|
im late but re: islam iwc is actually kind of correct-ish it's wrong to say that islam is a religion of war, but it's probably equally wrong to say that islam is a religion of peace. The only unconiditonally peaceful major religion would have to be new testament christianity (definitely not old testament) The problem with Islam is that there is no central authority, as there is with Christianity - it's no longer possible for someone to have uncontested authority. Instead, everyone is able to choose whatever religious leader or teachings or school of thought that they want. Combine this with the content of holy texts: the quran was built up over the course of twenty years, and contains elements from a period where Mohammed was a crazy spiritual leader wandering around in the desert, and also when he was the ruler of a city - it therefore deals with both spiritual and worldly, practical matters in a way that new testament christianity does not, and as Mohammed's thoughts evolved, new content can directly contradict older content The other major body of muslim thought is the sura - sayings of Mohammed that were attributed to him in the decades following his death, written down by his confidantes, and again often very contradictory and little better than hearsay. The two big contentions are jihad. Initially literally meant struggle against the enemy, but later defined in islamic jurisprudence to be both lesser [external] and greater [internal]. But you're allowed to pick which jurisprudence you listen to -again, there's no central auhtoirty Dar al harb and dar as salaam may not be "koranic" concepts, but are definitely an established element of islamic jurisprudence again, and can be taken as 'gospel truths' by people who's views they align with. I guess what i'm getting at is that Islam, and the Koran, both condones and refutes violence in different places, and in the absence of a central authority it's up to the individual to pick- and choose- what elements they emphasise and which they downplay. Obivously this is very much determined by indivudla and social factors such as wealth, cultural context, upbringing, encounters with diversity. But if someone is predisposed to certain anti-humanist views, the fuel for the fire is very much present in the Koran and in subsequent Islamic teachings. There is no blanket injunction against violence akin to Christianity's "turn the other cheek" or "love your enemies". Islam is in this way much closer to Judaism, and i think it's wrong to call it the religion of peace. plumpy hole lever fucked around with this message at 04:54 on Aug 13, 2014 |
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 17:01 |
|
|
open24hours posted:This is in no way unique to Islam. If there was a central authority and it was preventing a group of Muslims from doing something they wanted to do they'd split and start a new church based on a different interpretation. yeah but the koran emphasises an individual's relationship with god and IIRC specifically denies a hierarchical religion? anyway the caliphate was kind of like the papacy but ataturk got rid of that, which allows (in fact necessitates) that anyone who speaks about religion to claim moral authority when doing so like, there is literally no analogue to the church of england, Orthodox patriarchs, papacy, dalai lama etc, which becomes vry problematic when there is such a wide range of interpretation possible
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
BlitzkriegOfColour posted:Bullshit. Aside from the fact that Jesus specifically says that the Old Testament still applies, and aside from the history of Christianity, Jesus himself says that he comes to bring a sword. if you can provide a scripture reference i will believe you and admit that i am wrong
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
say what you want about christianity but at least the new testament is easy to interpret the koran intially says get drunk and drink lots of wine and have fun then mohammed changed his mind and said drink a little bit of wine but not too much then he changed it again and said dont drink any wine and all three of these sayings are in the koran
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
ok BB i admit i was wrong and know less about christianity than i thought i did although it's a bit spurious to say that jesus calls unbelievers dogs, when he says that "dont feed dogs the children's bread from the table" in reference to healing a sick lady who he later heals anyway and "i come with a sword, to set father against son" is maybe a bit different to ""Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage. . . . [I]f they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they desist, God is forgiving and merciful. Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil-doers"" anyway my mistake was comparisons to christianity, but i think there are institutional, historical, and scriptural factors in islam that mean there is the possibility of very violent intepretations of it, and therefore it's not a "religion of peace"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
structure agency
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:What's the stats on devout Christians/Catholics being homophobic? I'm guessing we'd see a similarly high number as compared to the general population. yeah tbh the problem is any religious people, imo burn all religious people at the stake except for quakers and sufis they are pretty chill although the 100% response rate against gay marriage is pretty loving extreme, depending on how you defined "christians/catholics" i would expect a 60-80% no rate
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
open24hours posted:Well, considering homosexuality is a sin and a crime under Islamic law it's hardly surprising that they aren't OK with it. What did you expect them to say? It's no coincidence the acceptance of homosexuality has increased in the west as the influence of religion has declined. which is kind of his point, muslim's shouldnt be beyond reproach but often are in lefty discourses it's what i like to call the "fruity gordo" complex, if a group is a victim in any one way then they literally can't be criticised for anything at all
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
rudatron posted:They're actually the same problem though. If the people who are bigots about islam were running Australia, Australia would just be a christian version of ISIS (ethnic cleansing, death squads, the whole shebang). There's a lot of support for reaction within the muslim community, but your goal is to confront reaction and not 'islam' as a community or identity or whatever. not really, i dont know that most of the anti-islamic left actually want to kill them, they just want them to get out of australia isis want to actually irl kill you
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:Good question! As BB was saying (and even though it's anecdotal) all the Australian Muslims he knows have no problem with homosexuals. Even religions can shift with culture so if we continue to work on having homosexuality accepted in society at large, hopefully it will sway those whose religion says otherwise. yeah this is my theory culture determines religious disposition if people grow up affluent-ish, in a society with low levels of inequality and high levels of tolerance and diversity, they'll end up choosing whatever is the happy interpretation of their religion if they grow up poor and watching all english the toffs smoke cigars made out of money while their mum dies from cataracts they're probably going to be bitter and resentful and choose the the less-happy parts of their religion which say its ok to hate whitey
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:Good question! As BB was saying (and even though it's anecdotal) all the Australian Muslims he knows have no problem with homosexuals. Even religions can shift with culture so if we continue to work on having homosexuality accepted in society at large, hopefully it will sway those whose religion says otherwise. two different issues here though, "acceptance of gays" and "gay marriage" never g oing to get a majority of religous people to "accept gay marriage" even though they might (in theory) agree on equality seriously ban religion
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
i would unironically be in favour of a homophobia test put your hand on your heart and swear to your chosen deity that you believe gay people should be able to get married or just make all the immigrant want to bes engage in homosexual acts while a customs officer watches on to make sure they're actually enjoying it and not just pretending
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:42
|
|
|
just make them kiss a member of the same sex for a visa it will be hot we can put tv screens up all over the city and show the hottest kisses live
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 06:56
|
|
|
you know if we banned all gays this wouldn't be an issue just sayin, is all...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
urseus posted:I'm sure you guys saw that video floating around facebook of that US journalist on the panel giving a muslim student a serve about islam and moderates and comparing them to nazis, in that only a small amount of extremists were required to carry out horrendous acts. What are people's thoughts on that video? Why is it incorrect? Maybe not now but 50 years from now based on current growth of the religion in all countries? youre a loving idiot a silent majority in a nation state is completely different to an occasionally-silent, occasionally loudly-critical, ocassionally condoning trans-national religious community with no borders, elected government, or levers of power and if you cant see why please kill you are self
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 09:37
|
|
|
why would you try and "reform" a religion why not just fucken quit religion we live in the 21 st century and mobile phones and space ships not pagan times you dont need to belive in the big floating YHWH up in the sky these days
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 10:33
|
|
|
who are all y'all's favourite arabs mine would have to be syrians i think if we're being incorrect and bigoted and classing the whole middle east as arabs my favourite middle easterners are 1: Turks 2: Syrians 3: Persians
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 11:52
|
|
|
Haters Objector posted:*Religion can sometimes be cool and lead to positive social benefit, and sometimes it does not. but net social bad
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
legitimately japan is a more racist country than australia and if you think otherwise youve succumbed to the knee-jerk circle-jerk of contemporary australian leftism
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 11:55
|
|
|
hey fruity dont respond to this post it has way too many tangents and we'll end up arguing about the meaning of theism vs theistic or something stupid read down some more Fruity Gordo posted:But like yeah, I have to respond to soag and TOML because this poo poo really pisses me off. Do we seriously have to go through some bullshit Ditchkins poo poo again about how religion is regressive and atheism is the light and agnosticism is cowardice or can we just go back to our perennial consensus that religious belief is an inherent part of all humans and necessarily concern the divine or a lack thereof or ambivalence? that was a kind of half-assed troll, i really dont care if people believe in religion or not and i get that its "faith" and science doesnt explain it away fro everyone etc etc i personally dont belive in anything and i can't imagine how anyone can make the leap from "where did i come from" to "it was this specific god and his specific teachings" and sincerely belive that i'll never fundamentally see eye-to-eye with someone who is really truly religious in the sense of an adherent to a defined faith because they seem to have such a different way of approaching fundamental questions of existence but that post was shitposting and i am very very live-and-let-live about it and don't really care one way or the other if people are religious quote:Because arguing about how anti-homophobic Muslims are essentially apostates according to your assumptions and prejudices against Islam is loving stupid, and so is talking about how there's no point in being a follower of an explicitly progressive iteration of an ancient religion because... what? Give a reason. i didn't say that and i dont think toml said that either, what we were saying is there's a very strong correlation between faith (of almost any kind) and socially regressive views,not that it's loving stupid or apostasy to be pro-gay, please dont straw man sorry if i did imply that somewhere in my posting, it was like six hours ago and i cant even remember what i posted thirty seconds ago, and it's not what i believe quote:Science? Science and religion are separate, that is the entire point of the scientific method, to break from the authority of the church to allow for reasonable inquiry in both philosophical directions because they clearly diverge. One is based on empirical analysis, one is based in belief systems. Atheism is a belief system. i dont think toml and i ever expressed rigidly pro-atheist views. my personal faith is "who the gently caress knows, if i pick one religion out of 700 i'll probably gently caress it up and choose the wrong one" - ie in the absence of any compelling evidence one way or the other im going to shrug my shoulders and not think about it too much quote:How many loving times do secular scientists have to say that they are not concerned with god or faith in the work they do about the beginnings of the universe? They are not saying it for the benefit of the fundamentally religious. They are saying shut the gently caress up to the smug atheists who jump on any discovery of the universe to say 'lol where's your god'. God is still everywhere, dipshits. God is in everything because I can't explain how anything exists without it, nor can science, and nor can you. You might not see god in anything but everything I see has something to do with something incredible by virtue of the simple fact that it exists. And existence is marvellous and complex and hosed up and worth it and something caused it all to happen and I call that god. see above noones being all raar rarr god is dead gently caress your god and salt the earth (well i was, but that was half tongue in cheek). I guess what i was more getting at was i don't understand why anyone would choose a formal religion in an era when alot of the truth-claims made by organised religions has been shown to be false and belief essentially boils down to "there is a force somewhere that is behind everything i see, experience, and do" plumpy hole lever fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
frutity you can ignore my rambling and incoherent post above Essentially, what I was getting at was I don't understand why anyone would choose to convert to a faith, or try to 'reform' a faith that they in some way disagreed with, in an age where competing religions with competing truth claims are all around us. I get the need to believe in the existence of something. I don't understand why that something should be the religion formally known as Judaism, and all the tenets that go along with it. So you believe that something created you, but it doesn't follow that the something doesn't want you to eat pig meat. Why not invent your own personal faith? But i'm not religious so i feel like we're essentially talking two different languages because religion isn't about logic, and A following from B, it's about what you feel i guess?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
also dont loving strawman noones doing a ditchkins
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
oh yeah sure lets go back to talking aobut OMG I HATE TEH LIBES OMG JOE HOCKEY DID A THING
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
The Deadly Hume posted:It's really bitter though I guess you might be able to deal with it if you like your coffee black. i got some 100% chocolate when i was back in syd, was super super good but you could only eat a 3mm square at a time it lasted me like two weeks per block
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Splode posted:yeah I empty quoted muyb and then realised that I had to quickly edit in an actual reply. Considering the entire argument about that israel-related cartoon was in GBS and we usually talk poo poo in here, it's getting confusing. you loving what
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
joe hockey: literally getting called out for being an idiot by the guy from the hoon party who throws kangaroo poo poo at his mates on national tv
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
Endman posted:Yeah, see, every time I hear from Ricky I like him more than ever. He's not a Green, so he doesn't come off all bourgeois like we usually do, instead coming off like a regular bloke, but yet he manages to say the right thing a lot of the time. Someone please tell me why him getting a Senate seat was a bad thing. im starting to think he has some value in knocking down the more deluded poo poo that the libs come out with (which is exactly the senate's role), but dont think he has the book-smarts to come up with good policy but it doesnt matter bc he's ind senator rather thna membr of govt i think a lot of the hositlity came from the fact that he's got the balance of power and people were envisioning nightmare scenarios where he would pass the lib's bill to introduce mandatory sterilisation for poors, in exchange for making the speed limit in the nullabor 200km/h
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
yeah but is it better or worse than your typical australian? (hint: 80% of australians think that asylum seekers are treated properly, or not toughly enough)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 11:52
|
|
|
wait when did auspol switch to loving australians, i thought the group consensus was that everyday australians are uneducated swill and essentially the scum of the earth?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 11:58
|
|
|
Endman posted:That old guy that called Tones a dickhead on TV should be PM. this and also the guy who threw a shoe on QandA but he dead 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 12:09
|
|
|
yeah asio injected him with cancer so he died, just like the russian spy
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 12:11
|
|
|
Jonah Galtberg posted:You are so loving stupid Soag. Idgi?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Fruity Gordo posted:I'm avshalom
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
hey someone give me the lowdown on andrew robb is he one of the "good" coalition members or one of the ones who deserves to be egged
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
Sanguine posted:When the margin of error is several percent, why bother discussing 0.5% swings? It's as useful as reading tea leaves or guessing the footy score using TV static. Is there some greater plan here? because they've paid a shitload of money for them and need to generate some headlines?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 10:30
|
|
|
this was a helpful post to me he's one of those anonymous, boring cabinet members that lurk around in the shadows but i dont hate them enough to put a face/policy to a name probs because hes never been on qanda ya'know
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 10:35
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:Isn't he the massive fundy who was behind workchoices? welp after doing slightly more research than his wiki article (which mentions absolutely nothing at all about his ideology or political views) i have discovered that he was a big driver in workchoices, devout catholic, and muslim-scapegoating racist-baiter one more liberal who i have a justified good reason to hate! although being a liberal is plenty enough reason
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 17:01 |
|
|
what hes not mentioning is that the boots are $500 RM Williams
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 12:28
|
|