Attitude to Gratitude

Of course not.
We can't help what we believe.

Fan, I've dealt with everything there already and you're offering nothing new, whilst hiding behind obvious lies, as usual.
You have two simple questions to answer, which you've failed to address for months.
I'm not going to deal with your latest round of crap until you do so, regardless of how you attempt to dishonestly spin it.

You've read the investigation by Judge Lukaszkiewicz.
You know that he mentions bomb craters at Treblinka and that he had workers carry out excavations there.
"Since a bomb crater 4 to 5-meter deep is present at the said location the digging was begun in this crater." JL
"GPR detects any large-scale disturbances in the soil structure to a normal effective depth of four or five meters" Krege.
"They found no soil disturbance consistent with the burial of hundreds of thousands of bodies, or even evidence that the ground had ever been disturbed." Krege's report.
Fail.

 

Could you elaborate on what kind of punishment?
A persons ethnicity or skin colour is out of their control and not chosen by the individual, unlike one's faith/religion/cult of choice. So mocking someones faith is fair game unlike racism, questioning certain aspects of a religion could be interpreted as mocking by those who blindly follow their cult unconditionally. But we are still entitled to a degree of freedom of speech in our culture and shouldn't fear punishment as a result. Of coarse a person may be brainwashed into following a religion/cult from an early age so I guess it can be argued that there wasn't a choice in that case. But punishing people for mocking what others choose to believe is ridiculous and extreme.

 

When did I ever say this?

And I ask again: do you tell your "gay friends" that you think they are abnormal?

Being gay isn't a belief by the way.

 

There's a massive difference between mocking somebody's belief and sending them to jail without trial because of it, Ammaar.
The two are entirely unconnected.

How can you disagree with homosexuality, by the way?
It's not a belief or a claim.
That's like saying, "I disagree with people finding redheads attractive".
It makes no sense.

 

Being a BNP member is a way of life and it's who those people stand for. Doesn't mean I'm not going to mock it when they doing things which are wrong.

Religion should never have special rules just for it.

Welllllllll ... not really though? That's true in more liberal Islamic households, but if you try to denounce Islam in a strict Muslim family, even if you don't believe in Islam anymore, you'll be ostracised and kicked out of the family. Which in a culture which values and places such a vital importance on family bonds basically ruins your life.

Not saying that's specific to Islam, or even strictly religious families in general. Hell, I know plenty of white, atheist families who'd do the same thing if their son or daughter said they were gay.

 

People have also been sent to jail for being homosexual, but I wouldn't compare that to your belief that it's wrong.
Should Islam be banned for being disrespectful and unreasonable to gays?

I'm sorry, but this is just wrong.
Given the way that gays have been treated by society down the years, why would anyone choose to be gay?
They can't help who they're attracted to any more than we can.

 

I said earlier you were a more erudite version of Fan. Looking at the way you deflect away questions, accuse people of saying things they haven't and simply refusing to acknowledge points it's becoming clear you're not that much different. A better speller. I'll give you that.

 

In response to Ammaar

As an atheist I find the idea that one of the many religions/cults is in fact more worthy than any other fairy tale/fantasy completely incomprehensible. I think the religion one adopts is mostly a matter of circumstance and enviroment, more to do with a doctrine as opposed to free will.

In the relatively new age of the Internet there is a chance those who have "their" faith imposed on them may come to the conclusion they've been fooled, and thus free themselves of the constraints and rules made up by psychologically damaged and/or those with an ulterior motive. But I assume there is a mass of believers who are still shielded from the real world and free thinking.

This would depend on the level of "mocking" You gave this as an example of mocking....

You and I have different ideas on what mocking is.

Getting jail time for innocently believing in a God or mocking those who believe in the wrong God is inexcusable.
Two mongs don't make a right.

I believe in the man in the moon and he told in a vision that I have to wear pants on my head, only eat corn flakes on the 3rd Tuesday in January,September and November and build a church from cheese to worship all that is holey.If I follow his instructions I'll live for an eternity in a utopia, if I don't my spirit will be tortured indefinitely.

please log in to view this image

Anyone who mocks my belief should serve time in prison! Do you realise that's not dissimilar to how atheists view most religions/cults and therfore believe it their duty to mock/criticise.

I fail to see how someone can deny evolution,the burden of proof will always be with theists, but that's a can of worms not to be opened here.
You used the word "naturally" please explain why there's homosexuality in the natural world of the animal kingdom. Do the animals make a conscious choice to be gay?

 

You can be accepting of something without agreeing with it or believing it's abnormal. As you probably are about any number of things.

Attack his beliefs if you want, but don't tell him what his beliefs are and then attack those.

 

Aye.

 

So the infertile shouldn't marry, then?

What are you basing that opinion on?
I have a feeling that your gay friends would disagree.

Again, what are you basing that opinion on?
It's not scripture, is it?

Why would a supposedly just deity give some people extra tests?
Doesn't sound very fair, does it?

 

No, you didn't, but you did say that the reason for a man to have a partner is to reproduce.
Not only can the infertile not reproduce, but in your opinion that'd be because of a choice made by god.

There have been various scientific studies that suggest that there is definitely a genetic link to homosexuality.
Several have taken place since the 90s.
It's still a contentious subject, though.

You're comparing acts that lead to the harm of others with one that doesn't.
Abusing children and murdering people is wrong because of that, not because some people find either activity distasteful.

Why?
They're not harming anyone, so what's the problem?

God knows best just doesn't cut it, for me.
If there's a good and just god, then surely he'd let everyone know the rules of the game that they're playing, wouldn't he?
Being damned for all eternity for committing a foul that you were unaware of wouldn't be justice, would it?
If Allah exists, then why go the route of prophets and messengers?
Why not just give us all the inner knowledge of what's a sin and what isn't?

 

I'm sure the BNP, or any other number of political and spiritual belief systems which I could mention, claim their ideology promotes peace and harmony on the whole as well. Except for the bits which don't.

There are, factually, bits of Islam which don't promote peace and harmony, just like the other Abrahamic religions. In fact, there are parts of all those religions which are as racist, sexist and homophobic as the charter of the BNP. Why am I allowed to mock the BNP but not Islam, in your book?

You call it a misconception, but it's the path which the majority of Muslim households take. That's a pretty widespread "misconception". Jihadists and al-Qaeda and the like ... that's a misconception of Islam. I doubt what I was referring to could be referred to as such.

 

Islam is all about anger, spite and having all Muslim countries

But unlike the BNP they follow a *****phile

 

You're not getting it. It's "pure common sense" to a lot of people to look at the pieces of text in the Qur'an which don't promote peace and harmony and claim that Islam as a whole doesn't. There's no special rule of "common sense" which applies to you. All the reasons you stated in your previous post could simply be flipped round on Islam.

Religion gets no special protection against saying and doing things which are wrong. Nor should it.

Ok. I wasn't entering a debate about whether they exist. They do, it's factual; you can look them up in the Qur'an if you like. Same with Christianity and Judaism.

No, it doesn't. When it's a minority. When the vast majority are doing it, like they do in the case of what we were talking about ... then it becomes a bit silly to claim there's not something inherent in the religion which is causing the behaviour. The culture of disowning and ruining the life of anyone in the family who chooses to give up their faith in the Islam comes directly from the teachings of Islam. Islam (like some other faiths) teaches that non-believers are outsiders.

 

And your reason for that is that homosexual couples cannot reproduce, yet you don't have a problem with heterosexual couples that can't.
As such, I don't think that's the reason that you object to gays.

No. We have loads of kids that aren't looked after properly as it is. We don't need more.
Using current technology homosexual couples can reproduce anyway, so it's not an issue.

IVF, adoption, etc. eliminate your first objection and the second is an unsubstantiated, faith-based claim.

The rules set out in each of those books are unproven, contradictory and backed by a ton of mistakes.
If you're going by the Torah then hell doesn't even exist.
Jews had no concept of it.
Did god invent it a couple of thousand years ago?
The closest that they had was Gehenna, literally the Valley of Hinnom, which is a real place.
Hell is just outside Jerusalem. They do tours.

That's not what it says in the holy books that you've referenced, though.
This is just your version of it, as it's more palatable.

The evidence for the existence of a god is paltry, though.
You're essentially suggesting that god rewards those who believe things without requiring evidence.
What sort of test is that passing?

Surely a more sensible test would be to set out the rules clearly for everyone and then see who follows them?
No failures due to ignorance or misinformation and no isolated tribes getting a free pass, plus no bias to those born in the right place at the right time.
Knowledge of god's existence clearly doesn't negate free will, either, as there are examples in each Abrahamic faith of those with personal experience of the deity, who still reject him.