam) you are assuming there won't be the random terrorist attack here or there in civilised Europe (by people who have no religious knowledge), so I guess by "people" being better off you must mean Europeans.
If, when you say "we would all be much better without religion", do you seriously believe that, for one second, without religion there would be no wars?
Nope.
Oh, but without religion (by which you mean Islam)
By which I actually mean "religion"...
you are assuming there won't be the random terrorist attack here or there in civilised Europe
Nope.
so I guess by "people" being better off you must mean Europeans.
....I think we would all be much better off without religion, and I fervently hope that we grow out of it as a species,....
I vehemently disagree with this notion. I have seen what life is like without religion and it most certainly is nothing to be proud of.
The hedonistic lifestyle that is the social norm of today is embarrasing to even hear about: students go to University to go to clubs to quite literaly waste themselves on alcohol (which is THE mother of ALL evils in any society), wake up at God-forsaken hours to finish and sometimes start an assignment that is due in the next 4 hours.
Doesn't sound too bad? Ok let's try another: A visit to the pub is far more frequent than a visit to one's OWN parents and family. It's regarded as the one-stop-show for all your needs: feeling down, have a drink; passed an exam, have a drink; absolutely pissed out of your mind, have a drink!
Oh and the fun doesn't end there, no no no. As if the above are not bad enough, gambling is another fun pass time of today: yeah another waste of time and money. Your own hard-earned money.
Of course, don't spend a penny on those who go hungry every night (and die as a result), don't spend any money on orphans or on these victims of XYZ event (unless of course MTV said to do so!) - just keep spending it on yourself. Yeah, because hey it's your hard earned money and you don't have to give a **** about anyone else....and anyone who tells you what to do is a complete retard and should mind their own.
That's a life without religion. What a wondeful life to lead. Compare and contrast that with a life that encourages the exact opposite, and I think you'll agree with me that a life without religion is pretty crap.
As a final comment: It's actually ironic that you want religion to die out but there will always be at least one gauranteed man-made religion; that of money. It makes the world go round right now and it's the only reason we get out of bed in the morning. It's a very sick thing to hear about tbh and only reinforces my belief in religion as a whole.
Someone said to the Prophet, "Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them." The Prophet replied, "I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse." (Muslim)
Actually, it was based on several individuals who I met at university. Common factor was no religion (or secular, I forgot what the PC term is nowadays), though there were also hindus, sikhs and even some muslims (embarassingly enough!) who joined the frey. Of course, I have no way of telling how devout each and any of them were but I go on what I know.
Alcohol and gambling have existed alongside religion in many societies for centuries.
Peace
All but one: Islam.
However, I should say I don't believe Hawkins wants to control every aspect of our lives, no (so in such respect, I agree with you). But, he and his ilk really have no legs to stand on when they disrespect religion as a whole citing it as whatever nonsense they seem fit for that day, be it means to terror, subjucation, disrespect of XYZ and so on; especially in light of my previous post which highlights 3 of the biggest social problems of this world and funnily enough 3 of the major harams in Islam.
Someone said to the Prophet, "Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them." The Prophet replied, "I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse." (Muslim)
Actually, it was based on several individuals who I met at university.
Well, that's fair enough as a description of behaviour among some students. However, it's a little different from a description of "life without religion". Especially as some of the students you describe actually had a religion.
However, I should say I don't believe Hawkins wants to control every aspect of our lives, no (so in such respect, I agree with you). But, he and his ilk really have no legs to stand on when they disrespect religion as a whole citing it as whatever nonsense they seem fit for that day, be it means to terror, subjucation, disrespect of XYZ and so on;
Maybe you should familiarise yourself with some of his arguments before you dismiss them. His name is Dawkins, by the way.
Well, that's fair enough as a description of behaviour among some students. However, it's a little different from a description of "life without religion". Especially as some of the students you describe actually had a religion.
Indeed, but my point was removing religion WILL not remove those 3 problems (which are real problems the western world is actually facing right now, this instant). And to be honest, these are far more detrimental to any individual or society than anything else, be it ideology or otherwise. Far, far worse certainly than any religion (especially ones that outright condemn it!)
Maybe you should familiarise yourself with some of his arguments before you dismiss them. His name is Dawkins, by the way.
Peace
Oh I'm familiar with his arguments but they all essentially boil down to God probably doesn't exist, your religion is man-made and you're deluded for believing in such a concept. Which is quite a lot of adhoms, assumptions and acts of passive agression for a man who believes in logical debates.
P.s; Did I say Hawkins instead of Dawkins? Sorry, my bad.
Someone said to the Prophet, "Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them." The Prophet replied, "I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse." (Muslim)
a lot of the people in the western society havent sat down and actually thought about religion, Whether there is a after life
True. A lot of people don't find they have any need to think about religion at all.
Can you imagine a a group of guys round a table in a pub, and one says ok lads, do you think theres an after life, People just dont do that,
They do where I live, although the person doing the asking is often me!
Its hard enough us muslims remembering about Allah swt every day
Think about why that might be.
format_quote Originally Posted by aamirsaab
Indeed, but my point was removing religion WILL not remove those 3 problems (which are real problems the western world is actually facing right now, this instant). And to be honest, these are far more detrimental to any individual or society than anything else, be it ideology or otherwise. Far, far worse certainly than any religion (especially ones that outright condemn it!)
I didn't claim removing religion would remove those problems.
Oh I'm familiar with his arguments but they all essentially boil down to God probably doesn't exist, your religion is man-made and you're deluded for believing in such a concept. Which is quite a lot of adhoms, assumptions and acts of passive agression for a man who believes in logical debates.
Those are conclusions, not arguments. Have another look at why and how he comes to those conclusions, and then you'll be able to start attacking his arguments.
Does that really describe atheism, or even the sorts of atheists you are talking about?
Communism.
I think we would all be much better off without religion,
Not really. High suicide rate, teenage pregnancy, drug abuse, depression and the list goes on forever! Not that I am saying this does not occur in religious communities but in the UK these are major problems and I would say the vast majority of people in the UK are secular.
format_quote Originally Posted by nightstar
a lot of the people in the western society havent sat down and actually thought about religion, Whether there is a after life
Yeah they're too busy thinking about alcohol.
Last edited by GuestFellow; 10-20-2009 at 11:11 PM.
I was looking at myself talking to myself and I realized this conversation...I was having with myself looking at myself was a conversation with myself that I needed to have with myself.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks