True, but honestly the biggest threat to world peace is either Russia, or us the USA. True, but we stated our right we are coming. We did it more official, and we do not go around saying if you mess with us we nuke you. For us iit is more if you nuke you we nuke you.
It's not about killing me @haroush although plenty of religious people are doing that it's that midevil backwards ideology that ALL religions have but islam gets the most crap for the truth is the bible quran ect ect are all written 2000 years ago and are no longer applicable to people's lives this is the 21st century and it's appalling to me to see people actually believing in things like noah's ark and creationism time to grow up embrace science and stop following a book written thousands of years ago
Some of them do, but many of them don't. As with most religious and politics issues--it's not that simple. But I agree that those who do should obviously not be allowed to or given that kind of platform. In places like the U.K they have plenty of it though.
Yes i agree islam has a fanatical problem but the only reason christianity doesn't is christians don't follow most of the bible's teachings whereas muslims follow all of there quran or in some cases just the violent verses which btw there are plenty of in the bible and @emilrose ok but we can all agree they were written many many years ago when times were very different the bible claims women who are raped should marry there rapist look it up if you don't believe me do you support that? It also claims that if a man marries a woman and she is found to not be on a virgin on there wedding day that he should take her back to her father's house and stone her this is what i am talking about that backwards midevil crap that is spewed all through the bible i know because i've read it old testament and new i've even underlined passages where it says these things so no the bible is not applicable to peoples lives
The Bible is book (actually made up of 'books') with *a lot* of layers and is best not taken entirely literally, at least in many parts. Additionally, the 'Christian bible' has two very different sections within it. Some Christians would argue that stoning was no longer applicable and/or acceptable according to their NT.
Why would you want to follow a book that advocates for stoning non virgins and women having to marry there rapist it's ridiculous weather you follow these teachings or not is irrelevant your praising a book that would literally stone you for wearing the dress that your wearing in ur profile picture
Hmm not really showing off as much skin as that dress does is clearly againist the bible which says you must dress modestly and cover yourself people would call you a whore and a harlot and kill you no doubt about that
Again, you're using terms such as the 'bible' without acknowledging that it's divided into two separate parts. Yes, I may be breaking one of the 613 commandments in the Hebrew Bible but there's much worse things people can do than wearing a dress.
The Martians may have the manpower of China, the stupidly stubborn resolve of Russia, that's pretty intimidating. But add his majesty the supreme glorious leader to the mix, and Earth as a fighting chance.
@dietorangesoda - Christians that talk about "the new convenient" are enormous hypocrites to me, but that is what they are talking about. Basically, there is no stoning in the New Testament. Christians take "some" of the laws from the OT, but ignore almost all Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Numbers. As distasteful as I find the hypocrisy, and Christians generally, I am happy that they take this New Convenient - the other option is literaly stoning in the public square, and they would do it!
@TBR, I actually agree that some Christians are hypocrites because of how the *pick and choose* aspects of the OT and ignore general things in it such as strong--once again, I was merely using this an argument that they would use to dietorangesoda--I'd advise her that it is helpful to analyze things from different perspectives and not always view things in black and white, which clearly, she absolutely does.
As for your comments about Buddhism: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/19/world/asia/sri-lanka-muslim-aluthgama/.... *anyone* can be violent in *any* religion. It is simply biased to focus exclusively on one religious group [I.E Christians] and claim that they are the worst.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2015/07/violent-christian-mob-attack-muslims-doing-eid-prayer-in-indonesias-papua/ See how easy this is @Emilrose? Seriously, just finding a story about a Buddhist mob does little to sway my lineup of religions by "peacefulness"
@TBR -- You seem to have a lot of different deep seeded hatreds of the most random groups which you fail to look beyond when formulating opinions of different groups...And I emphasize OPINIONS. You seem to be an American that hates America for....Well no real reason. Do you even enjoy being called an American, or would you rather be a different nationality? Honest question there.
@TBR -- Then why such animosity toward the core foundations of America? You can't really be a true patriot (as it correlates with America) if you don't at least have respect and understanding for the core foundations, including Judeo-Christian culture.
@TBR -- I didn't say you have to like it; I said you have to respect and understand it. What you're doing is like going to Iran and saying you love Iran and you're a patriot of and for Iran....But you hate Islam. Makes no sense.
Again, I'm still not really seeing any substantive evidence that Christians are actually the biggest 'bother' in this world. The problem with your argument [especially in saying things such as 'most' Christians] is that it pretty much labels an entire group of people--that consist of *individual* personalities. Billions of Christians exist--perhaps it's worth looking at other countries bar your own--many of whom are peaceful and do not fit any of the criteria that you've outlined.
Actually TBR, it really sounds like you should get out more. I've met many Christians who are good people--would you say that the Christians in counties such as Iraq/Syria are 'personally unpleasant'--when you haven't even met them? You are actually referring to one of the most persecuted groups in the world at the moment, and again, the vast majority of these people avoid conflict and do *not* impose themselves on others'.
@MakeSensePeopleDont - I don't agree that "foundation" is the right word here. Regardless, I will buy it for sake of the argument, and STILL see no problem reconciling my love of my secular nation with general distaste for Christians. I know plenty about Judeo-Christian culture, and plenty about Judeo-Christian religions. Christianity does not give you the exclusive right to the term Patriot.
@TBR -- I agree it does not corner the market on the word Patriot....Else I would not have used Iran as an example. But foundation is the correct word, and the foundations of America are Judeo-Christian.
@Emilrose - OK. Lets look at the "spreading the gospels". That is a bother to me. There are religions that have no such built-in requirement. Most Christians assume (rightfully from the Bible) that it a responsibility of Christians to evangelize.
@Triangle -- Correct in a sense. It is not founded ON CHRISTIAN RELIGION. This was the founders intent; to create a free nation in which any one person or group could practice a religion of their choice as they chose. "Founded on" and "foundations built on" are two completely different terms with two completely different meanings.
@reece -- Go back to school....Reading comprehension. Nobody said ANYTHING about creating a single religion, I said, FOUNDATIONS BUILT ON or FOUNDATIONS BUILT AROUND. Never did I EVER say, America only allows the free practice of a single religion.
@reece -- Go back to school....Reading comprehension. Nobody said ANYTHING about creating a single religion, I said, FOUNDATIONS BUILT ON or FOUNDATIONS BUILT AROUND. Never did I EVER say, America only allows the free practice of a single religion.
@TBR -- and so is every other mainstream religion. It's because it is what is written. However, as we have seen time and time again, the word of "God" is malleable with change in time and cultural acceptance. These things do not change overnight; specially because a law was passed by a government. Relax, give it time my friend.
Nope, here you go again with the 'most' Christians'. If your assertion was correct, this would mean the majority of Christians globally, go around attempting to convert people to their religion; which they do not. One could also argue that Islam is a religion in favor of conversion. The only Abrahamic religion that doesn't prioritize such a thing is Judaism. However, I will state that your 'spread the gospels' reference is open to interpretation. Rather than literal conversion it could simply mean showing/exposing 'the gospels' to people.
@reece -- and this is why I don't like to talk to you. You have NO comprehension of grammar, reading comprehension or logic and reasoning. You are stuck on the first amendment which has absolutely NOTHING to do with the argument. Free practice of religion and FOUNDATIONS BASED AROUND, are two COMPLETELY different things.
Yep, abortion clinics in the U.S. Why is that you always seem to think you're the only country that exist? Many Christians in Europe and elsewhere may disagree with abortion but they do not necessarily go 'harassing' abortion clinics. What is even more ridiculous is that you're claiming 'most' of billions of people 'cause more problems than any other religion'. Your entire stance is based on personal bias, simple as that.
@MakeSensePeopleDont You're the one getting into synonyms. Something that is based around and something that is based on still lead to the same conclusion (within the context of the constitution) an indirect meaning can still lead to the same inference as a direct one.
@Emilrose - "Nope, here you go again with the 'most' Christians'. If your assertion was correct, this would mean the majority of Christians globally, go around attempting to convert people to their religion;" Are you saying that better than half of the Christians ignore the dozens of calls from both the new and old testaments to spread the faith? || "One could also argue that Islam is a religion in favor of conversion." - They do. They are above Christians on my bothersome religion list. As I think I said up-thread, I have more Christians around me, making them more PERSONAL bothersome. || "The only Abrahamic religion that doesn't prioritize such a thing is Judaism." - Yup. A big reason they come in UNDER other Abrahamic religion || "However, I will state that your 'spread the gospels' reference is open to interpretation. Rather than literal conversion it could simply mean showing/exposing 'the gospels' to people." - Interpreter how you like. I don't like it, it has a negative effect in my society, it is a bother to me.
@reece -- HEY!!! Congrats! Yes! Foundations based ON and Foundations based AROUND are in fact the same exact thing. Foundations based on/around, however, is DIFFERENT than stating "You can only practice a single religion." Foundations based around ---- prohibited from --- see the difference?
MakeSensePeopleDont "and so is every other mainstream religion. It's because it is what is written. However, as we have seen time and time again, the word of "God" is malleable with change in time and cultural acceptance. These things do not change overnight; specially because a law was passed by a government. Relax, give it time my friend." - I presume this was about evangelizing. That is not really true. The Abraham religions do, others do not.
@reece; @triangle --- You ready for this? Your lives are based AROUND THE FOUNDATIONS of personhood that your parents instilled upon you. This does NOT mean you are restricted to only the career path your parents have taken and the decisions they have made in their lives. It simply means, the FOUNDATIONS of your lives and what you perceive to be right and wrong as a person are based AROUND what they instilled onto you.
@Emilrose - "Yep, abortion clinics in the U.S. Why is that you always seem to think you're the only country that exist?" - It is the country I can draw the most personal experience from. My opinions will be mostly formed from the environment I operate within. I don't deny that, and accept some level of criticism, but by necessity and honesty will speak from what I know best. || "Many Christians in Europe and elsewhere may disagree with abortion but they do not necessarily go 'harassing' abortion clinics." - Just less. They are still there. || "What is even more ridiculous is that you're claiming 'most' of billions of people 'cause more problems than any other religion'. Your entire stance is based on personal bias, simple as that." - Well, we are talking opinion. I have no available statics stating who is the most bothersome. I can, and have, provided stats to back individual points. Don't like it, I had no illusion you would like it.
@MakeSensePeopleDont I'm independent enough, but I see your reasoning. But would you care to explain how there are Judeo-Christian foundations in US culture? There's plenty of other religions in the USA, and we're generally considered a melting pot.
I'd like to jump in here and say that by Judeo-Christian values, MakeSense isn't necessarily talking about spirituality and such. Certain values like individual responsibility and entrepreneurship came along with certain Christian sects (the Puritans, primarily). These values DID set the stage for our Constitution, and were instilled upon the masses by religion. I think it's important to recognize that. HOWEVER, these values can easily be separated from religious thought, which is what the Founders did. We can respect *these* values without lending any additional merit to religious belief. Which is why I agree with everything TBR brought up on anti-science/progress stances from Christians.
@reece; @Triangle -- See this article for your starting point: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2007/09/the_judeochristian_values_of_a.html
Judeo-Christian Values have a foundational role in America, beginning with the Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."
Since the pursuit of happiness, as Sigmund Freud surmised, is tied to human love and to creative work and play, the principles of American Judeo-Christian Values can rightly be summarized as the honoring of God-given Life, Liberty and Creativity[...]
@MakeSensePeopleDont - I don't entirely disagree with your premises, but the line from the Deceleration resonates as Deists. The founders had a Christian background, so even the Deists would be Christian Deists, but... Point remains.
@MakeSensePeopleDont First off, the Decleration of Independence has NO relevancy to american law. It was simply a document to the world explaining why the founding fathers are starting their own country. You could easily say that "Life Liberty and Happiness" are Hindu values as well, or it could even be tied with Islam. The main motivation to rebel against Great Britain wasn't religious, it was political. You would know that if you had any sense of knowledge about the country's beginnings. The colonists were tired of Great Britain's oppression, so they formed their own country for POLITICAL reasons.
@reece -- Yes I do. I understand that in your drive to look intelligent on a website, you have successfully talked in circles about nothing, eventually proving my point. Your parents instilled a FOUNDATION of personhood. Your PERSONAL lifestyle, NOT DIRECTLY MIRRORING YOUR PARENTS, including your experiences, wants and needs; end with you having your own path. || In turn, America, our nation, based on the FOUNDATIONS of Judeo-Christian values, instilled a base PERSONHOOD (or national identity) in each of us as Americans. However, through each of our experiences, wants and needs, NOT DIRECTLY MIRRORING JUDEO-CHRISTIAN VALUES, end with each of us having our own unique path.
@triangle -- No, YOU are insulting YOURSELF with your complete lack of reading comprehension. AND you are showing EXACTLY why it is that we spend so much money on education in this country, yet we are HORRIBLE in comparison to the world. Pure, inexcusable LAZINESS.
@reece -- Trolls don't educate. For example || Definitions -- Prohibit: to say that (something) is not allowed: Link -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prohibit || Foundation: something (such as an idea, a principle, or a fact) that provides support for something: Link -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foundation || Just because I point out how embarrassing your education is, does NOT mean I am a troll.
@reece -- Great example of your reading comprehension failure. You stated "Do you understand what i was getting at?" || I responded: "Yes I do. I understand that in your drive to look intelligent on a website[...]" || See that? I acknowledged that I understand what you were getting at. I then continued this statement by giving an explanation of EXACTLY what you were getting at.
@MakeSensePeopleDont & reece, I have no idea what is going on between the two of you. For the both of you, for what it is worth, I have given ground on the foundation aspects of the country - Christians will insist it is Christianity. That is just a known - not even worth bickering over. I see no reason it has any impact on a secular nation.
@MakeSensePeopleDont "Assigning values with a religion is the same as assigning sex with porno." It works on so many levels. Sex and values are naturally occurring products of evolution compared to human constructs such as religion and porno. Values echo from religion to religion just as sex positions are duplicated from porno to porno. It is useless to say 'this is the values of [insert religion here]'
@reece -- There is a separation between good values, questionable values and bad values now aren't there? Pornography = bad - questionable values; Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness = good values; Judeo-Christian based values = good values (for the overwhelming majority). See the difference?
@MakeSensePeopleDont Both Pornography and religion have good, questionable and bad aspects. I wouldn't need to explain religion but pornography can be good because it increases the fertility of sperm. It's great to watch with your partner if you guys want to conceive. I could keep going on, But anyway, That's beside my point. I was getting at how ideals get passed down.
@reece -- #facepalm || Did you just google that or did you actually read the reports, subjects, data collected, etc.? || You state: "[...]pornography can be good because it increases the fertility of sperm. It's great to watch with your partner if you guys want to conceive[...] || This is NOT the case finding of the exam. First off, the human trials are extremely minimal and are relegated mostly to animal trials. Second, the findings of the small number of human trials show that it is NOT the pornography that increases potency or count of your little swimmers; instead, it is the feeling of inadequacy, rejection by your mate AND the natural fear of not being able to procreate and spread your genes. So, you want to increase potency and count? Call that guy that makes you jealous to have around your lady and bring him around to incite your deepest of fears....Rejection. || Again....Reading comprehension
@MakeSensePeopleDont No, i didn't search for it. I know there have been separate studies indicating better sperm fertility for humans when watching porn. But anyway i already told you that's beside my point. Stop trying to red herring.
@reece -- I'm not "red Herring-ing" you, I simply disputed your claim. You state that Pornography is both good and bad, citing that study for your "good" side. I simply pointed out the fact that you are wrong and in-turn, I successfully disproved your point. So, why don't YOU stop "red herring-ing" the community with falsities.
@MakeSensePeopleDont Good, questionable and bad sides have nothing to with my point. "I was getting at how ideals get passed down." it doesn't matter if they're Good, questionable or bad. Information is information...
@reece -- Yes, they all started from Abraham from the Hebrew Bible, hence Abrahamic Religions. But they split off in their own directions creating their own value and belief systems; two of them on the path of charity, forgiveness and equality; the other on the path to oppressive Sharia Law and complete inequality even within the privacy of one's own home. || What's the point?
@reece -- The statement that religion is like a dictionary that tries to not get updated is just completely false. In fact, from the Middle Ages through to the French Revolution, the Catholic Church led the way in sponsoring scientific research. Then during the 1600's, The Society of Jesus took over the lead in scientific advancement in Europe from the Catholic Church. Cathedrals were designed specifically to be observatories for astronomical research. In fact, modern genetics was founded by an Abbot (Father), while growing peas in a monastic garden. All the stuff you hear about religion holding back science and advancement, burning people at the cross or crucifying them for practicing science and speaking out about scientific advancements, etc. is utterly false, and without religious institutions, we would not be as advanced as we are today.
@MakeSensePeopleDont I wasn't talking about scientific advancements. I was talking about morality in general. Many, if not all Abrahamic faiths are apposed going against what they teach even though the religions and denominations (of them) teach completely different things which often contradict each other.
13:6 6 “If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace[b] or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, 8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. 9 But you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. 10 You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 11 And all Israel shall hear and fear and never again do any such wickedness as this among you.
@reece -- Yes, different denominations DO hold different beliefs and teachings. This is a perfect example of how malleable religion is; it shows how it changes over time. We can't expect the all mighty keeper of all religious texts to come down from the heavens and slap us across the face with a newly minted, more politically correct or modernized version of the texts that faiths use. Just as with groups of people (cultures, societies, etc.), we all come together under a uniform belief in something or goal to achieve; as time progresses, differences are found and rifts are built. Slowly but surely, different factions of a single group of people start to generate, they still (generally speaking) hold the same core beliefs and foundations, but smaller disagreements lead to different, smaller groups. This split will continue to grow into smaller and smaller groups indefinitely.
@TBR -- Yes, I know that is there. However, it is about growth and evolution of faith. How many groups of Judeo-Christian "terrorists" do you see in the news running around the globe blowing themselves up, raping little boys, killing innocent civilians, etc.? BTW, did you know that the American Military allows Islamists to bring underage boys....Children....Onto base and rape them? I have to verify this myself, but from all accounts to this point, this is a secret the American Military has been hiding from the public in order to "Protect the native's rights".
@reece -- So do you agree morality evolves with or without religious texts? || No, I do not agree. The entire world is based on religion. Morality, even based in civil laws, are based on religion for this reason. Heck, even civil laws are based off of religion. So, whether you want to see it or not, your morals are DEEPLY rooted in religion.
"However, it is about growth and evolution of faith." - Not for all Christians, not for all Muslims. || "How many groups of Judeo-Christian "terrorists" do you see" - Some, not as many as Islamic, that is why I dislike them more. || "raping little boys" - Well, Christians don't have a clean record on this one. || "killing innocent civilians, etc." - Some. || ? BTW, did you know that the American Military allows Islamists to bring underage boys....Children....Onto base and rape them? I have to verify this myself, but from all accounts to this point, this is a secret the American Military has been hiding from the public in order to "Protect the native's rights". - I would need more proof of this, but it would not surprise me .
Thanks for the link. Again, don't doubt it. This quote was better than the subject anyway. ""They're not normal people, and we shouldn't be here. We're serving no purpose. We're being lied to. They're telling us one thing and it's a whole other agenda. They have their reasons for us to be there. And as soon as we stand up and say something, they make us disappear," the son confided to his father. || We should not be there. Pack the he11 up, leave.
@reece -- Nobody knows how old religion is. In fact, we have NO IDEA how old intelligent thought process is with man. Archaeologists have begun dating new tool finds to 50,000; 70,000; even 3.3 MILLION years ago. WELL prior to what we see as intelligent man. So, how old is religion? If we want to answer honestly, we have no idea how old it is or when it started. They have actually come to majority agreement that Europeans were in America prior to the American Indians. || http://www.zmescience.com/other/most-amazing-unexplained-artifacts/ || http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/discovery-of-stone-tools-in-kenya-redefines-our/6487052 || http://www.livescience.com/50908-oldest-stone-tools-predate-humans.html
@reece -- Pay attention here because you're about to hear something that a VERY small handful of people have ever, and will ever hear: As far as if I believe morality came before religion; I cannot answer that at this time in the slightest. I have not studied the development of the human brain throughout our evolution. (something I don't know) However, as my previous post as shown, even scientists are now questioning the popular understanding of the evolution of the human brain; so even if I had studied it, it would mean nothing at this time. However-ing my however; without researching it, I would make the very probable assumption that the human brain would require fairly equivalent development and data processing capabilities in order for a person to comprehend morality as it would to comprehend religion as we see it. Furthermore, basic comprehension of a "divine being" or "higher power" more powerful than oneself is actually a basic animalistic instinct required for survival; so, one could surmise that the bases of religion were accepted and comprehended LONG before morality was understood and comprehended. (Congrats, you just got a glimpse into how my thought process and logical data processing works.)
No disrespect or slide intended on the "you get a glimpse[...]" comment. It was meant to be acknowledgment of you seeing how quickly and logically my mind works and the fact that I never let anyone see that process....Even just a piece of it.
@MakeSensePeopleDont "@reece -- So do you agree morality evolves with or without religious texts? || No, I do not agree. The entire world is based on religion. Morality, even based in civil laws, are based on religion for this reason. Heck, even civil laws are based off of religion. So, whether you want to see it or not, your morals are DEEPLY rooted in religion." What ever you say...
@reece -- Common law, civil law, societal law, even Civil Justice and even the modern judicial system including American are rooted in religion...Better believe it. || http://lawandliberty.org/justice.htm || There is a brief overview for you to start with.
@reece -- I never said morality just "POOF" appears. I said it was directly associated with the evolutionary development of the human brain. Just a quick search finds this site, defining the currently researched and understood, complex data processing that occurs in parts of the brain that took quite some time to develop...Or so is thought. || http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3770908/
@reece -- By my educated guess, seeing that basic survival instincts let any animal know that a creature much more powerful, large, quick, etc. than they are; are above them on the food chain and to respect them as such. In addition to the assumption of VERY early man coming into contact with, and interacting with creatures they have never seen before, doing things they cannot do; piled on top of the recent discoveries that even the most predatory of animals have the propensity to care for all living creatures even ones outside of their own species, including their normal prey, when welcomed; leading to the very realistic assumption that a "New, Weird and Powerful" creature never before encountered by man may well have assisted early man in accomplishing a task or two that early man perceived as impossible....I would say that early man had an idea of and thought process toward a "Higher Power", seeing the new creature as the "Higher Power" to not go against for fear of retaliation. Yes, this would have been the MOST utter of basic ideas of what we today call "Religion", but they in fact would have had the IDEA of it. So, in short: I believe that the comprehension of a "Higher Power" (religion) came well prior to morality.
@reece -- I don't believe I ever said morality does not come from religion. The entire conversation started with me saying we are based on Judeo-Christian values and you and triangle were denying that, citing the 1st Amendment. If I stated otherwise at some point in this dialog, my apologies; but I believe you were the one stating morality did NOT manifest from religion.
@reece -- OK, I just thought it through, and as simplistically as possible: No, there is no morality without religion. To come to this answer, we must first ask "What is religion?" The answer there is simple: "A belief in something larger than oneself or one's group." Morality is the distinction between right and wrong, good and bad. Thinking of this definition, one cannot have a choice between right and wrong, good and bad, unless they have a belief in a power (or other "thing") greater than themselves. Whether this is the survival of the species, protection of the group, territorial defense or takeover, or some other "higher cause"; you have a cause higher than yourself in which you believe in deeply. Think of this; without threat of reprisal from something greater than you or your group, what motivation do you have to make decisions based on morality as opposed to turning around, killing your neighbor or partner, then eating them for a quick easy meal or to make a tough decision easier?"