Food for thought

First topic message reminder :

I trust everyone reading this will take it as an unbiased reflection of the present situation and possible implications regarding faith.

There is much concern at the present time regarding young girls leaving home and joining the fighting in the belief that their faith demands it.

These are Muslim girls and one wonders why they would leave a so called better society to join in the fighting.


It should not be a secret what the parents of these girls teach their children as right from wrong, based on ther Koran.

These girls see day after day the way in which the vast majority of the youth of today behaves, along with the television and newspapers showing a long list of activities alien to the girls belief.

MP's lying, thieving and charged with the worst possible crimes of child abuse, 480 judges charged with crimes, parents killing their children, wives being beaten up, youths falling about and full of drugs etc;

This surely gives those Muslim's intent on brainwashing these poor girls to go to war, all the ammunition they need.

Polyglide I really do hope that you do not follow your scientists too closely? as they do not seem the type that should be followed legally anyway?

All in all this is pretty much what we've come to expect, cryptic and vague but un-evidenced claims, then "scientists" who don't check out or whose claims are not remotely scientific, and never peer reviewed. Creationists who are silly enough to claim creationism has scientific evidence are obviously either woefully misinformed or being duplicitous, or both of course. Of course theists who make these mendacious claims always try to cite scientific credential, as Poly does here, but they seldom ever stand up to scrutiny as is the case here. A far more obvious stumbling block of course is that despite billions of dollars of investment creationism has failed to get a single piece of scientific evidence successfully peer reviewed or published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. This speaks for itself, especially when evolution has succeeded in this countless times and continues to do so daily. Lastly of course it's worth again pointing out that creationism makes supernatural claims, and these can not be falsified which is an essential basic requirement of the scientific process, thus creationism itself is by it's very definition unscientific.

There's quite a good link here on the necessity of naturalism in the scientific process.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/essays/naturalism-in-science/

Polyglide wrote:MP's lying, thieving and charged with the worst possible crimes of child abuse, 480 judges charged with crimes, parents killing their children, wives being beaten up, youths falling about and full of drugs etc; This surely gives those Muslim's intent on brainwashing these poor girls to go to war, all the ammunition they need

These are all crimes in this country, and of course occur in Muslim countries as well. Indeed child abuse is endemic in a lot of Muslim countries where it is legal for ageing Muslim men to marry girls who are still young children, and who would be protected by the law in the UK. So this claim doesn't really make sense.

Those crimes happen in so many countries Sheldon,why are we so different?

Sheldon,I have actually found the so called scientists that polyglide wished me to look up!! Firstly it is his spelling of the names that has got this in a mess, the names are Dr Miceal Ledwith,( usa ) and Klaus Hienemann,german but lives in usa.
If you type in dr miceal ledwith about the spirit world, you should get the epilogue of mumbo jumbo that is written with Klauss, ok mate.

stuart torr wrote:Those crimes happen in so many countries Sheldon,why are we so different?

Firstly I reject Polyglide's premise that his list of crimes, and what he considers immoral behaviour by UK citizens is in any way to blame for young Muslims going to fight for IS and similar Islamic extremists. As I said the pages of the Koran offer all the ammunition required for anyone who having accepted it is the immutable word of god wants to use violent struggle to promote their version of Islam and suppress all other ideas and beliefs. As long as Islam in general retains the absurd and unjust idea that their beliefs should be beyond criticism, and even in certain circumstances beyond comment then the free world will remain in conflict to greater or lesser extent with certain forces within the Islamic world. Secondly I think that the middle eastern countries targeted by IS are hardly examples of superior morality or better legal structures than western democracies which on the whole are fairer more just societies, with far better records on human rights. The evil caliphates set up by IS are despicable amoral theocracies that are as close to hell as anyone is likely to get, and I pity anyone who falls under their influence.

So far it was just 3 girls from Britain that have made the headlines for leaving home and going to fight is it not,and that was probably due to pressure from their parents,not the state of our country.

stuart torr wrote:So far it was just 3 girls from Britain that have made the headlines for leaving home and going to fight is it not,and that was probably due to pressure from their parents,not the state of our country.

I don't know what motivates people in 21 st century Britain to forsake democracy and go and fight for a violent oppressive and barbaric regime. It does seem obvious however that if someone manages to delude themselves that the Koran is the literal word of god, then the groundwork is already laid as it contains passages that command just such violent actions against non-believers.

Well it is drilled into children from a very young age Sheldon,and it could be go off and fight or marry some old guy? if you were a young girl which would you choose?

Stu,
Can you explain why it is mumbo jumbo when a qualified scientist has spent many hours along with others using the latest hypothesis available and, with others, come to a conclusion based on the evidence found that there is in fact spirit life.

Yet you go along with other scientists based on feable mumbo gumbo?.

polyglide wrote:Stu,
    Can you explain why it is mumbo jumbo when a qualified scientist has spent many hours along with others using the latest hypothesis available and, with others, come to a conclusion based on the evidence found that there is in fact spirit life.

    Yet you go along with other scientists based on feable mumbo gumbo?.

Probably because you're making it up, as you've been unable to cite any research or show one single piece of peer reviewed evidence. Or name one credible scientist.

Or we could just point out that this earth shattering "scientific" revelation hasn't made the news!

Or failing any of that stu could simply mirror your approach to properly validated scientific facts you don't like and simply deny them. He'd have the added advantage that he'd be denying something that isn't validated by science of course.

Stu,
Surely you can see how stupid Dr, Sheldon's remarks are.

I gave you the details of the Scientists who conducted the experiments over several years, they are the most quulified in their field.

How on earth can you give any cedit or credibility to anyone who only thinks scientists who he agrees with are scientists.

Under normal circumstances, idiot comes to mind.


















Idiot springs to mind.

I see you've reverted to type Poly and are forced to play the man not the ball when your fantasies are exposed as puerile unevidenced nonsense.


Care to cite a single peer reviewed publication that supports these "scientific" claims? Only your tantrum doesn't really get you any closer to any real evidence.

Dr, Sheldon,
I have raised this subject again following the event of two sisters and several of their children all going to Syria to fight for their belief.

They have left their families, husbands and other relatives all of whom enjoy the facilities offered to them in their country of birth.

Anyone would wonder why?.

Then I considered how I would feel if I lived in a country which suddenly stoned people to death and chopped peoples hands off etc; when it all went against my belief.

I then considered the effects our society may have on the Muslim population.

Our country is full from top to bottom of all the things that go against their religion, every part of the media mocks their belief along with many people behaving in a manner what to them is totally unacceptable, this gives ammunition for the young to be exploited.

Just reading one issue of any daily paper will give a clear indication of the state our society has reached in every undesirable aspect.

What is the answer, I am afraid it is blowing in the wind, that is until God takes over.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon, I have raised this subject again following the event of two sisters and several of their children all going to Syria to fight for their belief. They have left their families, husbands and other relatives all of whom enjoy the facilities offered to them in their country of birth. Anyone would wonder why?. Then I considered how I would feel if I lived in a country which suddenly stoned people to death and chopped peoples hands off etc; when it all went against my belief.  I then considered the effects our society may have on the Muslim population. Our country is full from top to bottom of all the things that go against their religion, every part of the media mocks their belief along with many people behaving in a manner  what to them is totally unacceptable, this gives  ammunition for the young to be exploited. Just reading one issue of any daily paper will give a clear indication of the state our society has reached in every undesirable  aspect. What is the answer, I am afraid it is blowing in the wind, that is until God takes over.

Our society? The people you're talking about are part of that society, so it's their society as well. A person is entitled to their religious beliefs, and I'd have it no other way, they are not entitled to expect others to modify their behaviour based on those beliefs. Nor is being offended by how others live their lives a 'right,' I'm offend by a huge swathe of religious practices and beliefs, does this mean I am entitled to expect the religious to alter their behaviour so that it doesn't offend me? And if I am offended enough so I have the right to arm myself and use violence against them until they do as I want, just as ISIS are doing?

What's in the tabloids is not worth reading IMHO, which is why I don't buy or read them, I am offended by much of it, that doesn't mean this entitles me to use violence to force others to live as I believe they should, so I'm not sure what you're claiming we should do here, but if these people have broken the law then they should be subject to the consequences of that law. It might of course help if we and the US stopped waging pointless wars in the middle east to maintain influence over oil producing nations, but this in no way justifies the actions of fascist organisations like IS who are pure evil. As far as I can see there is no God, so waiting for a non-existent deity to help is not very pragmatic.

However if a deity like the judeo christian deity existed then it's reaction to human fallibility in the bible doesn't inspire confidence of a solution beyond global genocide, and we don't need a supernatural deity for that. The solution again is to put basic, universal, individual human rights at the top of our agenda. Then people can believe what they wish, but leave others to live their lives as they choose, and if anyone's god is truly omnipotent then leave that deity sort it out, instead of egotistically interfering using violence to do what they think that deity wants, by waging war with fascist theocracies like IS.

Dr, Sheldon,
I think I have raised this point on another post.

We have a major problem.

If everyone is allowed to to choose, who decides the choices.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                I think I have raised this point on another post.

                We have a major problem.

                If everyone is allowed to to choose, who decides the choices.  

Sorry but I have no idea what you mean, have you read my post at all? You're claiming that people's behaviour here somehow causes people to think they can go the middle east and use violence to help create a fascist theocracy. I have refuted this in my post above, please read it and if you disagree say why. People's choices are protected by the laws that underpin their rights, what is it you're claiming should be chosen, and by whom? People have no right to force their beliefs on others with violence, regardless of whether they approve of the way people behave in countries like the UK.

Reading the implication in the opening post that the "ungodly" actions of some in our society is in some vague way to blame for the abhorrent actions of believers preprepared to commit violence, and even murder, to help create a fascist theocracy or caliphate made me think of this quote from the Hitch.

"About once or twice every month I engage in public debates with those whose pressing need it is to woo and to win the approval of supernatural beings. Very often, when I give my view that there is no supernatural dimension, and certainly not one that is only or especially available to the faithful, and that the natural world is wonderful enough-and even miraculous enough if you insist-I attract pitying looks and anxious questions. How, in that case, I am asked, do I find meaning and purpose in life? How does a mere and gross materialist, with no expectation of a life to come, decide what, if anything, is worth caring about?

Depending on my mood, I sometimes but not always refrain from pointing out what a breathtakingly insulting and patronizing question this is. (It is on a par with the equally subtle inquiry: Since you don't believe in our god, what stops you from stealing and lying and raping and killing to your heart's content?) Just as the answer to the latter question is: self-respect and the desire for the respect of others-while in the meantime it is precisely those who think they have divine permission who are truly capable of any atrocity-so the answer to the first question falls into two parts. A life that partakes even a little of friendship, love, irony, humor, parenthood, literature, and music, and the chance to take part in battles for the liberation of others cannot be called 'meaningless' except if the person living it is also an existentialist and elects to call it so. It could be that all existence is a pointless joke, but it is not in fact possible to live one's everyday life as if this were so. Whereas if one sought to define meaninglessness and futility, the idea that a human life should be expended in the guilty, fearful, self-obsessed propitiation of supernatural nonentities... but there, there. Enough."

Christopher Hitchens

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                I think I have raised this point on another post.

                We have a major problem.

                If everyone is allowed to to choose, who decides the choices.  

Incidentally my point was that basic and universal human rights for every man woman and child should be inalienable. Thus your question seems rather odd, since no one could choose to ignore such rights in the way you're suggesting these terrorists who have decided to fight for IS are doing. Least of all because they have arbitrarily decided they know best on how others should live their lives.

Dr, Sheldon,
You have missed the point.

What rights are you talking about, a free for all when everyone can do what they want irrespective of the consequences.

If you have human rights, who decides what they are?

How on earth can you have rights that conform to the wishes of all the differences in society, the fact that we cannot is evident in the state the world is in at the present time.

We already have such rights. The Tories are busy trying to take them away. Did you not know this? The free for all has nothing to do with human rights, that's more like IS and their murderous attempts enforce their beliefs on others.

Can you speak out freely? Is your liberty protected by law. If accused of a crime are you innocent til proved guilty? Does the law allow you to be detained without charge? Does the law allow anyone to assault you with impunity? Are you free to practice your religious beliefs without persecution?

These are just a small number of the rights the law should entitle us to.

polyglide wrote:These girls see day after day the way in which the vast majority of the youth of today behaves, along with the television and newspapers showing a long list of activities alien to the girls belief.

These girls beliefs don't entitle them to judge how others live their lives, nor does it entitle them to try and force others to live their lives according to their archaic puritanical views.

Polyglide wrote:MP's lying, thieving and charged with the worst possible crimes of child abuse, 480 judges charged with crimes, parents killing their children, wives being beaten up, youths falling about and full of drugs etc;

Those are crimes, and as bad as they are they occur just as much in middle eastern Muslim countries, in fact child abuse is endemic in many of these countries where girls are treated no better than possessions, and are married off for monetary gain, so the idea these girls you're describing have some kind of moral right to use violence to set up fascist theocracies is absurd, and morally repugnant.  

I'm not sure what you mean by "falling about" but it hardly seems a justifiable reason to incite others to violence or murder.

Polyglide wrote:This surely gives those Muslim's intent on brainwashing these poor girls to go to war, all the ammunition they need.

No it doesn't, the Koran does this, there are numerous passages inciting the faithful to use violence including murder against non-believers.

It occurred to me that since some vague behaviour of UK residents is being tacitly blamed for indirectly fuelling support for the terrorist Islamic State, that we might examine who this organisation is and what it wants.

This is an interesting article, Baghdadi is the leader of IS.

LINK

  Baghdadi has spoken on camera only once. But his address, and the Islamic State’s countless other propaganda videos and encyclicals, are online, and the caliphate’s supporters have toiled mightily to make their project knowable. We can gather that their state rejects peace as a matter of principle; that it hungers for genocide; that its religious views make it constitutionally incapable of certain types of change, even if that change might ensure its survival; and that it considers itself a harbinger of—and headline player in—the imminent end of the world.

It seems other people's behaviour is largely irrelevant to those who support this regime. They want to bring about an apocalyptic end to the world in line with their beliefs.

I'd take the very worst behaviour of UK citizens any day of the week over them achieving this, as I suspect would most decent people. I'd also suggest that we shouldn't be altering our behaviour to placate such maniacs, quite the opposite in fact. Most decent people already obey our laws anyway, and Polyglide's histrionics don't accurately reflect this, but rather show an underlying agenda to insist that his own beliefs are a panacea for all the problems of the world. I don't see how hastening an apocalypse is a solution to anything. Nor how we could reasonably expect our behaviour to have helped cause such lunacy in any way.

It reminds me of Hitler blaming Poland for its attack on them in 39 tbh.

Dr, Sheldon,
I understand your thoughts on this matter but they do not in any way change the fact that the people who are told that certain activities are detrimental to their future find them a large part of the place in which they live and can therefore not understand or accept the position and decide to go where those activities are not allowed.

It makes no difference that in the place they decide to go there are even worse conditions than the one they leave, because those conditions are better to them than the ones they leave.

To them being the problem.

I think I already pointed this out when I indicated that the Koran has ample texts that advocate violence against those who are not Muslims.


As I say, our culture protects certain rights and freedoms in law. The fact that some people want to take those rights away shouldn't in any way prompt us to alter our way of life to placate them, quite the opposite.

Our laws should reflect basic human rights at their core. The very rights IS are fighting to destroy. As the article I linked indicates they (IS) have made their goals known, and aren't interested in our behaviour, culture, laws, or rights. They just want to be a catalyst in bringing about an apocalyptic end to the world. The problem here is the false idea that a person's religious beliefs entitle them to act as their religious texts demand, even if it means abusing the rights and freedoms of others.

Dr, Shedlon,
I think we have a problem in relationship to, they are not interested in our laws and rights.

It is just our laws and rights they do not agree with and want everyone to go by their laws and rights.

The main problems arise when they see their ideas being ignored and the activities they feel unacceptable being flaunted on a regular basis.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Shedlon,
                I think we have a problem in relationship to, they are not interested in our laws and rights.

                It is just our laws and rights they do not agree with and want everyone to go by their laws and rights.

                The main problems arise when they see their ideas being ignored and the activities they feel unacceptable being flaunted on a regular basis.

               

They are not offering any rights to anyone. They're using violence to subdue anyone and everyone who falls within their sphere of influence forcing them to conform to their own beliefs. The whole point of universal human rights is that they apply to all. Obviously such rights cannot encroach on the rights of others. They are trying to grant rights to themselves that they would deny to others. That's the point....


No equality between genders,  no laws to protect those rights outside of their own archaic beliefs.  In this country they can practice their religion and know there are laws to protect that right, try going to an IS controlled country and preaching your Christianity.

All people everywhere should have the right to believe or not as they choose. All people everywhere should have the right to freedom of speech and expression.  There are other rights of course none of which involve taking the rights of religious people to believe whatever they want, but that belief does not entitle them to force others to modify their behaviour or live their lives in any way.

There is no such right as the right to be offended. If someone wants to live an entirely godless hedonistic and materialist life that is and should be entirely their right, every bit as protected as a belevers right to believe.

Dr, Sheldon,
In our country we have laws that are used for one and not for another, one memeber of one culture can complain about a silly incident and be dealt with when another culture can complain about a similar but worse incident and be completely ignored, one culture can stand up and spout a load of hate and be allowed to do so and another preaching good told to stop.

There is no answer to mankinds problems, there are too many differing objectives and no solution other than to start all over again.

This will be at God's hands.

You'll have to cite that law please, as I've certainly never heard of it.

Polyglide wrote: There is no answer to mankinds problems, there are too many differing objectives and no solution other than to start all over again.

This will be at God's hands.

That's pretty much what IS are claiming. Now while you're entitled to believe it, you're not entitled to insist others believe it or try to force them to behave as you think your god wants. IS think they are entitled to do precisely that.

Dr, Sheldon,
I can only try to persuade one to consider what I believe.

I have no consideration other than contempt for what IS stand for, there ideas have no foundation within Christianity.

As I understand it, many of those actually fighting are drugged before going into battle and so are those used for blowing themselves up, what I cannot understand is why those who say that blowing themselves up will lead to everlasting life are the ones who never actually do it.

polyglide wrote: As I understand it, many of those actually fighting are drugged before going into battle and so are those used for blowing themselves up, what I cannot understand is why those who say that blowing themselves up will lead to everlasting life are the ones who never actually do it.  

I've not heard the former to be honest, perhaps if you offered some evidence or a link? The last claim isn't true, there is plenty of evidence that those who become suicide bombers do so in the unshakable belief they'll be martyred. Anyone being 100% certain about anything is seldom a good sign.

by polyglide Today at 4:46 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
In our country we have laws that are used for one and not for another, one memeber of one culture can complain about a silly incident and be dealt with when another culture can complain about a similar but worse incident and be completely ignored, one culture can stand up and spout a load of hate and be allowed to do so and another preaching good told to stop.

Any chance you can cite this law for us please, I did ask when you posted this claim earlier?

Dr, Sheldon,
I am talking about instances that occur on a regular basis, the law is regarding religious hatred.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                I am  talking about instances that occur on a regular basis, the law is regarding religious hatred.

Which law? Please quote the relevant law that applies to only certain individuals as you claimed.

Post by polyglide Yesterday at 4:46 pm
Dr, Sheldon,
In our country we have laws that are used for one and not for another,

This doesn't strike me as plausible. Please cite the specific law, and quote it to show it applies to some and not others.

Dr, Sheldon,
The human Rights Law and the law against discrimination.

A Christian cannot wear a cross in a work place for fear of upsetting a Muslim, a Christian cannot stand up and preach hatred against another religion, a Muslim can stand up and preach hatred and down with the infidels etc; a Muslim can go about dressed like a peice of black drapery and complain about anything and thier complaint is taken seriously immediately, a Christian's complaint is ignored.

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon,
                The human Rights Law and the law against discrimination.

                 A Christian cannot wear a cross in a work place for fear of upsetting a Muslim,

There is no such law.

Polyglide wrote:
a Christian cannot stand up and preach hatred against another religion, a Muslim can stand up and preach hatred and down with the infidels etc;

No they can't, the same law that makes the first a crime also makes the second a crime.

Polyglide wrote:a Muslim can go about dressed like a peice of black drapery and complain about anything and thier complaint is taken seriously immediately, a Christian's complaint is ignored.  

Again what law is this, please cite it, you claimed:

Post by polyglide on Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:46 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
In our country we have laws that are used for one and not for another, one memeber of one culture can complain about a silly incident and be dealt with when another culture can complain about a similar but worse incident and be completely ignored, one culture can stand up and spout a load of hate and be allowed to do so and another preaching good told to stop.

There is no such law I'm afraid and I'm at a loss as to what this has to do with your thread topic.

Your thoughts seem more than a little incongruous here, as you started by claiming it was the behaviour of non-Muslim UK citizens that have offered ammunition to indoctrinate young Muslims to go fight for IS. I pointed out that everything they needed for that was actually in the pages of the Koran, do you have thoughts on the passages that beseech the faithful to violence against non-believers? You see once you accept a text or book is the word of an all powerful deity whose "morals" are immutable any atrocity becomes justifiable, like genocide, or the crusades, or torturing and burning people in the mistaken belief they are witches.

So I ask again, since you started this thread what is it your suggesting should be done, and why?

Dr, Sheldon,
My original thought on this matter related to the fact that it was very hard to understand why many young poeple who had what can only be descibed a good life when compared to millions of other less fortunate could decide to become victims of the radicals intent on wiping out most of humanity.

Muslims being those mostly involved [ and not all Muslims]

Then you considerr just what these people actually believe.

They believe adultery is a sin, homosexuality is a sin, dressing in an inappropriate manner a sin, behaving in an inappropriate manner a sin, drug taking a sin etc; etc;

No one has to watch television or any other matter than would offend a Muslim, nor need a Muslim, in our country behave in any inappropriate manner.

However, you just have to look at the current telivision programms to see that everything the Muslim faith decries is not only covered in detail but you cannot get away from it.

Even were a Muslim parent to keep their children away from all the television etc; this does not stop those intent on indoctrinating the young by using the television etc; as a means of showing how decadent the unbelievers are.

There is no answer to the problem, things have gone too far, that may not exactly be true, the only solution by human means would be for one to wipe out all the others.

Fortunately God will do the sorting out.

.

Unfortunately your diatribe seems determined to ignore some facts I've already posted.  Firstly these are a very small minority so if your claim were correct why aren't all Muslims motivated in the same way by UK citizens enjoying their rights? Secondly the motivation for Muslims to enact violence on nonmuslims is amply found in the Koran.  


Lastly I have asked more than once what it is you're suggesting be done, and why? 

I don't care if religious people are offended by people living their lives in a fashion that is anathema to the religious.  Frankly they can MTFU as far as I'm concerned. 

I'm offended by religion, the stupidity of things like creationism but I don't insist everyone share that view and enact violence on those who don't. They have the right to believe whatever they wish. They have no right to insist others modify their behaviour to satisfy that belief or to violently attack those who won't.  That's fascism. ...

Dr, Shedlon,
The answer is for all mankind to work together, the chances of doing so ,none.

So have I have already stated, I do not know the answer only the problem.

You miss the point regarding some young people being radicalised, all that I have said is grounds to use for that purpose,

If a young person has been brought up to think X is wrong and Y is also wrong and can result in X, X being very unpleasant and the young person can be shown that where they are all that is wrong is happening and there is a safer and better place
open to them, ??????.

Again.....


Firstly these are a very small minority so if your claim were correct why aren't all Muslims motivated in the same way by UK citizens enjoying their rights? Secondly the motivation for Muslims to enact violence on nonmuslims is amply found in the Koran.  


Lastly I have asked more than once what it is you're suggesting be done, and why? 




Why start a thread asking people be open minded if you think the end is predetermined? 

Dr, Sheldon,
The thread asked if the children involved were being lead astray by the present activities of those who act against their teachings.