Bowing Down to Islam (again)

[laxfan25]

Unless you're required to eat three meals a day, that's a really stupid proposition. If you're gonna fast, FAST. Don't tell people they have to pay for you to observe your religious beliefs.

I don't think they were looking to get paid, but wanted to be reimbursed for the meal costs that they had pre-paid.

[Beta]

What a load of crap. So when I had the 14 meals per week plan...anything left over I could get reimbursed for? Please.

This is what happens when you pay a flat rate for something and don't use it in this quirky little thing we call reality.

I have a splendid idea...if they don't like how the meal system is set up...then they can NOT GET IT and pay for individual meals in a block plan. Man! This society/civilization-thing is getting a little too weird for me.

What if I had unlimited...which essentially means infinity. I could use 100 meals in a semester...subtract that from infinity..and voila...still infinity...I will be the richest man in the world after the infidels reimburse me!

[JW]

After first reading this and thinking that I would not respond, it was a few posts about the leadership of this country needing to make us feel safe. I believe that coach Oakley referred to the idea that our country is not safe, and that no one in position for the upcoming election even has an idea of how to do this.

I know that for this next discussion, many of you are going to find reason to debate, feel skeptical, and even upset about this next paragraph or so, but it is what I believe and I hope that you will open your hearts to it.

I believe that our country is not in great shape. I will not debate that. I don't think it has anything to do with politics however. There is not a leader, or person in this country that is going to be able to turn the United States of America back to a state of comfort and security. I believe that the only thing that will turn this country around will be for its people to turn back God. As much as people would like to focus on the sin of our founding fathers and say that they were not very religious people (whatever religious means), they founded this country on a set of morals and on a set of beliefs. For the most part Christian Beliefs. Throughout our existence we have seen a decline in those morals starting in the 1950s. There has been a rapidly increasing decline in the value of purity, and of faith in God to protect us. We have become a country that has fallen in love with our technology, our power, and our money. We have lost sight of the One that brought us to this land. Throughout the Old Testament we see that when God's chosen people (Israel) turn to things other than the worship of God, they are sent into exile and captivity by the Persians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans. It is not until they turn back to God and put their security and safety in the Hands of Yahweh that they are delivered from their injustice.

I am not perfect, never have been. But my security, my safety is only found in my faith of the one true God of the Holy Bible.

This country needs to turn back to God and remember that of ourselves, we can do nothing and only through dependence on God can we live in security.

I am sure many of you will have something to say on this, therefore, if you would like to PM me, I will reply to you personally.

May the Lord Bless you and keep you, May the Lord Shine on you and be Gracious to you, May the Lord look upon you with favor and grant you peace.

Amen

[everythingwentnumb]

I believe that our country is not in great shape. I will not debate that. I don't think it has anything to do with politics however. There is not a leader, or person in this country that is going to be able to turn the United States of America back to a state of comfort and security. I believe that the only thing that will turn this country around will be for its people to turn back God.

Okay, I'll play.

As much as people would like to focus on the sin of our founding fathers and say that they were not very religious people (whatever religious means), they founded this country on a set of morals and on a set of beliefs. For the most part Christian Beliefs.

Extremely common misconception, and extremely irritating to me when people repeat it over and over. The Founding Fathers were NOT CHRISTIANS in the sense of "Jesus is our Lord and Saviour and you must accept him or perish in Hell!" This particular time period is past that of "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God". In fact, the Fathers were Deist:

The concept of Deism covers a wide variety of positions on a wide variety of religious issues. Following Sir Leslie Stephen's English Thought in the Eighteenth Century, most commentators agree that two features constituted the core of Deism:

* The rejection of revealed religion — this was the critical aspect of Deism.
* The belief that reason, not faith, leads us to certain basic religious truths — this was the positive or constructive aspect of Deism.

Deist authors advocated a combination of both critical and constructive elements in proportions and emphases that varied from author to author.

Critical elements of Deist thought included:

* Rejection of all religions based on books that claim to contain the revealed word of God.
* Rejection of reports of miracles, prophecies and religious "mysteries".
* Rejection of the Genesis account of creation and the doctrine of original sin, along with all similar beliefs.
* Rejection of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and other religious beliefs.

Constructive elements of Deist thought included:

* God exists and created the universe.
* God wants human beings to behave morally.
* Human beings have souls that survive death; that is, there is an afterlife.
* In the afterlife, God will reward moral behavior and punish immoral behavior.

Who was a Deist?

Founding Fathers who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, and Hugh Williamson. Although these men were members of traditional Christian denominations (Hugh Williamson was a Presbyterian and the rest were Episcopalians), their political speeches show distinct Deistic influence. Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly Deist. These include Ethan Allen[31] and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize Deism throughout America and Europe). Elihu Palmer (1764-1806) wrote the "Bible" of American Deism in his Principles of Nature (1801) and attempted to organize Deism by forming the "Deistical Society of New York.

Let's examine Thomas Jefferson for a second:

Ill attempts to influence [choice of religion] by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do, but to extend it by its influence on reason alone...

(On a side note, one of Jefferson's first laws signed as Governor of Virgina was to abolish the state Church.)

What does this particular passage tell us? First off, Jefferson states outright that attempting to influence peoples' religious beliefs completely backfires. Furthermore, it isn't what God wanted -- God could have chosen to say to His believers to convert every man he sees, but God chose to allow humans to use reason to find Him, one-on-one. Hardly what one would call Christian.

Now that the history lesson's over, let's continue.

Throughout our existence we have seen a decline in those morals starting in the 1950s. There has been a rapidly increasing decline in the value of purity, and of faith in God to protect us. We have become a country that has fallen in love with our technology, our power, and our money. We have lost sight of the One that brought us to this land.

The 50s began the so-called Sexual Revolution. The pendulum swings from right to left (it is currently right and beginning to swing left once more). Nice rhetoric but redundant. I guess it's a hook to your next point.

Throughout the Old Testament we see that when God's chosen people (Israel) turn to things other than the worship of God, they are sent into exile and captivity by the Persians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans. It is not until they turn back to God and put their security and safety in the Hands of Yahweh that they are delivered from their injustice.

Let's assume for a moment that that Christian God is an all-loving, omnipotent, just, kind, caring God -- the "Standard Model of God", if you will. Let's look at the Old Testament and examine the details of God's personality, since you say the Old Testament shows that when the Israelites turn away from Him, He punishes them back. I will assume that, as the standard assumption is, the Bible is truly the Word of God.

Feel free to read along in your own copy of the Bible, just so you know I'm not making this up.

Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them. When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's and he shall go out alone. But if the slave plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for life.

God condones slavery. Not only does He condone slavery, He gives specific instructions on how to deal with certain situations:

--Slaves may be held for six years; after seven, you may let them go. Of course you don't pay them.
--If the slave has a family when he becomes a slave, he gets to keep it. If he doesn't, he goes out single, even if his master gives him a family. The family belongs to the master.
--If the slave, at the end of his "indenture", refuses to leave his family, then the master shall bring him to God and mutilate the slave, branding him for life, and forcing him to serve for life.

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Not only does God allow slavery, he allows them to be beaten -- so long as you don't kill them.

Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

Wouldn't a loving, just God not allow the slaughter of babies? God, being all-power and all-knowing, could have done the following:

-Told Herod not to slaughter babies
-Change history to not allow Herod to be king
-Kill Herod
-Convince the soldiers not to follow orders and kill babies
-Send all the families to Egypt with Jesus after he was born

There are countless other examples of this "loving God" in the Old Testament burning down villages, explaining the nuances of slave-holding, why women are inferior to men, why animal sacrifice is necessary, etc. If that's your God -- and if your God is the God of the Bible, this is your God -- you may want to consider reading your own literature before devoting blind faith into Him.

I am not perfect, never have been. But my security, my safety is only found in my faith of the one true God of the Holy Bible.

This country needs to turn back to God and remember that of ourselves, we can do nothing and only through dependence on God can we live in security.

Dependence on God is a cop-out. Here's a funny joke I heard a while ago:

Saul was a very poor man, and he had no money to feed his family or anything. So one day, he prayed to God:

"God, I have no money. My children are starving and my wife will soon leave me. Please, grant me a miracle -- let me win the lottery! Amen."

The next day, Saul did not win the lottery. He goes back to pray:

"God, my wife has left me, I am so hungry and tired and cold, and I have nothing left but You! Please help me in my time of need -- let me win the lottery! Amen."

The next day, Saul did not win the lottery. He goes back to pray:

"God, why have you forsaken me? I pray every day; I do everything in the name of You; I am a good Christian person! Why will you not answer my prayer?"

God replies to him, "Saul, meet me halfway here. Buy a ticket."

If you could depend on God, you wouldn't need health insurance. After all, if He answered all your prayers, you wouldn't ever be sick -- or if you were, you'd get well fast after praying. He has that power -- the power to make you well when ill, and he can do it instantly -- he's omnipotent! You can pray all you want to ask God to help you get well in times of illness -- but you'd never give up your health insurance. You'd be crazy to do it.
♦That very fact alone means either God refuses to answer your prayers, despite promising:

Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.

And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up.

I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.

Or, He is not a loving, giving, just God. Or, by application of Occam's Razor -- He doesn't exist.

You claim that only by returning to the morals and values held dear by Christianity may we have a return to normalcy, so-to-speak. My question is, do you really need a book and the threat of eternal damnation to make sure you do good in the world? If that threat wasn't there, would you still act respectfully, morally? Or would you hate your neighbor and cheat your friend? I am a loud-and-proud atheist, and I live by a strong moral code. Honor, duty, respect, and love are major parts of my life. I do well onto others because it is the right thing to do. I don't need a book or an all-powerful being or the threat of eternal damnation to continue living morally -- because that's the right thing to do.

May the Lord Bless you and keep you, May the Lord Shine on you and be Gracious to you, May the Lord look upon you with favor and grant you peace.

Amen

As-salaamu Alaikum. (Peace be upon you.)

[laxfan25]

JW,
I believe you voice the opinion of every generation - that the current one is less intelligent, moral and capable than the previous one. I'm sure we could find examples going back to the founding of our nation.
Many people look back fondly on the 50's as a time of peace and prosperity - that it was the late 60's that brought around the sexual revolution and the decline of western civilization - and that prior to that we all felt warm and safe here in America. What you overlook is the dominating fear that was drummed into us about the spread of global Communism and the threat of mass destruction. I have done the drills in elementary school of climbing under the desk - the every saturday air raid siren tests - the extreme tension of the Cuban Missile Crisis - it wasn't all Ozzie and Harriet. Minorities might also question the feeling that everything was OK back then - there was a pretty violent struggle for civil rights that took place in that era, and prior to that every good black "knew his place" at the back of the bus.
A case can be made that there are interests that always want to raise the spectre of some time of bogeyman out there in order to continue to feed the "Military-Industrial Complex"
I'm glad that you have a strong personal faith, I'm glad that works for you. Where things start to go bad is when people claim that God is on the side of their country or their group. Christians, Muslims and Jews all stake claim to God's beneficience, and a case can be made that it is Islamic Fundamentalist's extremely held faith that is the root of their extremism. It is a belief in God and eternal paradise that feeds the strength of people to go out and sacrifice their lives in suicide bombings against the infidels. They look with revulsion on the decadence of western society, much the same as you do, and it is the desire to stamp out it's influence that fuels the efforts of groups like the Taliban.
Your just adopting the other side of the same coin - if you take your commentary and substitute Allah for God it could be a Taliban manifesto. It is for these reasons that our insightful forefathers included the principle of separation of church and state in our Constitution, and I'm glad they did. A strong faith is ideal in your personal life if it embodies the principles laid out by everythingwentnumb - "Honor, duty, respect, and love" - and those are the ideals that should guide our governing officials as well.

[Beta]

This is turning into a religious knowledge measuring contest...I think everyone just needs to back up for a second, take a breath, watch American Ninja 4 like I am currently doing...and chill.

[everythingwentnumb]

This is turning into a religious knowledge measuring contest...I think everyone just needs to back up for a second, take a breath, watch American Ninja 4 like I am currently doing...and chill.

Learning is the first step out of ignorance and the first of many in achieving enlightenment. I'd love to hear JW's opinion, and I think we're all adult enough to maturely participate in public discourse.

[Beta]

Mmm, very lovely.

Reports: Sudan arrests UK teacher for teddy bear blasphemy

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/africa/11/26/sudan.bear/index.html

[Sonny]

The school has been closed until January for fear of reprisals.

Fellow teachers at Khartoum's Unity High School told Reuters news agency they feared for Ms Gibbons' safety after receiving reports that men had started gathering outside the police station where she was being held.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7112929.stm

[Zeuslax]

Mmm, very lovely.

Reports: Sudan arrests UK teacher for teddy bear blasphemy

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/africa/11 ... index.html

Who's bowing down to Islam here? This is definitely a solid example of the extreme thought process found with the religion of Islam in many parts of the world. Is she being made an example of? I seriously doubt it.
I'm not defending this situation or saying it's acceptable by any means. Just being captain O-vious

As a side note, I would have to think that many of us would find it a little weird if your kid brought home a teddy bear named Jehovah for the weekend. For kids this age there would most definitely be some questions for the teacher to find out what the heck is going on. I agree, that's probably were the similarities end!

[Beta]

Who's bowing down to Islam here? This is definitely a solid example of the extreme thought process found with the religion of Islam in many parts of the world. Is she being made an example of? I seriously doubt it. I'm not defending this situation or saying it's acceptable by any means. Just being captain O-vious

I didn't choose this topic because of any bowing, this was the most recent Islam subject. But if I had to draw a comparison, I think the UK shutting down the school because of threats of violence is sorta bowing, ish.

As a side note, I would have to think that many of us would find it a little weird if your kid brought home a teddy bear named Jehovah for the weekend.

Something is allowed to be "weird", but that doesn't mean it deserves closing a school and whipping a female schoolteacher. A very common latin american name is Jesus...I don't see a law in any latin american country calling for torture to a woman for calling a teddy bear Jesus.

Yay for human/female rights in Islam! Hip hip hooray!

[Jolly Roger]

Yay for human/female rights in radical Islam! Hip hip hooray!

Corrected

[Beta]

Corrected

This is the Sudan government that did this, not that they're credible as representatives of anything. But this is simply same story, different part of the world.

Let's pick a larger country that people care about like...oh...hmm..like Saudi Arabia. Who has gender segregation still. Where a woman can not so much as hang out with a man that is not of relation.

Well then women can just vote and change the system right?!! Wait, women in Saudi Arabia cannot vote. Hmm.

Well then...the women in Saudi can just drive to a meeting to fix this! Assuming of course, she asks permission from her husband and he says yes...because he says no...she has to stay. Oh wait...women in Saudi aren't permitted to drive. My bad.

Well at least women in Islam have the right to wear what they choose without worry. Kind of like the image below, where the woman was warned by police to dress more modestly, since you know....a woman is REQUIRED to be modest...because the girl below looks like a common street whore. I think what, 50 lashings? 100 lashings is in order?



In America if a man makes $31 per hour and a woman makes $30 for doing the same job...all hell breaks loose and it is the end of world. In in the Middle East...a woman goes outside without her veil and she gets prison...if not a handful of stones thrown at said mouth. Mmm mmm! I love my head in the sand!

Or does Saudi Arabi not count because (insert whatever reason here)?

[FLAK]

In America if a man makes $31 per hour and a woman makes $30 for doing the same job...all hell breaks loose and it is the end of world. In in the Middle East...a woman goes outside without her veil and she gets prison...if not a handful of stones thrown at said mouth. Mmm mmm! I love my head in the sand!

Or does Saudi Arabi not count because (insert whatever reason here)?

ON a side note, I would like to congratulate you Beta on finding a picture with an exceptionally beautiful example of a Saudi/Arab woman, I for one believe that she is being scolded by the less attractive woman purely on the basis of her hotness.

Granted it is merely a side-profile and not the full picture, but from this angle she appears to be quite the fox, how dare you Islamic nations for forcing a flower such as this to hide behind a vail

I give her a 7.5, purely because of the mere side profile and apparent lack of bod, but then again, if she were in a western country, we would be able to benefit from a style of tight jeans and low cut blouses which would allow for a more reasonable judgment of T and A...God Bless America.

[Zamboni_Driver]

Or does Saudi Arabi not count because (insert whatever reason here)?

So do you suggest the US get involved in altering, influencing, and pressuring foreign countries to change their inhuman policies? Kinda like nation-building?