Religion IV: Deus vult!

[Gears of the Beast]

That's always been one of my biggest criticisms of Pascal's Wager. What if one of those alernative tickets (nice usage that ;) ) is actually real and you've backed the wrong one? As nearly all of them have some sort of idea that backing the wrong ticket gives you an express ride "down" it's a silly bet overall.

Oh God, there are so many things wrong with Pascal's wager...that one is certainly up there but my biggest problem with it is that it just assumes that one can simply choose to believe in the God because they think it's a safe bet. It doesn't make any attempts to convince anyone that it's reasonable to believe in God, just that you should so you can avoid hell if it turns out he is real. Moreover, what kind of stupid God would be convinced by someone who said they believed on the basis of Pascal's Wager? He's basically calling his God an idiot.

haha I think I kinda got ninja'd on that one.

[Born Yesterday]

In Italy, until 1981, a man could legally abduct, assault and rape a woman - even a minor - as long as she "agreed" to marry her rapist afterwards. In Finland, marital rape was not a crime until 1994. The UK chemically castrated homosexuals. A number of non-Western countries had no anti-homosexual laws whatsoever until they were conquered by the British Empire with the clever use of flags. Switzerland didn't allow women to vote at the federal level before 1971. As for the cantonal level, the last canton waited until 1990. Malta didn't legalize divorce until 2011.

If a race of hyper-intelligent and enlightened aliens had landed in Europe 50 years ago, they would have concluded that Europeans are a bunch of backwards savages.

I don't think people realize how much progress has been made in the West in how little time. (Probably because it's a lot less than it should be.) Or how recent these developments are. Or how the exact opposite of "inherent to Western culture" this progress is. (Every single advance in gender equality has been a product of rebellion against the dominant culture.) Or how not limited to the West at all.

Civilization is a process.

Do not hamper this process. When you attack an entire population on the basis of its culture as a whole, instead of isolating the problematic elements (which you should!) and acknowledging all the special circumstances, you only make people more inclined to rally around their traditional values, in defense, instead of fighting against them, in rebellion.

[Darzin]

But they don't seem to have a fallen angel, so from their perspective they aren't worshiping a devil. Similarly, Gnostics would say worshipers of Yaweh are worshiping a demonic false god whose pretense at being the One is obvious:

Fair enough, I just meant the garden of eden story is very similar I actually like the Yazidi take more than the Christian one, that along with the closing of hell make the religion seem more humane.

[Gears of the Beast]

Do not hamper this process. When you attack an entire population on the basis of its culture as a whole, instead of isolating the problematic elements (which you should!) and acknowledging all the special circumstances, you only make people more inclined to rally around their traditional values, in defense, instead of fighting against them, in rebellion.

I'm not attacking an entire population. What about "Islam has a problem with violence and oppression of homosexuals and women" denotes an attack on the people? If I'm attacking anything it's the religion, it's a repugnant superstitious cult (just like the other Semitic religions) - I have no problem openly saying that and it's up to these enigmatic moderates to recognise the problem and address it. Dancing around pretending Islam doesn't have a problem gets nothing done. And you're gonna need to go back further than 50 years to find Europeans who hold a similar jurisprudence to those who rule Saudi Arabia.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

For the record I've also disliked "Pascal's Wager" for some time for exactly the reason's RBPL states.

GotB,

Dancing around pretending Islam doesn't have a problem gets nothing done.

Interesting. What do you propose to "get done" with your broad brush slap at the whole of Islam?

[Gears of the Beast]

Interesting. What do you propose to "get done" with your broad brush slap at the whole of Islam?

Recognising the problem is a start.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

Saying that extremists within Islam push horrifying positions isn't recognizing the problem? Your position is like saying Christianity as a whole has a problem because a fringe buys into young Earth Creationism ignoring the fact that most Christian Churches recognize Young Earth Creationism as complete crap.

[Gears of the Beast]

GotB,

Saying that extremists within Islam push horrifying positions isn't recognizing the problem? Your position is like saying Christianity as a whole has a problem because a fringe buys into young Earth Creationism ignoring the fact that most Christian Churches recognize Young Earth Creationism as complete crap.

90% of the time I'm engaging you it feels like I could just answer with quotes of stuff I've already directly said to you.

edit: I realise that math could be slightly off...

You people keep acting like I'm using small extreme groups to categorise Islam. This isn't true. The vast majority of Muslims believe apostasy should be punished by death, the majority of Muslims in most Islamic countries believe female adulterers and homosexuals should be killed. Yusuf al-Qaradawi is an Islamic theologian and chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, he has a TV audience of 60,000,000 and he supports suicide bombing attacks on Israeli civilians including women and children. I'm saying Islam has a serious problem with violence and the oppression of women and homosexuals etc. To say otherwise is dishonest. To say that 'not everyone supports this view of Islam' is not to say that this problem doesn't exist. Go read about what Islamic leaders of countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran think about homosexuality and do to homosexuals, it is repugnant and people like that cannot co-exist with civilisation. I'm not and never have been talking about a couple of extremist sects.

[Gears of the Beast]

This video is somewhat pertinent.

[Nunki]

And you're gonna need to go back further than 50 years to find Europeans who hold a similar jurisprudence to those who rule Saudi Arabia.

Not all that much further, though. Sweden administered it's last judicial decapitation in 1900, Denmark in 1892, Norway in 1876....these were by headsmen with axes. France decapitated by guillotine as recently as 1977. Germany stopped somewhat earlier, but decapitated on a fairly large scale.

Drawing and Quartering remained on the books in the UK until 1870, and was last administered in 1820 (though perhaps not in all it's gory glory). Breaking on the Wheel was still done in Germany in the late 1700s and early 1800s.

The point remains that Europe has made a great deal of progress in the last century or so. One can hope that the Near East can advance as much in the next century.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

Yusuf al-Qaradawi is an Islamic theologian and chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, he has a TV audience of 60,000,000 and he supports suicide bombing attacks on Israeli civilians including women and children.

Based on that assertion I can assume that everyone who watches Oprah or David Letterman agrees with everything they say? Even assuming that every viewer of Yuseh al-Qaradari's program believes every word he utters to be the gospel truth those 60,000,000 are only 6% of the total number of Muslims on the planet. You throw out big numbers and vauge terms to make this sound alarming but at ths end of the day you are still deliberately generalizing about the beliefs of people when you cannot say with any degree of certainty that they are problematic.

Is there a problem with Islamic extemists? Without question, yes. Does that make Islam as a whole problematic, no, I absolutely will not make that fallacious assumption.

[The Marquis de Leech]

And you're gonna need to go back further than 50 years to find Europeans who hold a similar jurisprudence to those who rule Saudi Arabia.

The last blasphemy trial in the UK was in 1979. It was only abolished at Common Law in 2008.

New Zealand still has blasphemy laws on the books, though our only trial (in February 1922) resulted in acquittal.

[Gears of the Beast]

GotB,

Based on that assertion I can assume that everyone who watches Oprah or David Letterman agrees with everything they say? Even assuming that every viewer of Yuseh al-Qaradari's program believes every word he utters to be the gospel truth those 60,000,000 are only 6% of the total number of Muslims on the planet. You through out big numbers and vauge terms to make this sound alarming but at ths end of the day you are still deliberately generalizing about the Beliefs of people when you cannot say with any degree of certainty that they are problematic.

Is there a problem with Islamic extemsist? Without question, yes. Does that make Islam as a whole problematic, no, I absolutely will not make that fallacious assumption.

What assertion? I didn't say they agree with him (I did however lay out a few positions that the majority of Muslims in the majority of Muslims countries believe) but it is a disturbing reflection of the society that allows such an extreme view onto TV to so many viewers. In some of these countries they broadcast kids shows wherein "criminal zionist" characters are beaten. The problem of violence and oppression of women and homosexuals is widespread enough in Islamic societies (with a direct causal relationship to the religion itself ) to say it's a problem for Islam.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

GotB,

Okay not "assertion". The implication that the number of people watching a radical clerics program mean they must support his beliefs. As for disturbing programs being allowed to be broadcast what does allowing the disturbing images portrayed on "CSI" and "Law and Order" and watched multiple times every day say about our culture? They aren't "kids shows" but they certainly broadcast disturbing images.

[Gears of the Beast]

@Nunki, Roose Boltons Pet Leech. Do you guy's really think that stuff has anything on Saudi fucking Arabia? This is a country that stones female "adulterers" (often rape victims) to death, beheads "sorcerers" and "witches". Women can't fucking drive in Saudi Arabia. Come on.

[Born Yesterday]

I'm not attacking an entire population.

Oh, I wasn't referring to you specifically, more to a trend I see a lot these days. But since you replied...

And you're gonna need to go back further than 50 years to find Europeans who hold a similar jurisprudence to those who rule Saudi Arabia.

Christianity has been around for almost two millennia, Islam for almost one and a half. 50 years are nothing. And these 50 years (a hundred, if you like) were marked by enormous social turmoil. People clashed with their own culture to bring about change and fight misogyny. It didn't happen naturally, it wasn't inevitable, it wasn't guaranteed to work (in fact, most didn't - what we have is a fraction of what was owed). And specific conditions allowed this struggle to come to pass.

Islam is not that different from Christianity. Similar conditions will undoubtedly allow a similar struggle. In many cases they have (Algeria made an amazing progress after gaining its independence, for example), and in many cases they are, as we speak. There's nothing inherently incorrigible with ANY religion, not when people can simply bypass the misogyny that's in their holy texts, and when the clergy stops being a powerful social class. You don't HAVE to burn the Bible. (Though in the case of the Spanish Civil War, in conceivably helped, notwithstanding the eventual defeat of those who rejected Gods and Masters.)

The Western world has been held back by its ruling class, and its culture (including Christianity). The Islamic world has been similarly held back by its ruling class and its culture (including Islam), but most of all, as history glaringly proves, by colonialism and racist imperialism.

This is why I have little patience with people who make direct, non-normalized comparisons between "the west" and "the rest". I mean, the audacity. The west fucked "the rest" over for centuries, secured its lovely GDP with the wealth it sucked from the colonies and later the dependent countries (and still does), it drew borders on the map that had no relation to the people who lived there (who cares about the natives? all we want is to divide the loot among ourselves!), it divided and conquered, it fueled hostilities (very much including religious fanaticism) whenever it suited its interests, it imposed brutal dictatorships, it supported corrupt regimes, in short it oversaw many decades of minimal to zero political advancement on purpose - and then it derides Muslims for not being as advanced? Really?

I have the lowest possible opinion on the ruling class of Saudi Arabia, with the exception of Nazis. This doesn't extend to the Saudi people, or their potential. Unfortunately, this potential will remain stifled, as long as that goddamn ruling class remains in power, and in the favor of - wait for it - the West.

[Jo498]

The west is still "fucking" (most of) the rest with "free" trade "agreements" in our favor, exporting subsidized agrarian produce to ruin local small farmers, selling our arms to everybody with some claim to be "our bastard" etc. So we have no reasons for putting ourselves on the moral high ground. And we do not really care about the treatment of women, children etc. in islamic countries. Otherwise Saudi Arabia (clearly worse than Iran and the hotbed and funding source of islamic terrorism) would not be our "friend", but occupied and forced to democratize.

But anyway: How many people should we bomb to liberate women and gays in the muslim world? How many collateral dead children? Even if such ideas were the reasons for our wars in the middle east (which they obviously are not), would those really be good reasons to wage a war and kill thousands to "liberate" groups that are suppressed (according to our Western standards)? I do not think so.

Apart from the moral questions, I am not aware of historical precedents when "liberations" like this actually worked, often the opposite was the result. Enlightenment and social progress do not work like that.

[Wise Fool]

Criticizing or even attacking a religion is not the same as attacking a race, gender, sexuality, etc. You can throw out the term "bigotry" all you want, but religions are belief systems. They present an ideology and proscribe actions. Arguing that a religion is dangerous and harmful to humanity is no different than saying the same for a political ideology. Are you bigoted if you condemn National Socialism, the Republican Party, or Libertarianism? Of course not.

What's really odious is the knee-jerk impulse of left-liberals to equate the harmful impact of all religions today, as well as their attempt to separate beliefs from actions. What reason do you have to not take ISIS or Al Qaeda at their word when they say they are motivated by their faith?

Ah yes, very good, being bigoted against Muslims is no different from being bigoted against Nazis. I guess I can't argue against condemnation of the one without arguing against condemnation of the other, forcing me to choose to defend Nazis. What am I then, a Nazi-lover? Pierced by these fierce pincers, surely I must admit defeat... or nah.

That last question there, very nice - what reason have I to doubt the wisdom and honesty of brutal murderers? A group, after all, renowned worldwide for their brilliant ability to assess themselves philosophically, psychologically, and spiritually and then faithfully report back their findings.

Whenever people start talking about how they're motivated by something like faith, freedom, community, nation, honor, love, reason, it's usually just bullshit to make themselves seem like better people. Everyone can reach into their ass and find some platitudes we're supposed to pretend are the driving angels of their behavior. That way, you can't hate the playa, you can only hate the game. It's not ME to blame for my disgusting homophobia, it's my religion. A wizard did it!

Beliefs are often not merely separate from, but totally contradictory to, actions. That's not some weird left-liberal fact there, just a fact.

[Gears of the Beast]

Beliefs are often not merely separate from, but totally contradictory to, actions. That's not some weird left-liberal fact there, just a fact.

This is one of the most ridiculous things you've ever said. Beliefs absolutely do inform your actions. If you believe vaccines are evil you most likely aren't going to vaccinate your children, if you believe that your god views homosexuality as immoral you probably aren't going to be all that tolerant of homosexuality. Is this not obvious to everyone? One who has beliefs that match reality is probably going to make sounder decisions than someone who has beliefs that don't match reality, this is why having deluded beliefs is undesirable while reason and logic is desirable. Moreover it's pretty easy to establish a casual relationship between the things many horrible people do and their religion. And it's painfully obvious that something like a suicide bombing pretty much necessitates a belief in paradise, their motivation and indoctrination is clear - you can simply look at what these kinds of people say and what they teach their children. Is anyone really arguing that most Islamic extremists are not in fact motivated by their religion? Such a position would require profound ignorance.

[Gears of the Beast]

Atheist who was jailed for denying a higher power awarded $2 million. Did we really need more reason to say these 12 step Jesus programs are fucking abhorrent and the state should never be able to force someone to attend them?