Please, all of you read this!!!

The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins.

If you read it fully, and still are not convinced by it, I will give your views full respect, as you will have at least made an effort to learn about the other side of the argument.

Bilbo Baggins wrote:The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins.

If you read it fully, and still are not convinced by it, I will give your views full respect, as you will have at least made an effort to learn about the other side of the argument.

First, you read the book Unintended Consequences by John Ross.
Then I'll read your book

fair enough, i will look into it

Looks like an interesting book actually

Bilbo Baggins wrote:Looks like an interesting book actually

It is.
I'm trying to find The God Delusion at half price books.
Maybe our library will have a copy.

I have no problem reading alternative views, as long as they're either
1 well written & entertaining
or
2 at least somewhat object/fact based

Dawkins knows what he's talking about regarding religions today. I wasn't entirely convinced by his theories on agnostics but he reaffirmed my belief that whatevers up there does not care whether you wear a headscarf or if a guy likes another guy. Not that I'm saying we should get rid of religion, just lets make sure we don't force it on those who don't want it

Bilbo Baggins wrote:Dawkins knows what he's talking about regarding religions today. I wasn't entirely convinced by his theories on agnostics but he reaffirmed my belief that whatevers up there does not care whether you wear a headscarf or if a guy likes another guy. Not that I'm saying we should get rid of religion, just lets make sure we don't force it on those who don't want it

I'm an agnostic.
That doesn't mean I agree with other agnostics.

But raghead muslims are evil bastards.

But raghead muslims are evil bastards.

So all Muslims are evil is that right? There has never been a good Muslim ever?

Spoken like a true Christian fundamentalist. You're no agnostic.

Bilbo Baggins wrote:

But raghead muslims are evil bastards.

So all Muslims are evil is that right? There has never been a good Muslim ever?

Spoken like a true Christian fundamentalist. You're no agnostic.

No.
Spoken like someone who's spent decades living with muslims.

Spoken like someone who's spent decades living with muslims

Then you've clouded your vision with hate. I know some good Muslims, in fact in my country theres thousands of moderate Muslim people who are peaceful, hard-working and are not trying to overthrow the current government.

Bilbo Baggins wrote:

Spoken like someone who's spent decades living with muslims

Then you've clouded your vision with hate. I know some good Muslims, in fact in my country theres thousands of moderate Muslim people who are peaceful, hard-working and are not trying to overthrow the current government.

And to these so called peaceful muslims go to Mosques?
If they do they are financially contributing to raghead terrorists.

Do these so called peaceful muslims openly denounce Hamas, AQ, Hezbollah, etc? Do they call for a fatah against such evil groups?
If not, then they are tacitly advocating terrorism, and are the enemy.

And to these so called peaceful muslims go to Mosques?
If they do they are financially contributing to raghead terrorists.

They do go to Mosques, but I would like some further information from you to back up the claim that all Mosques contribute financially to terrorism.

Do these so called peaceful muslims openly denounce Hamas, AQ, Hezbollah, etc? Do they call for a fatah against such evil groups?
If not, then they are tacitly advocating terrorism, and are the enemy.

Yes, the do denounce these groups, but like any civilized people they advocate diplomacy first when dealing with these groups, before violence is considered.

It's called Shakat.


And diplomacy doesn't work with savage hateful dogs like muslims.
But they understand POWER.

Bilbo Baggins wrote:The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins.

If you read it fully, and still are not convinced by it, I will give your views full respect, as you will have at least made an effort to learn about the other side of the argument.

What has reading one person's work got to do with our knowledge of the "other side"?

How about you study religion, study the various tenants of the different religions as well as study other points of view such as agnositics. Then we can talk.

One book and you are convinced? That shows me a person who is too easily swayed by a conviction you hope to be true.

I have studied many religions and I have found them all wanting. I have spent years sorting my ideas out and I've come to the conclusion that the human interpretation of 'God' is based on our fear of the unknown, not a proper understanding of the universe. Now thats just my opinion, and if you follow a religion then all power to ya, but I find it annoying when those who are very religious don't even consider the other side of the argument (which might not be you guys)

old goat wrote:One book and you are convinced? That shows me a person who is too easily swayed by a conviction you hope to be true.

No truer words have ever been said.

KSigMason wrote:

old goat wrote:One book and you are convinced? That shows me a person who is too easily swayed by a conviction you hope to be true.

No truer words have ever been said.

Umm, I'm not trying to be a dick.
But, isn't The Bible "one book"?
Yes I know that technically it is many books written over many years. But it is basically one book.


The point I'm doing a poor job of making is this:
People of faith will not be swayed away from their faith by the writings of mortal man. And those that expect people of faith to be swayed are fools because they obviously don't understand faith.

People of faith will not be swayed away from their faith by the writings of mortal man. And those that expect people of faith to be swayed are fools because they obviously don't understand faith.

Why is it that in our normal everyday lives we nearly always need facts to convince us of the validity of an argument, but when it comes to religion so many people just act and believe without any real proof? Why is religion exempt from scientific and rational investigation? A lot of people only follow a religion because thats how they were raised and they know nothing else. You should at least read Dawkins book to understand how the other side thinks (largely, he's a bit more scathing than me), even if you don't think you will be convinced.

Bilbo Baggins wrote:

People of faith will not be swayed away from their faith by the writings of mortal man. And those that expect people of faith to be swayed are fools because they obviously don't understand faith.

Why is it that in our normal everyday lives we nearly always need facts to convince us of the validity of an argument, but when it comes to religion so many people just act and believe without any real proof? Why is religion exempt from scientific and rational investigation? A lot of people only follow a religion because thats how they were raised and they know nothing else. You should at least read Dawkins book to understand how the other side thinks (largely, he's a bit more scathing than me), even if you don't think you will be convinced.

You still don't get it.
And I guess you never will.

iluvfreebeer wrote:

KSigMason wrote:

old goat wrote:One book and you are convinced? That shows me a person who is too easily swayed by a conviction you hope to be true.

No truer words have ever been said.

Umm, I'm not trying to be a dick.
But, isn't The Bible "one book"?
Yes I know that technically it is many books written over many years. But it is basically one book.


The point I'm doing a poor job of making is this:
People of faith will not be swayed away from their faith by the writings of mortal man. And those that expect people of faith to be swayed are fools because they obviously don't understand faith.

Touche

iluvfreebeer wrote:It's called Shakat.


And diplomacy doesn't work with savage hateful dogs like muslims.
But they understand POWER.

Zakat...

and i fail to grasp how paying for charitable works and giving money to the poor (because that is what zakat is destined for) funds terrorism,
if some mosque leaders mislead their parish and give money from the zakat to terrorists that's not the parishoners fault

if a catholic church leader used part of the tithe to pay for child pornography that's on him, not on the people that paid the church, thinking that the money would go to upkeep and charitable works

you shouldn't throw away a whole bushel because of one bad apple

Popov wrote:

iluvfreebeer wrote:It's called Shakat.


And diplomacy doesn't work with savage hateful dogs like muslims.
But they understand POWER.

Zakat...

and i fail to grasp how paying for charitable works and giving money to the poor (because that is what zakat is destined for) funds terrorism,
if some mosque leaders mislead their parish and give money from the zakat to terrorists that's not the parishoners fault

if a catholic church leader used part of the tithe to pay for child pornography that's on him, not on the people that paid the church, thinking that the money would go to upkeep and charitable works

you shouldn't throw away a whole bushel because of one bad apple

ALL zakat gets funneled through Riyadh and a good portion of that money is funneled off to fund AQ, JI, and other islamofascist groups.

.... meh, yeah ok but still, i think you're connecting too many dots here, you can't for example blame an individual for his country's war crimes because he pays taxes

Is a person a Christian if he refuses to follow the commandments and the teachings of Jesus?

Is a person a Muslim if he refuses to follow the Koran, including Jihad?

Or are we just talking attendance in church here?

There really aren't any moderate "Good" Muslims. If there were then we would be seeing the Islamic world rise up and crush the Islamofascist movements, they couldn't exist, they wouldn't exist. Zackat has been going to the Islamofascists for ages and to some extent it is no different than Catholics allowing pedophile Priests to keep preying on their own children. Maybe the same sense of denial exists in both Islam and the Catholic church but the price for reforming the Catholic Church is no longer beheading. Try to reform Islam and tell me how that works out for you.

And yes we do hold not only "taxpayers" but all citizens and every person in a country responsible to some extent for the deeds and misdeeds of that nations government. We couldn't wage war if that was not true, despite the "modern" trend in precision munitions. Islam held nearly 3k people responsible for their grievances against the US on 9/11/2001 and precious few had anything to do with the government.

Popov wrote:.... meh, yeah ok but still, i think you're connecting too many dots here, you can't for example blame an individual for his country's war crimes because he pays taxes

If you don't pay lawful taxes you'll get put in jail.

If you don't pay zakat and don't support islamofascism you may get to go to heaven.