40 Sikh lads defend themselves against Muslim sex predators?

[Webbo]

No it's not at all, if you look through history there are several wars, executions, etc etc which would have never have happened if it weren't for religion, To say otherwise is just blatently denying fact.

So a King orders a war on the basis of religion and the fact that he ends up with another country's land and treasure is just a happy accident?

The only controlling influences on the old absolute monarchs was religion. What atrocities would they have carried out if they didn't think they'd be going to hell for their sins?

Nobody can possibly know how the world would have turned out if religion had never existed so to say that the world definitely have been a better place is blowing it out of their arse.

[Manwell Pablo]

So a King orders a war on the basis of religion and the fact that he ends up with another country's land and treasure is just a happy accident?

The only controlling influences on the old absolute monarchs was religion. What atrocities would they have carried out if they didn't think they'd be going to hell for their sins?

Nobody can possibly know how the world would have turned out if religion had never existed so to say that the world definitely have been a better place is blowing it out of their arse.

please. Please look back at English history and look at the amount of catholics/protestants died as the country swayed back and forth between Catholism and Protestantism rule, look at the same issues that have been caused in Ireland because of this. Look at the French war of religion, thirty years war, even 9/11. "America has been hit by Alla" I believe was Bin Ladens quote. Look at trouble in Isreal over a small piece of "Holy" land. Quite often Religion is the sole cause of bloody conflict.

I'm not saying Religion is the cause of all war and not even saying that it isn't used as an excuse to invade when those starting the war have a under lying agenda (although even that is bad enough to condem it as it is used to brain wash the individuals fighting the war which is evil enough in itself)

Christianity also stood in the way of technological advancement for hundreds of years, had the church not stood in the way of scholers for hunders of years we could be alot further down the technological tree than we are now.

You could do with brushing up on your history mate!

[Manwell Pablo]

So a King orders a war on the basis of religion and the fact that he ends up with another country's land and treasure is just a happy accident?

The only controlling influences on the old absolute monarchs was religion. What atrocities would they have carried out if they didn't think they'd be going to hell for their sins?

Nobody can possibly know how the world would have turned out if religion had never existed so to say that the world definitely have been a better place is blowing it out of their arse.

To answer that we seem to manage ok today, a lot better than states still using organised religion to keep their subordinates in check so it's clearly not needed.

[Zingari]

please. Please look back at English history and look at the amount of catholics/protestants died as the country swayed back and forth between Catholism and Protestantism rule, look at the same issues that have been caused in Ireland because of this. Look at the French war of religion, thirty years war, even 9/11. "America has been hit by Alla" I believe was Bin Ladens quote. Look at trouble in Isreal over a small piece of "Holy" land. Quite often Religion is the sole cause of bloody conflict.

I'm not saying Religion is the cause of all war and not even saying that it isn't used as an excuse to invade when those starting the war have a under lying agenda (although even that is bad enough to condem it as it is used to brain wash the individuals fighting the war which is evil enough in itself)

Christianity also stood in the way of technological advancement for hundreds of years, had the church not stood in the way of scholers for hunders of years we could be alot further down the technological tree than we are now.

You could do with brushing up on your history mate!

Maybe so , but the weapons that cause destruction on a massive scale are as a direct result of science.

No one was killed by an exploding halo or a mad nativity donkey !

This is a stupid and irrelevant argument though

[Manwell Pablo]

Maybe so , but the weapons that cause destruction on a massive scale are as a direct result of science.

No one was killed by an exploding halo or a mad nativity donkey !

This is a stupid and irrelevant argument though

You have clearly never played Worms

[Zingari]

You have clearly never played Worms

Ive not , no

is it like snakes and ladders ?

[Manwell Pablo]

Ive not , no

is it like snakes and ladders ?

Quite a few fundamental differences. Such as previously mentioned exploding donkeys.

[Captain...]

please. Please look back at English history and look at the amount of catholics/protestants died as the country swayed back and forth between Catholism and Protestantism rule, look at the same issues that have been caused in Ireland because of this. Look at the French war of religion, thirty years war, even 9/11. "America has been hit by Alla" I believe was Bin Ladens quote. Look at trouble in Isreal over a small piece of "Holy" land. Quite often Religion is the sole cause of bloody conflict.

I'm not saying Religion is the cause of all war and not even saying that it isn't used as an excuse to invade when those starting the war have a under lying agenda (although even that is bad enough to condem it as it is used to brain wash the individuals fighting the war which is evil enough in itself)

Christianity also stood in the way of technological advancement for hundreds of years, had the church not stood in the way of scholers for hunders of years we could be alot further down the technological tree than we are now.

You could do with brushing up on your history mate!

But is it religion?

Most religions have a variation on thou shalt not kill. Strict followers of religions should never shed blood for any reason, so is religion to blame when people kill in its name?

If I read a motivational self help book, and then kill someone because of what I have read, then is it my fault, the fault of the author of the book, or the fault of the subject of the book?

The problem is rarely religion it is man committing atrocities in religion's name, finding justification in some archaic, often mis-translated and left open to interpretation, word of mouth stories that served to educate and guide people hundreds of years ago.

I am no fan of organised religions, but what they have become is not necessarily what they were and them being abused by many for selfish/delusional reasons doesn't mean that religion is necessarily wrong.

[The Doctor]

Quite a few fundamental differences. Such as previously mentioned exploding donkeys.

And even better, the exploding old ladies. And Kamakazi sheep.

I may actually dig my old playstation and worms out now.

[Zingari]

Quite a few fundamental differences. Such as previously mentioned exploding donkeys.

Exploding donkeys ?

Wait til Oz hears about this , there'll be hell to pay !!

[Rincewind]

Onward Christian soldiers

marching on to war

With the cross of Jesus

Going on before

God is on OUR side

[The Doctor]

Exploding donkeys ?

Wait til Oz hears about this , there'll be hell to pay !!

But the donkeys die for the worms pleasure, not ours - so it's fine, right?

[Raj]

Is the restaurant still serving???

[Finnegan]

Religious people were persecuted in the atheist old Soviet Bloc, Buddhists are persecuted in atheist China.

That's not strictly an accurate comparison.

Both are or were oppressive states that frowned upon religion because of it's influence on the behaviour of it's subjects. Neither the PRC nor the CCCP were so militantly pro-science that they were outraged by the thought of worship for any other force, they just simply didn't want any church challenging their own authority. Especially given most authoritarian dictatorships in the world thrive on a cult of personality that elevates their leader to an almost god-like status in their own right.

[Guest Bilo]

[Manwell Pablo]

But is it religion?

Most religions have a variation on thou shalt not kill. Strict followers of religions should never shed blood for any reason, so is religion to blame when people kill in its name?

If I read a motivational self help book, and then kill someone because of what I have read, then is it my fault, the fault of the author of the book, or the fault of the subject of the book?

The problem is rarely religion it is man committing atrocities in religion's name, finding justification in some archaic, often mis-translated and left open to interpretation, word of mouth stories that served to educate and guide people hundreds of years ago.

I am no fan of organised religions, but what they have become is not necessarily what they were and them being abused by many for selfish/delusional reasons doesn't mean that religion is necessarily wrong.

A Religious movement is little more than the people who follow it and the actions they committ in it's name.

[Vacamion]

at that.

If we are going meme-a-licious:

[Captain...]

A Religious movement is little more than the people who follow it and the actions they committ in it's name.

Not really answering the question. The vast majority of all religious followers don't have any blood on their hands, haven't sexually abused anyone, and have generally made positive contributions to society, the fact that some choose to wilfully mis-represent and twist religious texts to suit their own needs doesn't mean that the problem is with the religion, or even organised religions, but with the individual. The problems occur when there views are twisted by those in a position of influence who start preaching them as fact.

[leicsmac]

Not really answering the question. The vast majority of all religious followers don't have any blood on their hands, haven't sexually abused anyone, and have generally made positive contributions to society, the fact that some choose to wilfully mis-represent and twist religious texts to suit their own needs doesn't mean that the problem is with the religion, or even organised religions, but with the individual. The problems occur when there views are twisted by those in a position of influence who start preaching them as fact.

This is pretty much my stance on the whole thing. The very human traits of greed, the desire for control and power-mongering are the real problems here - religion is just the vehicle many people have used to exercise these three things in the past.

[Manwell Pablo]

Not really answering the question. The vast majority of all religious followers don't have any blood on their hands, haven't sexually abused anyone, and have generally made positive contributions to society, the fact that some choose to wilfully mis-represent and twist religious texts to suit their own needs doesn't mean that the problem is with the religion, or even organised religions, but with the individual. The problems occur when there views are twisted by those in a position of influence who start preaching them as fact.

Probably not fully but it was late, and I know if I pedal out another long response you'll just come back with more nonsence which again I'll have to respond to and we'll go round and round and round as you get more and more nonsensical and you'll look for alrernate angles, until I get annoyed, as with most of our discussions.

Your point is invalid and annoying in this case because not every religious conflict is bought about by twisting what is in holy books it is a direct reasult of following parts of it letter for letter, hence religion is no more than the actions of it's followers.

Every religious group has blood on it's hands, individuals might not, but every religious group does. The decline of religion is one of the main reasons the world is a much better place these days, why technology has advanced, why we have modern medicine, and why no one gets executed anymore because they do not follow the state religion. Certainly in modern times it is less of a problem than it was but thats because it is no longer forced upon us.

Again you are talking modern day and in specific about Al queada there by the looks of it there is no twisiting going in Ireland where Catholic and Protestant divide exists, no twisting in conflicts between Isreal and the Middle East, it is just bog standard difference in religious opinion and it's the same in many other high tension areas. But even then I would not say it is twisting, it's intepretation, and reading parts of the Koran I can fully understand why Al queada followers believe what they do, there are certain passages which back up their beliefs perfectly, of course there are contridictory parts, as there is in the bible, but then just sums up both religions. Thery're bollocks, a man is accepted into a church for what he believes and thrown out for what he knows.

As I've also said, even if it is just the tool to get people to follow a man demaning war or atsrocity when there is an underlying agenda, this is bad enough. I don't approve the use of any other weapon of mass destruction so I don't see why I should be in favour of religion.

Religion offers very little to society apart from placing rules upon peoples lives in which they most live by.

Even for the average Joe on the street it's burden, I cannot see how a Muslim enjoys starving himself in the name of god and I cannot see why any higher being should require such actions of his followers. I don't see why a Christian should have to give hours going to Church and reading the bible and repenting sin such sins as having a bit of pride. That's is all religion is, fear of death.

Don't get me wrong I know loads of religious types, I don't bother them with Aethism theorys anymore than they bother me with there religious ones, and as long as nobody tries to shove religion in my face I normally wouldn't come out with any of this. As someone who has studided history accademically though I am aware of the effect Religion has had on the world and I can undeniably say that the world would be a better place if it had never existed.

[Leicester Piggott]

The more you talk about a 'God' seemingly the less you have to act as they would have you do so.

[Captain...]

Probably not fully but it was late, and I know if I pedal out another long response you'll just come back with more nonsence which again I'll have to respond to and we'll go round and round and round as you get more and more nonsensical and you'll look for alrernate angles, until I get annoyed, as with most of our discussions.

Your point is invalid and annoying in this case because not every religious conflict is bought about by twisting what is in holy books it is a direct reasult of following parts of it letter for letter, hence religion is no more than the actions of it's followers.

Every religious group has blood on it's hands, individuals might not, but every religious group does. The decline of religion is one of the main reasons the world is a much better place these days, why technology has advanced, why we have modern medicine, and why no one gets executed anymore because they do not follow the state religion. Certainly in modern times it is less of a problem than it was but thats because it is no longer forced upon us.

Again you are talking modern day and in specific about Al queada there by the looks of it there is no twisiting going in Ireland where Catholic and Protestant divide exists, no twisting in conflicts between Isreal and the Middle East, it is just bog standard difference in religious opinion and it's the same in many other high tension areas. But even then I would not say it is twisting, it's intepretation, and reading parts of the Koran I can fully understand why Al queada followers believe what they do, there are certain passages which back up their beliefs perfectly, of course there are contridictory parts, as there is in the bible, but then just sums up both religions. Thery're bollocks, a man is accepted into a church for what he believes and thrown out for what he knows.

As I've also said, even if it is just the tool to get people to follow a man demaning war or atsrocity when there is an underlying agenda, this is bad enough. I don't approve the use of any other weapon of mass destruction so I don't see why I should be in favour of religion.

Religion offers very little to society apart from placing rules upon peoples lives in which they most live by.

Even for the average Joe on the street it's burden, I cannot see how a Muslim enjoys starving himself in the name of god and I cannot see why any higher being should require such actions of his followers. I don't see why a Christian should have to give hours going to Church and reading the bible and repenting sin such sins as having a bit of pride. That's is all religion is, fear of death.

Don't get me wrong I know loads of religious types, I don't bother them with Aethism theorys anymore than they bother me with there religious ones, and as long as nobody tries to shove religion in my face I normally wouldn't come out with any of this. As someone who has studided history accademically though I am aware of the effect Religion has had on the world and I can undeniably say that the world would be a better place if it had never existed.

A very long answer and one which I agree with in the main, but you are still again not answering my question.

Who is to blame, the reader, the author or the subject? you can add the translator in there too if you want.

My point is it is when people kill in the name of a religion that promotes peace and prohibits killing, then surely the religion is not the problem.

You can argue that Islam isn't a peaceful religion and I'm sure El Empty will argue that it does promote peace, but that is a separate point.

[Manwell Pablo]

A very long answer and one which I agree with in the main, but you are still again not answering my question.

Who is to blame, the reader, the author or the subject? you can add the translator in there too if you want.

My point is it is when people kill in the name of a religion that promotes peace and prohibits killing, then surely the religion is not the problem.

You can argue that Islam isn't a peaceful religion and I'm sure El Empty will argue that it does promote peace, but that is a separate point.

Both of them, and together they create the subject, the translaor is probably to blame in some cases too. Religion promoted both peace and blood shed depending on which chapter your reading.

"Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly"

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; "

" whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

"And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die"

I'm at work at the minute so I'll probably get sacked for being a member of the EDL if I quote one of man passagers from the Koran about violence and women but believe me there are plenty.

[Daggers]

Mankind is still very young, to say there is no superior force that is part of the universe, is abit premature

It's old enough not to believe in pixies and magic.

[Daggers]

Carl Sagan:

“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.â€