Do atheists outnumber radical Muslims in the U.S.A.?

Posted by johnpe1 8 years, 10 months ago to Government
130 comments | Share | Flag

if our atheists received the same honor as radical Muslims,
would terms like faith, supernatural, omniscient
and omnipresent be outlawed? -- j
.


All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    All of them have a father figure and cohorts in an exempted class including the entities known as collectives. That is the Diety or one of them.

    Secular Progressives go after atheists seeing easy converts however....athiests are more likely to be objectivists and immunized against the twin dieties of Yoda Yakoff and Soros.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't have to believe that. To me a socialist is a socialist is a socialist What is the difference the venom between snake one and snake two?

    The danger is in having a one party system of government that sets all the rules allowing only their members to hold the top offices - and those that vote for them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Well Said! . religion has no place in government. . but
    morality certainly does. -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ sjatkins 8 years, 9 months ago
    Sure. At least officially listed unaffiliated and/or agnostic and atheists to and by quite a bit. Anyone can be radicalized. Some would point to the Soviet Union as proof. But I would argue that being highly collectivist/statist is a religion with the Collective in the place of a deity.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by livefree-NH 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    After this followup, I checked some more, and I stand by my original statement. You might want to look at here, as one example: "According to Abdul Rashied Omar, the majority of modern Muslim scholars continue to hold the traditional view that the death penalty for apostasy is required by the two primary sources of Sharia - the Quran and the Hadiths." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostas... -- Apostasy in Islam - Wikipedia
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It's not merely a portrayal. They aren't even tolerant of their own people who take a moderate/tolerant stance (personal witness to me from another Muslim family).

    In addition, that intolerance is the whole basis of ISIS. ISIS is based on an entirely Qu'ranically supported interpretation of Islam that wants everyone - including other Muslims - to live by strict Sharia. And they use that interpretation themselves to justify their lust for killing and rape. Are all Muslims like that? No. But many of their own Islamic scholars fail to condemn this interpretation as being wrong - they just gloss over that part because of where it leads. But ISIS isn't the only group who takes this stance - they're just the ones the American media fixates on. Saudi Arabia supports strict Sharia, they just don't go around in force killing and raping people and invading other nations. Iran doesn't do it themselves, they just support others who do it on their behalf. Iraq wasn't a stranger to funding outside terror groups prior to its overthrow. Syria has been doing it for more than 70 years with its support of the PLO and Hezbollah. Or look at the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. Or the Phillippines and Moro. Look at Pakistan and their fight with India over Kashmir. It isn't as if this is an isolated incident or an outlier. There is significant and sustained fundamentalism all over the world. To paint this as fringe behavior is simply to ignore the sheer volume of not only history but current events.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The way to fix it is actually quite simple. They need to change and accept fundamental human rights, such as the equality of the sexes, the right to believe what one wishes and to have that right respected by others who believe differently, the right to be tried by a jury of peers, the right to common defense before the law, the rights of women to be equal to men in a court of law, and more.

    Basically, they need to abandon Islam. Hmmm... Maybe this isn't so simple after all.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 10 months ago
    "Defended itself." I see. So it's called defending one's self to you when one arms up tens of thousands of soldiers, tramps them over to a neighboring country, and invades. Or when they just roam around their own countryside forcibly converting every hamlet and village to Islam even when they are fine how they are. Tens of thousands of Coptic Christians, Bedouins, and others all died while in their own villages because Mohammed's forces and his followers were "defending themselves". That's how you want to paint it.

    You're an Islamic sympathizer. You will refuse to admit to the past 1500 years of history and you have no problems attempting to shift the blame. You are unwilling to recognize reality for what it is. I have no use and no tolerance for such. Adieu.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by $ number6 8 years, 10 months ago
    You guys always crack me up ... the discussion always gets back to "You are Obama, or You are Hilary or You are a Muslim sympathisizer" .. dnt discuss the opposing view just attack the other person. Its also funny how so many can HATE and believe that is the answer. Lets blame ALL blacks in America for the crme problem while we are at it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ number6 8 years, 10 months ago
    so you see a diiference netween an irrational hatred of ALL followers of Islam and the irrational hatred of Jews?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ number6 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    incorrect statement of fact ... Islam accepts other religions and does nit call for conversion of others.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ number6 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I deny that Mohammed killed thousands of "innocents" ... In battle DEFENDING people were killed. (as they have been in Christianityas well.)
    I would also submit that Islam has defended itself for 1500 years and that some "Islmaic Scholars" deny the holocaust is aireelevant tot he discussion (as is the statement that some Christian scholars deny the holocaust and some people deny the Holodomor.)
    Reply | Permalink  
    • blarman replied 8 years, 10 months ago
  • Posted by 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    but I don't generalize my statements ... I guess it's enough
    that if anyone generalizes, then the whole class must
    "stay in" at the end of the school day! -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by rbroberg 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There are a number of questions that arise from the above, one of which would be: What constitutes "spreading mischief in the land"? Which can be broken down into what is "mischief" and what is "the land". I presume the answers vary depending on the original language and views of the interpreter... and more than their respective Jeopardy hints.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The keys are the same, but the embouchure is quite different. Yes, FIT guys do have a lot in common.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Flute and sax have the same keys, so that helps.

    Good answer! Of course and FIT guy would have good taste in music!
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo