THAILAND: Muslims behead a 9-year-old boy (WARNING: Graphic Images)

[bushidomartialarts]

Sorry mate (Bushido) - I would love to meet you half way on this one but I can't.

There is a world of difference between accepting the existence of a creator deity on the say-so of the Priest-class and accepting (as a 'lay-man') the existence and functioning of gravity on the say-so of Newton and his peers.

The former is a social-control assertion predicated on the non-necessity of proof (why that does not send more alarm bells ringing I can never figure out). The latter can land an artillery round on your head or put a man on the moon, depending on what use you want to put it to.

As an aside, who are these 'spokespeople' you speak of as if you mean 'salesmen'? That's not how science works; tho' it might be how business seeking to profit from science operates.

Predictive utility is what matters in science. A theory can be as beautiful as a sunset but if it's not able to predict outcomes then it has no use (or, to be cautious, has no use right now if the science is incomplete).

That's true of (I hope) most scientists operating in the lab. But take two cases:

a. A guy who ignores climate change because he read a study funded by an oil company with results published in a newspaper run by a conservative media conglomerate.

b. A guy who pays the priest an indulgence because a lay minister told him it would get his father in to heaven.

The guy's relationship to knowledge and the working of the universe is identical in both cases. And sadly, and with respect, this is exactly like too much science works anymore. To talk about science without acknowledging how it gets funded is like talking about religion without accknowledging holy wars.

 

[fangjian]

Religion isn't merely a tool for understanding the universe. It's equally concerned with human morality/ethics and how to interact with each other.

Yup. And they fail in that department too. Morals/Ethics are part of evolutionary biology.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

The overwhelming majority of functional legal systems in the world are based on religious ideas of how to live with other people, most of them developed before evolutionary/social biology became a field of study.

And Evolutionary Biologists for Positive Change doesn't really make the top ten for applying the best ideas of how to treat one another.

 

[billc]

Something to think about with the muslim threat you think we are obsessing over. Unlike a lone gunman here in the states, muslim terrorists can and do recieve state sponsership. This is often in the form of special training in tactics, communications, falsifying identities, explosives and firearms. Also, they may recieve access to deadlier weapons, with mass effects that the lone wacko doesn't have access to. Right now, the muslim radicals are sending their A-team over to places in the middle east, especially Iraq and Afghanistan, and we are benefiting from that decision. They are dying in their thousands because of this decision, and we are disrupting a lot of their command and control structures, and forcing them to move with extreme caution, because they are being hunted.

If we let up on them, and give them a chance to regroup, and allow new leadership to take over, who may choose different targets and tactics it could very well be very bad for us. It is easy to point to how little activity we have over here, because most of the hard core terrorists are fighting over seas, which is why we are over there. It is easier for them to get to our troops than it is to get over here, with weapons and numbers.

By downplaying the threat of radical muslim terrorism now, marginalizing those who bring it up so it is not forgotten, it hurries up the day when we ease up on the terrorists. People have already forgotten 9/11 to a great extent. We may not see a spike in terrorist activity, but our kids or grand kids might from terrorists with real training and real weapons, and not just jihadi wannabe's but highly trained terrorists or at least highly motivated terrorists such as the ones in Mumbai. Check out the documentary "Terror in Mumbai." that is what we are trying to avoid by reminding people that there still is a threat and it is real.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Bill, who is suggesting letting up on them? Who is downplaying the threat?

Let me put it another way.

How many innocent Muslims must face harassment, discrimination, assault would you consider an acceptable number?

What is your or Johns solution to this "Muslim Problem" you keep going on about?

Should we outlaw the religion?
Require they were special uniforms or badges?
Put them in camps?

Because all I've seen is "worry, panic, be afraid".
I've yet to see anyone come up with a realistic solution to the 'problem'.

 

[elder999]

muslim terrorists can and do
marginalizing those who bring it up
not just jihadi wannabe's
"Terror in Mumbai."
real training
real weapons
9/11 already forgotten
hurries up the day
see a spike
bad for us
with weapons and numbers

 

[Empty Hands]

What is your or Johns solution to this "Muslim Problem" you keep going on about?

Whatever this Solution is, I hope it's a Final one. I would hate to have to deal with this problem again in a few years.

Put them in camps?

Hopefully some type of Camp where they can think really hard about how bad Islamic extremism is. You know, where they can really Concentrate on that topic.

Sorry, couldn't resist!

 

[elder999]

Religion, pretty much by definition is 'to connect' right? It is an attempt to understand existence. Science is the exact same thing. They both have the same goal. But one of them demonstrably does it better.

The root of the word, "religion," is the latin relegare, "to regulate.
"Religion," by definition, is a method of ordering one's life, something it does demonstrably better than science.I'd even add, here, that for some scientists, science is a "religion," a method of regulating their lives. One can, by extension, also say that religion and spirituality are attempts to understand existence, but they are doing it in a completely different realm than that of science. I had a religious studies professor start the year by coming in and asking everyone what "religion" was for, opposed to what it "is", and write this on the board:
LIFE/DEATH
...and say, "what does this mean?" If there is anything after death, there is no scientific evidence of it-it's hardly subject to the scientific method, and what little evidence that is presented can easily be attributed to other things, but my point here is to point out that your posts don't really demonstrate much understanding of what religion is for most, or what it's meant to be.

When you say 'religion', you are referring to the actual 'clubs' or 'organizations', who have more 'identity' if you will. Every town in the USA has a bunch of churches and synagogues and such. If there were near equal amounts of science clubs too, and the religious clubs did more for the homeless etc., I would agree with you.

Regardless, "religion," clubs if you will, do more for the homeless etc., even in a town like Los Alamos, which has something like 35 churches and one of the biggest "science clubs" in the world.....:lol:

But I'm talking about it 'as a method of understanding the universe' And when it comes to finding out if something is true or untrue, the scientific method is so far the way to go. And pretty much everyone agrees. Many people though, for some odd reason, abandon the scientific method when it comes to Cosmology/Cosmogony. Strange.

And this is a confusion on both sides. The cosmological models offered by most religions-Christianity and Judaism as special examples-are, in fact,originally intended to be allegorical, and applied to one's self, rather than an explanation of how the universe actually works.

 

[fangjian]

The root of the word, "religion," is the latin relegare, "to regulate.
"Religion," by definition, is a method of ordering one's life, something it does demonstrably better than science.I'd even add, here, that for some scientists, science is a "religion," a method of regulating their lives. One can, by extension, also say that religion and spirituality are attempts to understand existence, but they are doing it in a completely different realm than that of science.

Religion (from O.Fr. religion "religious community," from L. religionem (nom. religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods,"[3] "obligation, the bond between man and the gods"[4]) is derived from the Latin religiō, the ultimate origins of which are obscure. One possibility is derivation from a reduplicated *le-ligare, an interpretation traced to Cicero connecting lego "read", i.e. re (again) + lego in the sense of "choose", "go over again" or "consider carefully". Modern scholars such as Tom Harpur and Joseph Campbell favor the derivation from ligare "bind, connect", probably from a prefixed re-ligare, i.e. re (again) + ligare or "to reconnect," which was made prominent by St. Augustine, following the interpretation of Lactantius.[5][6] The medieval usage alternates with order in designating bonded communities like those of monastic orders: "we hear of the 'religion' of the Golden Fleece, of a knight 'of the religion of Avys'".[7]

If there is anything after death, there is no scientific evidence of it-it's hardly subject to the scientific method, and what little evidence that is presented can easily be attributed to other things, but my point here is to point out that your posts don't really demonstrate much understanding of what religion is for most, or what it's meant to be.

There is no evidence of some type of consciousness after your brain dies. Yes. That doesn't make Islam and Judaism relevant now. It would still be a scientific issue. Biology. Neuroscience. Brain Chemistry......

Religion is a lot of things for many. A way to understand the universe. A way to lead ones life. A way to manage a country......................

And this is a confusion on both sides. The cosmological models offered by most religions-Christianity and Judaism as special examples-are, in fact,originally intended to be allegorical, and applied to one's self, rather than an explanation of how the universe actually works.

There original intent is unknown. The cosmological, biological, geological........models in those books are different things to different people. Allegorical, reality, nonsense.............Interpret them however you like.

 

[fangjian]

The overwhelming majority of functional legal systems in the world are based on religious ideas of how to live with other people, most of them developed before evolutionary/social biology became a field of study.

And Evolutionary Biologists for Positive Change doesn't really make the top ten for applying the best ideas of how to treat one another.

All I am saying is that our ideas of morality and ethics are all part of the evolution of the human brain. No supernatural magic explanation needed.

Law/morality/ethical systems......are all things that need to be discussed by rational leaders using human reason and such. No Old Testament or Dianetics needed.

 

[elder999]

Religion (from O.Fr. religion "religious community," from L. religionem (nom. religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods,"[3] "obligation, the bond between man and the gods"[4]) is derived from the Latin religiō, the ultimate origins of which are obscure. One possibility is derivation from a reduplicated *le-ligare, an interpretation traced to Cicero connecting lego "read", i.e. re (again) + lego in the sense of "choose", "go over again" or "consider carefully". Modern scholars such as Tom Harpur and Joseph Campbell favor the derivation from ligare "bind, connect", probably from a prefixed re-ligare, i.e. re (again) + ligare or "to reconnect," which was made prominent by St. Augustine, following the interpretation of Lactantius.[5][6] The medieval usage alternates with order in designating bonded communities like those of monastic orders: "we hear of the 'religion' of the Golden Fleece, of a knight 'of the religion of Avys'".[7]

Well, the scholarship, and Latin, of that particular wikipedia paragraph is pretty weak in places. To say that re ligare means to connect again, or to rebind, is somewhat like saying that "mooring a boat" is the same as the "moors" in England.

Wrong.

In fact, religare actually is the verb that would have been used in mooring a boat-a form of regulation,as well as one associated with rites, rituals.

Interesting that the paragraph cites Muller, who would have agreed with me about the allegorical aspects of mythology-it was he who said that "mythology is a disease of language," that myth changes concepts into beings and stories.

There is no evidence of some type of consciousness after your brain dies. Yes.

There is no evidence that there isn't some type of consciousness after the body dies, yes. If there were, would you recognize it? Could you? Could it be duplicated, measured and replicated?

That doesn't make Islam and Judaism relevant now. It would still be a scientific issue. Biology. Neuroscience. Brain Chemistry......

And, in fact, all those sciences and more may just have models for that, someday-but if we had scientific confirmation of consciousness after death, it would only serve as confirmation of validity of certain spiritual principles and concepts (see above)-ones common to all religions that have their roots in shamanism, which is, of course, all religions.

Religion is a lot of things for many. A way to understand the universe. A way to lead ones life. A way to manage a country......................

Yes, yes, justification for murder and mayhem, sexually abusing children, exploiting labor, etc., etc., etc.

There is a science to religion, though-there are, through ritual, replicable, observable , measurable phenomena. Of course, these same phenomena can be attirubuted to purely scientific issues: biology, neuroscience, brain chemistry, but, from a biological standpoint, and touching on what Sukerkin mentioned upthread, if human beings have an ingrained biological capacity to have "spiritual experiences,' what biological purpose do they serve, evolution wise?

Why are we religious, and why does it work for us?

There original intent is unknown. The cosmological, biological, geological........models in those books are different things to different people. Allegorical, reality, nonsense.............Interpret them however you like.

The cosmological aspects of religion have always, always, always been meant to be allegorical, in all religions, throughout our history. The best, and very best example of this are the practices and rituals of the ancient Egyptians, where everything they have left us was allegorical and cosmological in nature, and not open to interpretation at all-quite unambiguous, though often unfathomable.

 

[fangjian]

There is no evidence that there isn't some type of consciousness after the body dies, yes. If there were, would you recognize it? Could you? Could it be duplicated, measured and replicated?

There also isn't evidence that fire breathing dragons don't exist. You could play that game with anything that there isn't evidence for. No touch knock outs, afterlife, unicorns, .....

If there was evidence, of course I'd except. Evidence is evidence.

The cosmological aspects of religion has always, always, always been meant to be allegorical, in all religions, throughout our history. The best, and very best example of this are the practices and rituals of the ancient Egyptians, where everything they have left us was allegrical and cosmological in nature, and not open to interpretation at all-quite unambiguous, though often unfathomable.

You made the assertion that most or all of them originated to be allegorical. I don't know. Thanks, I will look in to it.

Many sure don't take them as just allegorical or poetry. Many take the quran as: A science book, history book, law book, ........Same with the bible.

And since the thread is about Muslims beheading people. I wonder where they got this morality from. And I'm not talkin about some 'twisted ideology' like the Eugenics program or anything, I'm talking about direct and perfect words from a real god.

 

[elder999]

The significance to the original post, of course, is simple: it's a perversion of most religions to commit acts of terror, sexual abuse, murder and mayhem. That's not what they're meant for, and any interpretation of them that allows such behavior is typically an incorrect interpretation.

Islam is, sadly, a special case in this regard, but the vast majority of its adherents hold this very viewpoint about Islamic terrorism, and even hold that there is no coercion in conversion, and that Jews and Christians are believers in the same book-this was, in fact, a common saying in Afghanistan, before the arrival of the Taliban

 

[fangjian]

The significance to the original post, of course, is simple: it's a perversion of most religions to commit acts of terror, sexual abuse, murder and mayhem. That's not what they're meant for, and any interpretation of them that allows such behavior is typically an incorrect interpretation.

Yeah. And the words in it never change, since it's the perfect word of a god. You can interpret the bible the same way. You can interpret Catcher In The Rye and go kill people too for that matter. The only difference is, with the other, people actually think it is the divine word of a god. Irresponsible.

 

[elder999]

There also isn't evidence that fire breathing dragons don't exist. You could play that game with anything that there isn't evidence for. No touch knock outs, afterlife, unicorns, .....

If there was evidence, of course I'd except. Evidence is evidence.

Well, no, in the case of religious experience, evidence isn't evidence at all. Real scientific evidence is, after all, objective, and we're talking about something that is completely subjective: I can say what I experience, and it may even have told me exactly what it signifies, but you can't tell me what it is. In that respect, I probably can't convince you if you need "evidence." You have to take it on faith.

There are, as I said, completely replicable experiences in shamanic ritual that have even been subjected to double blind testing with all individuals reporting the same information. These, however, are easily attributable to any of the various causes you mentioned earlier: brain chemistry, etc.-which still brings us back to my question: what evolutionary purpose does this capacity for religious/spiritual/transcendent experiences have?

I added "transcendent" because it's been my observation that in some of my colleagues, science provides the same sort of experience. Thus, when Dr. Andy Saunders managed to capture a record number of super-cold neutrons in a magnetic bottle, it was, for him, a religious experience, despite his atheism. It was, likewise, a religious experience for our mentor, Dr. Kevin Jones, though, being an Episcopalian, Kevin probably didn't recognize it as such.

For me, having had religious experiences independent of science, it was simply the culmination of a lot of hard work.

You made the assertion that most or all of them originated to be allegorical. I don't know. Thanks, I will look in to it.

It's certainly true of the Genesis creation myth, and was commented upon as such through much of the period between 500 B.C. to about 1000 A.D., when literal interpretation came to the fore. Thus, literal interpretation of the Bible is, essentially, Dark Ages thinking.

A really good example in the Old Testament is the story of wise King Solomon,and the two mothers-the "Judgement of Solomon." If you're unfamiliar with it, essentially, two women claimed a baby as their own, and came before King Solomon to settle it. He told them that he'd cut the baby in two, and give them each half-whereupon he could discern the true mother, because she yielded her claim in order to keep the baby alive. The backstory is that Solomon wasn't thought of as the rightful claimant to the throne of Israel-they thought that David's older, fourth son Adonijah was the rightful claimant, and were trying to dispute the claim, possibly dividing the kingdom of Israel. The story of the two mothers is a bit of politics by Solomon, whereby he says that he will be the "false claimant," and cut the baby-Israel-in two, and that the "true claimants" should yield their claim for the good of all.

Many sure don't take them as just allegorical or poetry. Many take the quran as: A science book, history book, law book, ........Same with the bible

Unquestionably. I'm saying that this is usually a mistake-however, since religious experiences are subjective, it's not for me, or anyone else, to say, sadly.

And since the thread is about Muslims beheading people. I wonder where they got this morality from. And I'm not talkin about some 'twisted ideology' like the Eugenics program or anything, I'm talking about direct and perfect words from a real god.

Well, yes and no. While religious texts have been used to justify various human depridations throughout the centuries, and they can find verses to justify and support their actions, the fact is that the "morality" comes from a twisted political agenda that uses perversions and misinterpretations to justify and accomplish political ends-think Solomon actually splitting a baby in two.

 

[billc]

Which muslims have faced harrassment, discrimination or assault. Of all the places in the world, our country has little if any of that going on against muslims, and that is the right thing. You have people who complain constantly about mistreatment but what little there is is minor compared to what would be happening anywhere else in the world if the situation of 9/11 had been reversed. The solution? I don't know. Iraq turning into a real democracy would be a big step in the right direction. It would at least be a start in showing muslims who just want to live in peace that there is a way to do it. Supporting at least in words the real Iranians opposed to their government would be another step. Clearly identifying when radical muslims kill people is also a step in the right direction, the main stream press trying to hide it isn't helping. It makes people more suspicious, not less. the Hassan shooting is the worst example of this.

 

[Archangel M]

In ANY society you are going to have examples of people attacking others based on issues such as race/religion/ethnicity etc. To raise individual examples as proof of some sort of "problem" can be as duplicitous as saying that there is a thievery problem by pointing at news stories of shoplifting. There will ALWAYS be crime where people are involved. You have to show that there is a widespread and socially accepted level of discrimination beyond the "normal" level of a human society. IMO the USA is no more (or less) discriminatory against Muslims than any other 1st world society. As a matter of fact I think we are much more tollerant.. haven't had a genocide here within at least my great grandparents generation, or had organized use of murder to force people of a specific race/religion out of an area of the country. Theres quite a few European countries that can't say the same.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Which muslims have faced harrassment, discrimination or assault. Of all the places in the world, our country has little if any of that going on against muslims, and that is the right thing.

Bill....

FBI Stats for 2008 list
Anti-Islamic 107 Incidents 128 Offenses 132 Victims 95 known offenders.

Report: Muslim Harassment Up - CBS News
May 3, 2004 ... American-Islamic Group Says Post-9/11 Abuse Continues.

Surge in Anti-Muslim Incidents Reported - washingtonpost.com
Sep 19, 2006 ... Md., Va. and D.C. Among Top 10 Locations for Harassment ... "We're seeing a rise in anti-Muslim rhetoric fed by the Internet and also on ...

CNN: Bush denounces Muslim harassment
Sep 17, 2001 ... A Muslim group on Monday detailed scores of reports of attacks against American Muslims, South Asians and Arabs since the terrorist attacks ...

Teacher tells 9th grade Muslim girl: ‘I bet you’re grieving’ for ‘uncle’ Osama May 4th, 2011
A ninth grade algebra teacher was suspended from a Texas school district after making offensive comments to a Muslim student in front of the entire class.

Army Investigation Over False Accusations Ruined Our Lives, Say Muslim Soldiers
Five Muslims who joined the Army to work as military translators say their lives and careers were ruined after they were falsely accused of trying to poison their fellow soldiers. In an interview for ABC News, two of the men say an Army investigation into the matter has cast a stigma on their lives, preventing them from gaining citizenship and employment.

U.S. probe to look at border concerns of Muslims
May 7 2011
The U.S. government has launched an investigation into allegations that federal agents at several U.S.-Canada border crossings in Michigan repeatedly harassed, jailed and body searched Muslims because of their background or appearance.

San Diego assault brings calls for hate crime charges
Saturday, May 15th, 2010
The Muslim man was praying near Mission Bay park last Wednesday when the incident began. A man watched the Muslim pray and then followed him to a taxi stand where he had parked his cab.
When the victim attempted to enter the taxi, his alleged assailant first shouted, “You idiot, you mother f**ker, go back to where you came from.”
The Muslim cab driver was then grabbed by the shirt and punched repeatedly. The victim had to undergo hospital tests including a CAT scan.


Do you really want me to continue here? I could post hundreds of these. A simple google search of muslim harassment or muslim assault turns up a **** load.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

In ANY society you are going to have examples of people attacking others based on issues such as race/religion/ethnicity etc. To raise individual examples as proof of some sort of "problem" can be as duplicitous as saying that there is a thievery problem by pointing at news stories of shoplifting. There will ALWAYS be crime where people are involved. You have to show that there is a widespread and socially accepted level of discrimination beyond the "normal" level of a human society. IMO the USA is no more (or less) discriminatory against Muslims than any other 1st world society. As a matter of fact I think we are much more tollerant.. haven't had a genocide here within at least my great grandparents generation, or had organized use of murder to force people of a specific race/religion out of an area of the country. Theres quite a few European countries that can't say the same.

Bill said "little if any" indicating an ignorance of the problem.
I corrected that ignorance.

There is less anti-islamic behavior than anti-homosexual behavior. I'm not sure that's a good statistic however.

Now, if the 100 or so deemed-hate-crimes are an acceptable number in a nation of 300 million people, then I suppose the 11 deemed terrorist actions are also acceptable? Or is this a case where 11 > 100?

Just curious.


To go on the record, the only number of either I consider acceptable is 0.
Before someone mis reads what I said and decides I'm somehow condoning terrorism. /sarcasm

 

[Archangel M]

Only if you are trying to say that planned and funded murder of thousands of people in a terrorist attack is the equivalent of some random knucklehead attacking another individual or some "Teacher tells 9th grade Muslim girl: ‘I bet you’re grieving’ for ‘uncle’ Osama". I don't think that analogy has much downrange effect Bob.

Not that either should be seen as "acceptable" but there is such a thing as severity.