World of religion

[Mario B]

Raamsade;818358 wrote:

I don't "accept" it because it is not true. There is no such thing as Social Darwanism

I think you lost credibility with most SOLers with that statement. The Nazis were eugenics and believed as Aryan master race they had the right to dominate while purging society of claimed inferior elements. Remember the concept of the survival of the fittest?

 

The Jews were only seen as an obstacle to their master plan. To maintain the purity and strength of the Aryan race, the Nazis sought to exterminate Jews, Romani, and the physically and mentally disabled.

[Raamsade]

Mario B;818362 wrote:

Remember the concept of the survival of the fittest?

Yes. Do you?

 

Nazi Aryanism and Christian antisemitism are two sides of the same coin. Both are premised on blind faith and prejudice not on reason and evidence that underpin scientific concepts such as survival of the fittest.

[Mario B]

^LOL, you keep obfuscating!

[Johnny B]

^^ Give it a rest Mario, display no more Cognitive distortions.

 

Hitler in his autobiography (Mein Kampf ) stated:

 

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.".

 

The underlying argument of Atheists too commit atrocities is but a meek acceptance of the atrocities committed in the name of the gods.

[wyre]

Miskiin-Macruuf-Aqiyaar;817981 wrote:

My theory of waxee diinta ugu daba harin online has to do everything this: In offline kama hadlaan diin, probably some of them 'act' like inay Muslimiin yihiin, oo dadka iskuma soo jeediyaan. And I bet markee tacsiyeynaayaana Eebbe ha u raxmado, Illaah ha u naxariisto marxuumka/marxuumata iyo wixii la mid ah ayee adeegsadaan iyagoo isqarinaayo. Haddii lagu salaamana 'salaamu caleykum,' wacäleykum salaam iyagoo lasoo boodaayo arkeysaa.

 

Online is their refuge waxee real life ku sameyn karin. Yaa ogaado even meherkooda wadaado ayaa loo wacaa oo gacanta ayee wadaadka mehrinaayo qabsan doonaan, if they haven't done already iyagoo iska dhigaayo Muslimiin. And I bet none of their parents know diin naceybka ay online ku jilaayaan.

 

What is even weirder is that some of them are hardcore qabyaaladists. Very weird. Dad diintooda ka baxay, qabyaaladdana ku dhex jiro.

Munaafuqiin waaye soo lama dhihi karo Macruufow?

 

Sidi abdullahi ibn ubayi waqtiga rasuulka iska dhigi jiray muslimiinta hortooda nin muslim ah markuu gaalada u tagana gaalo isaga dhigi jiray??

[Mario B]

Johnny B;818428 wrote:

^^ Give it a rest Mario, display no more Cognitive distortions.

 

Hitler in his autobiography (Mein Kampf ) stated:

 

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

The Man is in jail when he makes that statement, I suppose he has the God given right to defend himself from whatever accusations leveled at him.

 

My Lol, was with Raamsade and his refusal to accept the term "social Darwism", I suppose you share his sentiment too!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinism

 

Islam is clear when it comes crimes against humanity or any other attrocities and whoever oppresses or commits them has only wronged his own soul.

[Garnaqsi]

Mario B - Help me here. You're arguing that Hitler feigned a belief in God so as to defend himself? That's almost as bad as GaroweGal's argument that 'it is immaterial and irrelevant that Hitler himself professed to be Roman Catholic as no believing person is capable of inflicting such inhumane and indescribable atrocities'. (By the way, I'm surprised Jacpher and Che -Guevara didn't throw tomatoes at you for providing a link to wikipedia, lol).

[Mario B]

Garnaqsi;818703 wrote:

Mario B

- Help me here. You're arguing that Hitler feigned a belief in God so as to defend himself?

No, I'm not arguing that.

[Raamsade]

Mario B,

 

Why are you citing Wikipedia? You can't defend the oxymoronic and pseudoscientific concept of Social Darwanism by appealing to Wikipedia any more than you can defend Homeopathy by citing Wikipedia. Wikipedia, or any other site, may mention Social Darwanism but that tells us nothing whether it is legitimate scientific discipline or not. Truth can not be established by mere reference to a site especially one that can be edited by any body.

 

Furthermore, racists have always tried to rationalize their bigotry by utilizing the reigning paradigm of the day. The reigning paradigm of Darwin's time was religion, so racists the Bible and Quran to justify their racism. Ever since science replaced religion as the reigning paradigm, bigots started to use science to justify their bigotry. But there is nothing in "Darwanism" that justifies racism at all. In fact, Evolution Theory tells all humans are of common origin and human equality is contingent historical fact.

 

Lastly, I've noticed a lot of you are whinging about the answers you're getting. Here is a possible remedy: if you need better answers, ask better questions.

[Mario B]

I agree Raamsaade, bigots will use whatever predominate world view that exist for their bigotry, wether be scientific or religious reasons. This puts to bed that argument that if there was no religion then the world will be a better place,If need be people will find a reason to hate a group or justify their crimes against another. I have no problem with science, for me it tells the how of existence, my religion teaches me the why.

 

"In fact, Evolution Theory tells all humans are of common origin and human equality is contingent historical fact." Raamsade

 

I believe religion[iSLAM] beat Darwin to that claim.

 

Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?[Quran 21:30]

 

As a matter of fact science has not added an iota to that aya (statement) which was given around 14 centuries ago . :cool:

[LayZie G.]

GaroweGal;818103 wrote:

I think it is immaterial and irrelevant that Hitler himself

professed to be Roman Catholic as

no believing person is capable of inflicting such inhumane and indescribable atrocities

. Equally, Mao’s, Mussolini’s and Stalin’s murderous systems were also

atheism inspired ideologies

. Not to mention that European imperialists also used “Social Darwinism” to justify their appalling and atrocious expeditions of civilising the savages. Therefore it is not surprising that modern day atheists like yourself cannot fathom that atheism inspired ideologies such as fascism, Nazism, racialism, and imperialism have resulted so much death and destruction in planet earth.

How do you definite 'indescribable atrocities'? War massacres, rapes, invasions, slavery, Islamic expansion, etc? Just give me some examples here.

 

More importantly, who are the believerS? Muslims and/or people of the book?

 

Poster, you're loose with your facts and vague with your terms...

 

By believer, if you mean muslims, then I can give you the most recent example, Think about your beloved

continent, think 19th century, think about the hercules of the jihad war, think of Cusman(uthman) dan fodio,

think sokoto caliphate.........give yourself sometime to reflect on the history or if you want me to go old school,

 

pre-modern, then think about:

 

Islamic conquest of Syria

Islamic conquest of Egypt

Islamic conquest of North Africa

Islamic conquest of Persia

Islamic conquest of Afghanistan, etc, etc, etc...

 

or think about Islam and slavery in the frontier of Africa....think about the lasting impact of such expansion...think about the lost of lives....in the millions....

 

or is it because you would rather not discuss the history of Islamic jihad because its a legitimate war thats waged against so called non-believers?

 

There is evidence that believers (muslims) do commit atrocities and you dont have to go back far into history...

 

 

 

Besides, I want to know why Hitler, Stalin, and Mussosilini are part of this discussion when religion had very little

to do with fascist Italy and Nazi Germany...and more importantly, religion had less to do with Stalin and Soviet

union...what the soviet, Fascist Italy, and Nazi Germany had in common is that they all led totalitarian movements that gave rise to their total state.

 

Its not enough that you invoke Hitler and Stalin's name, you have to explain why you believe Fascism, and

 

Nazism were "murderous system' and/or was atheist inspired ideologies'. (whatever that means, as I still dont

understand what atheist inspired ideology is suppose to mean?)

 

You have to provide evidence,

you just cant hitler your way out of this debate without properly backing your position.

 

 

I believe its important for everyone involved to understand who and what they are discussing.

 

I believe its important for you understand what fascism is....know the concept of totalitarianism. Its not enough to google a war here, a name there and state it as facts, when in fact those 'facts' are delusional lies.

 

For example, historians developed a definition for so called 'fascism', and it states:

 

‘Fascism is a set of ideologies and practices that seeks to place the nation, defined in exclusive biological, cultural, and/or historical terms, above all other sources of loyalty, and to create a mobilized national community.’

 

 

Now, look up the dictionary for atheism and provide a proper definition or better yet, consult with SOL resident

experts.....and post your definition...compare and contrast with atheism and let me know if the above definition

resembles the principles of atheism.

 

 

Also, what you are forgetting is that fascism was a response to a post-war society afflicted with economic dislocation, political instability. Ask yourself, what happened in late 19th century, early 20th century that gave rise to

fascism and subsequently led to the so called 'atrocities' you speak of. If your answer is religion, then you're

mistaken.

 

There was a strong reaction against democratic values because it produced failed liberal institutions that could

not meet the demands of the modern industrial society.

 

This was precisely why Mussolini and hitler rose to power. Think about the 1930s, stock market crush,think great depression.

 

Be prepared, and If you decide to call Hitler's name, you might want to know your history. Specifically, you might want to know the weaknesses of the Weimer Republic.

 

Do you know what what Germany inherited in post-WWI, think of the versailles legacy.....ever heard of the term, hyperinflation?

 

YOu have your work cut out, so I will leave you to it.......

 

 

Best Wishes,

 

LayZie G.

[Garnaqsi]

Mario B;818765 wrote:

Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?[Quran 21:30]

I'm baffled as to why people take the above verse as a miracle of sorts. The myth of the parted heavens and earth is all over the place. As a matter of fact, many cultures maintained it through-out history. Even in Hesiod's Theogony (one of the most popular creation narratives -- still taught at universities) the first stage of the creation of the present world was the separation of the heaven and earth. What makes yours a miracle? It seems to me what we have here is a glorified myth with no scientific content whatsoever.

[N.O.R.F]

^Why not answer my question?

[wyre]

ISka daaya muranka badan sxbayaal, Garnaqsi, Raamsade, johny dhowr su'aalood iiga jawaaba, Yes Or no kabadan idinkama rabo

1 Ilaahey jiritaankiisa ma aaminsantihiin? haddey maya tahay

2 Adiga jiritaankaaga ma aaminsantahay? haddey haa tahay

3 yaa ku abuuray, ama kusameeyay, halkeese kasoo farcantay? don't say hooyadey iyo aabehey ayaa iska key dhalay:D

4 Aaden iyo xaawo miyaad ka abuuranteen, mise some monkeys As scientists say

5 haddii aad monkeys ka abuuranteen monkeys ka marki hore yaa abuuray

Afsomaali inaa iigu jawaabtaan ayaan jeclaan lahaa

[Garnaqsi]

N.O.R.F;818805 wrote:

^Why not answer my question?

My answer will probably bore you because I don't have a particular pet-peeve (moral or otherwise) with the Koran. I'm just not convinced by its divinity. I see no evidence for the claim that it's a divine work. People purport 'scientific miracles' in attempts to show its supernatural nature but unfortunately these more often than not turn-out to be just like the one I was just addressing, so I don't think they even come close to being adequate at doing that. Can some sort of independent verification system be used to confirm that it's indeed divine? If yes, then good, but how? If no, then there's probably no good reason for anyone to believe it.