Page 17 of 46 FirstFirst ... 7121314151617181920212227 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 914
  1. #321  
    Oh ya....imagine a mod making an Iraq post a sticky!!!!! =)
  2. #322  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    I cannot separate religion from the behavior of it's followers.
    I don't mean to sound harsh, but we have a word for what you describe: bigotry. "Religion" is a big thing. Painting all believers without regard to their individual beliefs or actual actions is naked prejudice.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  3. #323  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    I don't mean to sound harsh, but we have a word for what you describe: bigotry. "Religion" is a big thing. Painting all believers without regard to their individual beliefs or actual actions is naked prejudice.
    This whole thread (including its title) is about bigotry.

    My thoughts are: If everyone was more logical and rational and less reliant on "faith" and "belief", the world would be ab better place.

    And don't tell me that the society would fall apart because of lack of "faith" and values. These have nothing to do with each other.

    Atheists are not child molesting, murdering, thieving, philandering rapists just because they lack "faith" in the un-provable.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  4. #324  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    My thoughts are: If everyone was more logical and rational and less reliant on "faith" and "belief", the world would be ab better place.
    You seem to believe that logic and rationality and faith are mutually exclusive values. I do not believe this to be the case.
    And don't tell me that the society would fall apart because of lack of "faith" and values. These have nothing to do with each other.
    We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I would contend that evidence for my side can be seen all around us. Our society has not fallen apart, but given all our social ills and the coincident de-emphasizing of religious faith (or minimally religious ethical instruction) I'd say the circumstantial evidence is not with you on this one.
    Atheists are not child molesting, murdering, thieving, philandering rapists just because they lack "faith" in the un-provable.
    As individuals? Obviously not - since I'm the one crying bigotry, I'm not about to go throwing out a generalization like that. I will say that someone who is raised and lives with no moral code except what he "feels is right" is more likely to do all the things you mention. When nothing is forbidden, everything is permissible...

    I also don't mean to say that there can be no ethics apart from religious teaching. It's just that ethics determined by your Creator would tend to carry more weight than ethics determined by your neighbor.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  5. #325  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    And don't tell me that the society would fall apart because of lack of "faith" and values. These have nothing to do with each other.

    Atheists are not child molesting, murdering, thieving, philandering rapists just because they lack "faith" in the un-provable.
    But you would have to also recognize that it does instill a great deal of honesty, morality, chastity, and positive ethical values in a great deal of people which has who knows what positive effect on both believers and nonbelievers that they come into contact on a daily basis. These are not exclusive characteristics to only those who are religious, but are commonly found because they are religious.

    Any good thing can be abused and used for bad. Any good thing can be used as an excuse to do bad.
  6. #326  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Look at the situation without hindsight if you can. Pre invasion the vast majority of the world believed that Saddam either had or was very close to acquiring WMDs.
    No they didn't. Thats why the majority of the UN voted no. And I never believed it either. His country was too broken up to even have the ability to do so. We have people who go to Iraq to visit relatives, our newspapers have corrospondants there & I am telling you this first hand. At the time of war, I was SURE he had nothing.
  7. #327  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    You seem to believe that logic and rationality and faith are mutually exclusive values. I do not believe this to be the case.We'll have to agree to disagree on that. I would contend that evidence for my side can be seen all around us. Our society has not fallen apart, but given all our social ills and the coincident de-emphasizing of religious faith (or minimally religious ethical instruction) I'd say the circumstantial evidence is not with you on this one.
    I politely disagree: the US as a - in comparison to European democracies - highly religious county does not score well in most social aspects (homicide rate, teenage pregnancy, divorce rate, life expectancy, etc.). See this post and link therein for a more scientific evaluation:
    http://discuss.treocentral.com/showp...&postcount=505

    So it seems that circumstantial evidence is against you in this case.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  8.    #328  
    Good for you on the guess, I sure thought they had wmd's. Why was the UN monitoring Iraq for a decade? The answer is the UN thought Iraq had WMD's. The vote for NO was not for if they did or didn't have WMD's, it was for going to war or not. But, it was an illegitmate vote since a number of resolutions had already spelled it out if Iraq didn't do as the UN asked.

    Any rate, I never get tired of talking about Iraq so bring it on if you want to beat a dead horse. The way I see it, the mass amount of insurgents we are killing are like roaches coming out of the walls. Might as well get rid of them now.

    Regarding a quote from above about the thread title being bigotry. Ridiculous wrong. Bigotry is in the actions of Islam.

    Quote Originally Posted by redbelt
    No they didn't. Thats why the majority of the UN voted no. And I never believed it either. His country was too broken up to even have the ability to do so. We have people who go to Iraq to visit relatives, our newspapers have corrospondants there & I am telling you this first hand. At the time of war, I was SURE he had nothing.
  9. #329  
    Question: If you have a population of a 1000, and 10 of them are resistance fighters, and you kill 10, how many resistance fighters are left?

    Answer: 20

    Surur
  10.    #330  
    And eventually it will be 0.

    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Question: If you have a population of a 1000, and 10 of them are resistance fighters, and you kill 10, how many resistance fighters are left?

    Answer: 20

    Surur
  11. #331  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I politely disagree: the US as a - in comparison to European democracies - highly religious county does not score well in most social aspects (homicide rate, teenage pregnancy, divorce rate, life expectancy, etc.). See this post and link therein for a more scientific evaluation:
    http://discuss.treocentral.com/show...5&postcount=505

    So it seems that circumstantial evidence is against you in this case.
    As I said previously, we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I'll just note the following:

    - You and I likely have different definitions of what a social pathology is.
    - The social ills you point to have only recently risen in the US - at the same time as the rapid secularization of our society.
    - Christian ethics is so woven into Western culture that I think it's hard to say that even Europe is completely "secular".
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  12. #332  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Question: If you have a population of a 1000, and 10 of them are resistance fighters, and you kill 10, how many resistance fighters are left?

    Answer: 20
    Only if the 990 sympathize with the 10.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  13. #333  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Question: If you have a population of a 1000, and 10 of them are resistance fighters, and you kill 10, how many resistance fighters are left?

    Answer: 20

    Surur
    So, I guess we should do nothing. Let them be. Let them grow stronger. Don't kill the terrorist because there will always be two more to takes it place. If you leave a hornet nest alone by your front door and do not disturb it, then each time you leave and come home you should have nothing to worry about because you didn't do anything to them.

    Maybe we should do any one of your other suggestions:

    Maybe we should reason with them. I am sure they are understanding people. If we give them what they want, they will surely go home happy that their demands were met. We will never have deal with them again.

    Maybe we should just rely on intel to deal with only. We see how solid the intel was concerning Saddam. We can see that intel has helped to capture OBL. We can see that intel helped to capture Saddam....oh...scratch that, he was captured by soldiers on the ground.

    Maybe we should sympathize with them. They are poor. They are uneducated. They are not treated very nicely in other countries. They are not given the same opportunities as everyone else. They are not given very good jobs.

    Equal tolerance is the key. They are so understand and accepting and respectful of other religious belief systems, both abroad and in their homeland. We should be just as accepting of theirs. Since they would never look down on Christians, or other religious faiths (including Atheists), we should make EVERY single effort possible, even at the cost at our own expense, to not offend them.

    It is all justified because hundreds of years ago we did do Crusades against them. It has taken them 500 years to respond, but at least they are doing it now. We deserve it.

    They are in the Dark Ages of their religion after all. They haven't learned in the last 1,429 years killing innocent people is wrong. They don't know what they are doing yet. They don't realize that sawing off a person's head violates his personal rights as a civilian and a human. Just be patient as they keep on killing innocent men, woman, and children for another 500 years when they will realize that they were wrong the whole time.


    Bottom line: A killer is a killer. An organization that orchestrates and plans on killing innocent people is wrong. No matter what the reason, sawing off a person's head that has nothing to do with why they are mad, besides simply being born, is wrong. No matter what injustice one feels has wronged them, blowing up children eating dinner with their families in a public restaurant is wrong. No matter what their religion says, setting road side bombs targeted at innocent civilians, attacking hospitals, blowing up weddings, is wrong.

    It is wrong.
    Period.
    No excuses.
    No justification.

    What gets me almost as much as these acts taking place is the amount of people in the West, including in EU, England, and the US....not to mention the Musims and members of Islam that support it or don't protest against it happening in their name.....is that they continually make the above excuses and to make it appear that the terrorists are the victims in the situation, not the innocent civilians that they target.

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Only if the 990 sympathize with the 10.
    Exactly.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 02/09/2006 at 10:34 AM.
  14. #334  
    Quote Originally Posted by redbelt
    No they didn't. Thats why the majority of the UN voted no. And I never believed it either. His country was too broken up to even have the ability to do so. We have people who go to Iraq to visit relatives, our newspapers have corrospondants there & I am telling you this first hand. At the time of war, I was SURE he had nothing.
    I would have to respectfully disagree. Please see the numerous posts I listed a couple posts back that point out several factors, Russian had a great deal of financial incentive to not go to war due to business deals and depts owed to them. France was a major player of being on the take with the Oil for Food scandal. The bottom answer is that the intel was there at the time. But there were several different motivations to act on it or to ignore it. If you put a date restriction on google's search to not include anything after 90 days after we stepped on Iraqi soil, you will see a great deal of intel, evidence, and world wide agreement of the strong possibilities and probabilities that Saddam had or was trying to actively get WMDs.

    I really don't want this to be an Iraqi thread, there are other threads dedicated to just that. You can feel to respond in any of those threads specifically dealing with the points about Iraq you are talking about. I think my links will point to you all the major Iraqi threads.
  15.    #335  
    One thing I think is overlooked is the US is not going to stop. Much like terrorists we are relentless, we will never give in, never give up and never negotiate. So it is a fight till the end (may be 5, 10, 50 years). I like our chances over the terrorists.
  16. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #336  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    Those who wanted to believe, did. Read Hans Blix's book. The UN inspectors had unlimited access to any place in Iraq (especially after US started building up it's troops in neighboring countries). They went to every site that CIA told them to check out, and found nothing.

    As for the rest of the world, they depend largely on the intelligence and analysis that US agencies provide. No one else has satellites or resources or access to raw intelligence like US does. They will believe (not anymore) whatever the Secretary of State tells them.
    The UN inspectors continually stated they could not verify the WMDs had been destroyed. The stated that a lot of material was unaccounted for and records had been altered. The US does not run the UN.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  17. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #337  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Question: If you have a population of a 1000, and 10 of them are resistance fighters, and you kill 10, how many resistance fighters are left?

    Answer: 20

    Surur
    Now that makes a lot of sense
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  18. #338  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Question: If you have a population of a 1000, and 10 of them are resistance fighters, and you kill 10, how many resistance fighters are left?

    Answer: 20

    Surur
    Sense we are doing the math...

    If this were true, it would be good news. It would mean that their defeat would accelerate exponentially.

    By round 7, the effort would be complete, i.e. 10+20+40+80+160+320+370=1000
  19. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #339  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I politely disagree: the US as a - in comparison to European democracies - highly religious county does not score well in most social aspects (homicide rate, teenage pregnancy, divorce rate, life expectancy, etc.). See this post and link therein for a more scientific evaluation:
    http://discuss.treocentral.com/showp...&postcount=505

    So it seems that circumstantial evidence is against you in this case.


    A percentage of America is religious, not ALL the people here are of a religious faith. There are many, many other types of people, as im sure you know, with different belief systems in this country. Crime and deliquency occurs in all areas with all types of people.

    Also, the claim that european nations have fewer religious inhabitants is somewhat of a dubious statement in my view. There are measurable amounts of muslim, catholic, presbyterian faiths among others throughout Europe, particularly France, England, and yes, even Switzerland.
    You make it sound like a large majority of the US is religious. I dont think that is the case.
    Last edited by vw2002; 02/09/2006 at 11:33 AM.
  20. #340  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    A percentage of America is religious, not ALL the people here are of a religious faith. There are many, many other types of people, as im sure you know, with different belief systems in this country. Crime and deliquency occurs in all areas with all types of people.

    Also, the claim that european nations have fewer religious inhabitants is somewhat of a dubious statement in my view. There are measurable amounts of muslim, catholic, presbyterian faiths among others throughout Europe, particularly France, England, and yes, even Switzerland.
    You make it sound like a large majority of the US is religious. I dont think that is the case.
    We rehash this discussion frequently. I fnid that the issue is not so much understanding the percentage of the population that can be characterized as "religious" as much as it is the underlying presumption of causality in relating religiosity to social-economic conditions.

Posting Permissions