"Terrorists have no soul. They have no religion"

[Midlodemocrat]

Spoken by a woman of Indian descent just now on GMA. She and her husband survived the attack in Mumbai and she wanted to make a point of saying that this wasn't a 'Muslim' act.

Very powerful segment, IMHO.

[Clovis Sangrail]

1. They're a completely predictable result of religion.

at least the religious extremist terrorists are.

They represent apects of religion most people try to ignore but they very definitely have religion.

[Midlodemocrat]

2. Missed the point. There is NO religion that adheres to

terrorism and its killing of innocents. That's what she was saying. It's not a religion. It's a corruption of what once might have been one.

[mrcheerful]

3. But all religions are corrupted by religious leaders in some way shape or form

Even the most peaceful religions tell their sheep that people of other sects or beliefs are to be avoided and shunned. Unless you can get money or have them work for you, then you over look their beliefs.

[Midlodemocrat]

4. Untrue. Sorry.

Shunning? C'mon.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

19. Painting a rather broad brush, I'd say

There are sects within religions that are all-encompassing in their doctrines. Unity, a Christian sect, welcomes everyone to their church, including non-Christians. Sufis do the same thing--no "litmus test" for coming to a Sufi ceremony. In the Sufi Order International, the SRS, and the Sufi Movement, the worship service consists of reading from sacred scripture of many different religions and showing how they are saying the same thing. One of the daily prayers says :"Allow us to recognize Thee in ALL Thy Holy Names and Forms: as Rama, as Krishna, as Shiva, as Buddha; Let us know Thee as Abraham, as Solomon, as Zarathustra, as Moses, as Jesus, as Mohammed, and in many other names and forms, known and unknown to the world" (Salat)

In both of these sects, one may be a member of the sect and ALSO a member of another religious organization. I personally know a couple of priests (Catholic and Episcopal) who are initiated Sufis, as well as rabbis and Unitarian and Unity ministers.

Perhaps the reason for this tolerance is that both Unity and Sufism stress the individual's personal connection to Source and stress that each person's path is unique. The leaders in both sects do not demand obedience to some dogma, but rather encourage individual exploration of the Greater Self.

[Deep13]

41. Religion is corrupt ab initio because it is founded on a lie. nt

[prostock69]

62. How true

:thumbsup:

[varkam]

5. Well that just depends on who you ask, doesn't it?

I mean, the "innocents" thing - I'm sure the gunmen in Mumbai were all about killing infidels. It's been a while since I have read the Koran, but if I remember correctly there was a whole lot about killing infidels and non-believers. Point being that you can't kick people out of your party or your religion just because you don't like what they're doing ala the No True Scotsman fallacy.

[Midlodemocrat]

7. No backpack for you.

The point this woman was trying to make is that a Religion didn't do this. Insanity ruled. The lone captured terrorist has a fourth grade education and stated that they trained in Pakistan for a year prior to the attacks.

Corrupting a 9yo in the name of religion? Sorry. Not a religion.

And, there's a lot of stuff in the Bible that we would give pause to. Same with the Torah.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

23. Yes yes!

Just because someone calls what they are doing a "religion" doesn't make it so. Religion is really found in one's heart, and is related to one's connection to Source, be it directly or indirectly through a priest, rabbi, or minister.

[Midlodemocrat]

24. I believe that is what this woman was trying to convey.

And, as for me, I'm doing a poor job conveying it for her.

It was a very emotional segment. She was clutching a tissue the whole time and talking about how she and her husband split up so that there was at least a smidge of a chance that one of them would survive to return to their two small children.

:cry:

[prostock69]

47. Religion is found in one's heart! I don't think so

Compassion, love, honesty, foregiveness, and empathy are found in one's heart NATURALLY. Not because there is a god or jesus. We are born with these traits. Religion is not a feeling or a trait. Religions are cults created by men to govern, control and manipulate people and their beliefs. The three main religions' holy books (bible, torah and koran) which are the FOUNDATIONS of these religions, tells their readers through God, in explicit detail, to injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, and kill any creature or living being that doesn't agree with god. You can't cherry pick the the koran for the things you like and ignore the rest and claim to be a true follower of Islam. Their gods does not allow for this without severe punishment (death). So I don't understand how you can say it's the "people" not the religion when it's the religion that is MANDATING them to injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, and kill in order to get into heaven?

I have done a lot of research on Islam. I have read many books and watched many videos. They all say the same thing: Muslims truly do want to rid this world of Christians, Hindus and Jews and all non-believers such as I. They will not stop until they do because they are MANDATE by their god to do so. The Clerics and the Mullahs mandate that all Muslims follow the koran word for word. Muslims are already infiltrating Europe. They passed the Sharia Law in England so the laws of Islam will be enforced on its people instead of the laws of England. They will push for the same thing here in America. Iran is setting to stone to death a woman who is accused of commiting adultry. Adultry has a broad meaning over there. It's not just cheating on your husband. Sharia law will allow them to do that in Europe.

This isn't because of people, it's because of their Religion beliefs. A good video to watch regarding how religion is harmful is "The Root of All Evil" by Richard Dawkins. You can find parts 1 and 2 on Google Video. It's a real eye opener to how and why religious beliefs based on 1st century stuperstitions are harmful and why.

Some books that I have read that deal with religions:
"The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason" and "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris;
"The God Delusion" "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins;
"No Gods-No Masters" by Annie Laurie Gaylor; (Addresses the oppression of women as mandated in the bible)
"The Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible" by Ruth Hurmence Green;and
"Misquoting Jesus. The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" by Bart D. Ehrman.

Dr. Bart Ehrman also has two vidoes that I highly recomment as well on Google Video:

"Conversations with History - Bart Ehrman" He talks a little about how the Devil and the Apocalypse was invented by MAN and WHY.
"Heyns Lecture Series: Misquoting Jesus" He talks about how the New Testament was created. REALLY eye opening.

His website, if you are interested: http://bartdehrman.com/

Dr. Ehram is a highly respect and esteemed Bible Scholar. He teaches of the U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:

UNDERGRADUATE COURSES TAUGHT:
New Testament Introduction; Jesus in Myth, Tradition, and History; The Birth of Christianity; Apocalypse Now and Then; Heresy and Orthodoxy in Early Christianity; Jesus in Scholarship and Film; The Life and Letters of Paul; Jesus and the Synoptics; The Gospel and Letters of John; The Problem of Suffering in the Biblical Traditions; Introduction to Hebrew Bible.

GRADUATE COURSES TAUGHT:
Problems and Methods in New Testament Studies; Early Christian Apocrypha; The Apostolic Fathers; Literary Forgery in the Early Christian Tradition; The Greek Apologists; Heresy and Orthodoxy in Early Christianity; Christianity in the Early Roman Empire; Readings in the Greco-Roman Religions; New Testament Textual Criticism; New Testament Greek and Exegesis; The Rise of Anti-Judaism.

Another book that I am reading right now is amazingly inspiring and eye opening as well: "Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists" by Dan Barker. Dan Barker became an Atheist back in 1983 after 20 years of preaching the "word of god". He was also a Christian music writer, composer and performer. He is currently the co-president of "Freedom From Religion Foundation" which is a non-profit organization that fights for Separation of Church and State. They are fighting many legal battles all over the U.S. to keep religion out of our government and public schools. He also has become the go to person for ministers, pastors, and priests who are closet atheists that are trapped in their religions because they don't know how to do anything else.

Anyways, I'm sorry this became so long and "preachy" but I feel very passionate about this subject. Religion is bad for everyone.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

69. That is your viewpoint

and I respect it, mainly because I am not you and have not experienced what you have experienced. Mine is different, but I assure you it is based upon my personal experiences.

[varkam]

56. I respectuflly disagree.

Religion is an external system of belief and politics that has little to do with what is in the heart of its constituent members. Maybe some sort of sense of spirituality is found in the heart, but religion is an external phenomenon.

[skepticscott]

129. It is religion for THEM

when they act on their faith in violent ways. Just because you say it isn't, that also does not make it so. And by what right or wisdom do you declare unilaterally what is and is not a "religion"?

[varkam]

57. Oh, so you're not going to get me the bag now because I disagree with you? Bigot.

:D

It seems that such an individual would be an exception rather than the rule. Terrorists tend to be fairly well educated and come from middle-class backgrounds.

I agree with you that taking a 9-year-old and instilling such principles is pretty messed up - but it's still a religion. You can't boot people out just because you don't agree with it. That's not to say all of Islam is like that, or that all practicing Muslims are like that, but there is certainly a dark side to the faith (just as there is here in the States with the likes of Fred Phelps and his ilk). Otherwise, the conclusion is that only good people are Christians / Islamic - which is understandably offensive to people who aren't members of the faith.

[Seldona]

100. "Corrupting a 9yo in the name of religion? Sorry. Not a religion."

http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/

:yoiks:

[ZombieHorde]

124. What is the difference between religion and insanity?

[rd_kent]

137. "religion didn't do this, insanity did". Hmmm, isn't believing in something that cannot be proven

insane in the first place? AT least delusional?

[rd_kent]

138. Do you even see how hypocritical your statements are?

Corrupting a 9yo in the name of religion? Sorry. Not a religion.

What the fuck do you think you are doing to kids when you take them to church? You are corrupting them, brainwashing them into believing what YOU believe.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

22. I wonder which translation of the Qur'an you read

as there are three major translations, and they vary on their meanings. The one by Yusuf Ali is one most used by Sufis, and the message I get from reading it is that human nature is inclined to do violence when wrongs are done to someone--but that it should be a last and not a first resort, and that innocent bystanders should NOT be hurt--nor should their property. And when a peace is made, old hates should be forgotten.

[Clovis Sangrail]

44. 'last resort' is very subjective

Emperor Bush launched an attack against Iraq as a 'last resort'.

[varkam]

58. It has been some time, and so I do not remember.

However, that is part of the problem with religion and dogma in general is that so much of it is open to differing interpretation and translation. Who is to say that the version that you believe is the "correct" one? FWIW, I very much agree with the sentiment that you express, but understand that there is just as much authority for differing - and much darker - interpretations.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

71. But this, I think, is the nature of mankind

I've seen the Communist Manifesto "interpreted" so that the USSR could exist and flourish. And let's remember the many many treaties different nations have had over the years, and how they were often "creatively" interpreted. Whenever you deal with words, you deal with concepts. Concepts are shadows of reality, and can be distorted to fit one's own agenda.

Perhaps this is why many Sufis stress not the holy books but rather one's individual, personal experience with The Beloved. That experience is so far beyond words that it cannot be expressed with language.

[varkam]

78. I agree, but I don't see how that's a refutation of what I said.

Maybe it wasn't intended to be (it has been a long day), because it seems like even if it's true that "concepts are shadows of reality, and can be distorted to fit one's own agenda" then you're still left with the problem of determining which interpretation is the correct one. Moreover, you're still left with the problem of debasing another interpretation as incorrect while resting your own interpretation on the same shaky premise that your opponent has.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

79. Or maybe finding out

neither concept is correct--or perhaps both are.

[varkam]

81. It seems to me that some concepts are mutually exclusive.

for example, dictates to "kill the nonbeliever" are not compatible with "don't kill the nonbeliever" - both cannot be simultaneously true.

[trotsky]

87. "one's individual, personal experience with The Beloved"

Without even realizing it, you highlight the single biggest problem with revealed religions. If ultimately your personal experience with your god is just that - personal and wholly impossible for anyone else to duplicate - then how can anyone state conclusively what the "true" form of a religion is? Especially with one like, for instance, Christianity, which has had huge movements focused around people who got an individual, personal message from their god. Strange that each of them got such vastly different messages.

[ZombieHorde]

123. Aren't all three translations equally valid?

[Clovis Sangrail]

6. no... I didn't miss that point

Fundie terrorists might not be representative of the religion some people like to believe they themselves belong to but that doesn't mean they aren't

[Midlodemocrat]

8. This woman stated that the people next to her

in the locked room for 12 hours were Muslim.

Her entire point is that it wasn't a religious attack. I believe in her own way, she is trying to tell people not to react with the knee-jerk that a lot of AMericans did after 9/11.

She was very sincere and very sweet.

[charlie]

13. It might not have been a religious attack

But your assertion above that NO religion would countenance this is codswallop. Most adherents may have move beyond such divinely sanctioned bloodlust, but enough have not, and can readily find justification in "holy" texts.

[Midlodemocrat]

15. Do you really believe that any of the mainstream religions

preach on the practice of killing innocents. In my experience, it's exactly the opposite. Justification can be found in any Holy Book, but that doesn't mean that it is practiced or encouraged.

[charlie]

20. Are you kidding?

Do you think the strident flavor of Islam that holds sway from Saudi Arabia to the madrassas in the hinterlands doesn't sanction the death of infidel "innocents"? You might find some comfort in tweezing them apart from the "mainstream", but they enjoy a whole crapload of adherents, and they ARE religious observers in spite of attempts to define them as something else.

[Midlodemocrat]

21. That's Islamic LAW, not the Religion.

Again, corrupted by those for their own agendas.

The Muslims I know here in the US are repulsed by what happens under Islamic and Sharia Law.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

26. The Muslims I know from around the world agree with you

They are repulsed and are working hard to show the world that the majority of Muslims are non-violent and are working for justice and change in their respective countries.

[charlie]

30. Oh, fer chrissakes

Until the religious convene a worldwide quorum and either categorically condemn or dismiss the compulsion to violence in their "holy" texts that a huge swath of believers use for justification as "not religious", you can't dismiss such actions as unreligious. Of course, your Muslims friends are repulsed. They're decent people, but their blood soaked brethren are just as religious (likely more so) as they are.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

33. You mean like the Sufis in Iran?

The Iranian government destroyed a Sufi center, and the students of the Murshid (teacher) came to non-violently protest. They were beaten, then arrested, and many held and tortured. But they remained non-violent, and are non-violent to this day.

By "not religious" I mean they are not following the teachings found in the Qur'an nor are they following the example set by The Prophet.

As for worldwide religious quorums--there have been many many interfaith meetings about this very topic. They are not covered by the MSM to any extent, but their agenda is to find common ground so that fighting and hatred can cease. Ironically, at the 2005 interfaith conference in Dallas, the delegates had to have police protection because of threats from fundamentalist Christians.

[charlie]

42. No, I don't mean like Sufis

Ayeshahaqqiqa, I'm certainly aware the sect you're part of is expansive, accomodating and socially mild. I'm not interested in whacking on believers for "being religious." Seriously, I'm not. And certainly, least of all you, you're someone I admire. And I understand the woman's intent when she claims the wanton murderers have "no religion." But, I won't let fly the OP's assertion that this couldn't happen under the rubric of ANY religion when we both know that isn't true.

Yes, there are and have been large assemblies, interdenominational and otherwise, that affirm commonality and peace. But, these rub against passages in their own canon. THAT's what I was talking about, not denigrating the peaceful intent of the majority. Unless the the full authority of the various denominations are used to either excise or delegate to anachronism the bloody passages, there will always be a God-sanctioned well for murderers to draw from.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

67. Well, as my "denomination" is SOI,

and SOI (Sufi Order International) is doing all these things, I don't know what else to say. I certainly wouldn't expect someone who is a member of the Unitarian Universalist Church to be able in any way to influence what the Pope decides to do--or Franklin Graham or the local Baptist preacher. We have to start from where we are.

[charlie]

80. I'm not putting the onus on you

I have no expectation that you must DO something, that's not my intent and it's definitely not my place. You have no responsibility for the actions of Wahhabists, Taliban, Christian Fundies, etc.

All I'm saying is the notion that if the results are bad, then religious practices are "not religion" is foolish. The OP's assertion that no religion would sanction the death of innocents is plainly false. If the big religions want to credibly make that claim, the least they ought to do is purge every violent dictum, every tale of retribution from their sacred texts. Then they can rightly say, you can't get that from this. (I don't see where they do much good for anyone concerned with the numinous and ineffable anyway, their only value is historical -- so put them where they won't be mistaken for anything but history)

[ZombieHorde]

134. What is a mainstream religion? nt

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

25. And very wise

Muslims have been and continue to be victims of terrorist violence perpetrated by so-called "Muslims". We know what happened here after 9/11--the woman is trying to keep something like that from happening in India. She knows that there is a struggle now within Islam between those who preach non-violence and tolerance and those who teach violence and hate. The latter would love to have widespread persecution of any Muslim, as they feel it will only add to their ranks. As any pacifist will tell you, it takes real strength and courage not to fight once you are assaulted.

[Midlodemocrat]

27. You have some amazing insights into Religion. Do you

post in any of the religious forums much? I'd like to read more of your thoughts.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

29. No, not really

R/T is mainly a haven for atheists, and the Muslim/Islam group is very quiet.

[Midlodemocrat]

32. yeah, my experience as well.

I used to read Progressives and other Christians of Faith, but most of my conversations with folks here on religion take place via PM.

I had a wonderful conversation several years back with matcom about why he is an atheist. It was very enlightening. He's one of the few atheists here who doesn't play the 'believing in a higher power makes you stupid' card.

[JNelson6563]

46. You are always a credit to your faith

I am an atheist but I always appreciate your posts. You are an enlightened soul. :toast:

Julie

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

68. And I respect your worldview n/t

[Clovis Sangrail]

43. I don't doubt her sincerity but so far as we know now it *was religious

unfortunately religious adherents pick and choose the parts to pay attention to and to overlook.

Most people choose all the warm fuzzy bits and ignore the nasty stuff like killing your neighbor if he works on the sabbath.
The Deccan Mujahadeen chose different bits... doesn't mean they're not motivated by religion .

Just like how Phelps bases his hatred in religion.

I don't want to see this result in another wave of anti-muslim fervor either but it should result in a wave of anti-fundie fervor.

[John Gauger]

117. It's not just that they weren't motivated by religion

It's that they don't have any at all. If only they had some religion, they wouldn't have done these terrible things. See, religion is by definition good, so anyone who does anything bad is by definition not religious, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

[Orsino]

31. Begging your pardon, but there are indeed such religions.

Religious terrorists adhere to them--by definition.

They worship vengeful, intolerant deities that demand or delight in death.

[Midlodemocrat]

34. It's the corruption of the religion that they adhere to.

Not the religion themselves.

The Qua'an has been completely misinterpreted since 9/11. Pulling out the vengeful wrath like stuff akin to the OT.

[Orsino]

38. Pretty much every religion is a corruption/evolution of another...

...or a fusion of elements of some others.

The distinction you're highlighting is not one between religion and non-religion, but between different religions.

[ZombieHorde]

135. Well said. nt

[Qibing Zero]

60. Going back a few hundred years

Before all the social reforms and even the enlightenment, what was then the mainstream non-corrupted version of the Abrahamic religions would be considered barbaric today. Even further, extending that to the time in which each religion was 'founded', things were even more gruesome. And yet, what is considered the 'corruption' of these religions in today's world are the things that would have been most appropriate during the time of their inception.

Claiming corruption or misinterpretation is incredibly dishonest, and only marginalizes the real problem behind these type of things.

[Marr]

65. Religious zealots would say the same about you.

They would say that your willingness to ignore certain scripture in favor of the parts you agree with is a corruption of the faith. They see themselves and the purest, most devoted of all god's children-- from abortion bombers to suicide bombers.

What's more, they are just as correct as you are. These different interpretations of religious texts may not all be socially acceptable, but they're all equally "correct".

[Deep13]

40. Um, all three Abrahamic religions explicitly authorize and require that.

So as a factual matter, your statement is just plain wrong.

[DireStrike]

70. That's like saying the US does not adhere to killing civilians in wartime

It's still an inevitable result of our policies and actions.

[Goblinmonger]

95. Inquisitions? Crusades? Pogroms?

Kind of smacks of terrorism with religious origins.

[PassingFair]

109. You left out "Shock and Awe"

Don't forget MOAB, either.

[northernsoul]

114. The God of the Bible Disagrees

This isn't some human religious leader "corrupting what once might have been," this is the God of Abraham himself, being a bloodthirsty, genocidal monster:

1 Chronicles 21: 9-14: God kills 70,000 people. Why? To punish David for taking a census.

Deuteronomy 3:1-7: God's Chosen People kill every resident of sixty different towns that were in their path.

Joshua 6: God orders the attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses.”

Judges 21: God orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When the Israelites wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, ther could kidnap her, rape her and thereby make her a wife.

[ZombieHorde]

115. Actually, there is a religion that adheres to terrorism and killing innocents.

That religion is a branch of Islam adhered by the suicide bombers.

They believe they will go to heaven, and receive automatons with the form of a woman, if they die while killing others. That is a religious belief.

[Deep13]

130. She's mistaken.

The Koran, Hadifs (sp?) and holy men of Islam all authorize the "defense" of Islam and expansion thereof at the point of a sword. If that woman doesn't believe it, that's her business. But Islam as a religion does allow and even command such things. You may say that such things are the result of corrupt leaders going back to Mohamed himself. If so, then it is still part of the religion.

Let me put it this way. Saying someone was a suicide bomber says nothing about that person's social class, race, nationality, education, social background, gender or upbringing. Nevertheless, you can be pretty damn sure what his religion is.

[ZombieHorde]

133. Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

I think all the people who kill in the name of religion prove her statement wrong.

[rd_kent]

136. Thats funny, because from the extremists POV, its the moderates that have corrupted their religion.

Its all a matter of perspective. IMO, ALL religion eventually leads to this extremist behavior. It is seen in ALL religions.

[Toasterlad]

11. Definitely.

The fact that they are crazy doesn't preclude them from being religious. In fact...

[tekisui]

9. Agree on lack of soul, but they most definitely have religion.

That kind of brainwashing and motivation comes from indoctrination from an institution. It may be a horrendous version of religion, and may be a religion of terrorist, but it is a religion.

Religion: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; an institution to express belief in a divine power;A religion is a set of beliefs and practices often organized around supernatural and moral claims, and often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

14. Religion in this case

is a thin veneer to hate the hatred and lust for power that really motivates these terrorist organizations. The Nazis were similar--they gave lip service to Christianity but in truth were more interested in world domination of their "master race".

[Midlodemocrat]

16. I think that is what she was saying. She was very emotional

as would anyone be after such a traumatic event, but she was trying to convey that these acts weren't the works of a religion, but of someone who was corrupting it for their own agenda.

I don't believe that English was her first language, either, which might have been why her statements weren't as clear. Her sentiment certainly was, though.

[ZombieHorde]

125. Without religion, suicide bombings don't make sense.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

10. The Muslim Council of India has refused burial of the 9 terrorists

killed, and has asked that no Muslim cemetery in India bury them. This is a very powerful statement of condemnation imho.

[Midlodemocrat]

12. Well, IMHO, doing so would give credence

to the fact that they are indeed Muslims. Refusing to allow them to be buried in a Muslim cemetery seems to be ammunition for what this survivor was saying.

I guess if you didn't see the segment, you can't really understand what this survivor was saying. It was a quick one and I didn't DVR it because I didn't know it was coming.

She was very sincere. Very straightforward that this was a terrorist act, not a religious one. I think she is frightened for her country at this point because of some of the rhetoric she was hearing.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

17. But in another way it does not

just because someone says they are Muslim doesn't mean they are. I believe the Council was trying to make sure no Muslim group was duped into giving the terrorists a cemetery plot as it would imply that they were Muslims and that the group supported them.

[Midlodemocrat]

18. I think we're saying the same thing.

I think they are refusing to bury them in a Muslim ceremony because they want the public to realize that they aren't indicative of mainstream Muslims.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

28. Yes, we agree n/t

[ZombieHorde]

126. a terrorist act, not a religious one - It was both.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

35. Muslims are supposed to be buried soon after death, correct?

[Midlodemocrat]

36. That's what I thought, so this news is kind of a surprise to me.

[Deep13]

37. They are terrorists because of their religion.

I understand that most Muslim are normal people just as most Christians, Jews and Hindus are normal people. I understand the lady's desire to make religion a defining standard of decency, but it just is not. The terrorists would not have done what they did if they did not deeply believe in Islam and the Koran.

[Deja Q]

39. Muslim? Naah, it's clearly a new turf war instigated by Pakistan.

:sarcasm:

I don't know who caused it, but current whole world political situation suggests it transcends their two countries' petty little feud.

[arcadian]

59. It's being exploited by the American news media.

LINKS TO Al-Qaeda!

[JNelson6563]

45. Yeah, they must be atheists!

Because everyone knows if you aren't in fear of some kind of god you cannot possibly be capable of being a good person. Oy.

Julie

[riderinthestorm]

49. I know. I read it that way too.

No religion = no soul.

And believers never condemn this kind of statement. I'm not even sure they "see" it. Anti-atheist crap allowed to hang out there unchallenged.

[Ichingcarpenter]

52. "Agnostics have no soul. They have no religion"

Sort of read the OP thing like that to. If you notice the
saying is dealing in absolutes in both sentences. I understand
the meaning of the thread but it lost in the language of the sentence.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

48. No True Scotsman fallacy. On crack. -nt

[prostock69]

50. They have religion. It's called Islam

ALL Religions are cults created by men to govern, control and manipulate people and their beliefs. The three main religions' holy books (bible, torah and koran) which are the FOUNDATIONS of these religions, tells their readers through God, in explicit detail, to injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, and kill any creature or living being that doesn't agree with god. It also tells MEN to OPPRESS Women in numerous scriptures. Now with Islam, you can't cherry pick the the koran for the things you like and ignore the rest and claim to be a true follower of Islam. Their god does not allow for this without severe punishment (death). Islam DEMANDS them to injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, and kill in order to get into heaven.

I have done a lot of research on Islam. I have read many books and watched many videos. They all say the same thing: Muslims truly do want to rid this world of Christians, Hindus and Jews and all non-believers such as I. They will not stop until they do because they are MANDATE by their god to do so. The Clerics and the Mullahs mandate that all Muslims follow the koran word for word. Muslims are already infiltrating Europe. They passed the Sharia Law in England so the laws of Islam will be enforced on its people instead of the laws of England. They will push for the same thing here in America. Iran is setting to stone to death a woman who is accused of commiting adultry. Adultry has a broad meaning over there. It's not just cheating on your husband. Sharia law will allow them to do that in Europe.

This isn't because of people, it's because of their Religion beliefs. A good video to watch regarding how religion is harmful is "The Root of All Evil" by Richard Dawkins. You can find parts 1 and 2 on Google Video. It's a real eye opener to how and why religious beliefs based on 1st century stuperstitions are harmful and why. He interviews many different people of faith. The one interview with the Muslim in Palistine truly is frightening.

Some books that I have read that deal with religions:
"The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason" and "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris;
"The God Delusion" "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins;
"No Gods-No Masters" by Annie Laurie Gaylor; (Addresses the oppression of women as mandated in the bible)
"The Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible" by Ruth Hurmence Green;and
"Misquoting Jesus. The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" by Bart D. Ehrman. HIGHLY RECOMMEND!!!!

Dr. Bart Ehrman also has two vidoes that I highly recommend as well on Google Video:

"Conversations with History - Bart Ehrman" He talks a little about how the Devil and the Apocalypse was invented by MAN and WHY.
"Heyns Lecture Series: Misquoting Jesus" He talks about how the New Testament was created. REALLY eye opening.

His website, if you are interested: http://bartdehrman.com /

Dr. Ehram is a highly respect and esteemed Bible Scholar. He teaches of the U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:

UNDERGRADUATE COURSES TAUGHT:
New Testament Introduction; Jesus in Myth, Tradition, and History; The Birth of Christianity; Apocalypse Now and Then; Heresy and Orthodoxy in Early Christianity; Jesus in Scholarship and Film; The Life and Letters of Paul; Jesus and the Synoptics; The Gospel and Letters of John; The Problem of Suffering in the Biblical Traditions; Introduction to Hebrew Bible.

GRADUATE COURSES TAUGHT:
Problems and Methods in New Testament Studies; Early Christian Apocrypha; The Apostolic Fathers; Literary Forgery in the Early Christian Tradition; The Greek Apologists; Heresy and Orthodoxy in Early Christianity; Christianity in the Early Roman Empire; Readings in the Greco-Roman Religions; New Testament Textual Criticism; New Testament Greek and Exegesis; The Rise of Anti-Judaism.

Another book that I am reading right now is amazingly inspiring and eye opening as well: "Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists" by Dan Barker. Dan Barker became an Atheist back in 1983 after 20 years of preaching the "word of god". He was also a Christian music writer, composer and performer. He is currently the co-president of "Freedom From Religion Foundation" which is a non-profit organization that fights for Separation of Church and State. They are fighting many legal battles all over the U.S. to keep religion out of our government and public schools. He also has become the go to person for ministers, pastors, and priests who are closet atheists that are trapped in their religions because they don't know how to do anything else.

Anyways, I'm sorry this became so long and "preachy" but I feel very passionate about this subject. Religion is bad for everyone.

[uppityperson]

86. Timothy McVeigh was Islamic? Wow, I missed that.

I guess the anthrax mailer must be Muslim, as were all those who gave smallpox blankets to NA.

[prostock69]

51. They have religion. It's called Islam

ALL Religions are cults created by men to govern, control and manipulate people and their beliefs. The three main religions' holy books (bible, torah and koran) which are the FOUNDATIONS of these religions, tells their readers through God, in explicit detail, to injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, and kill any creature or living being that doesn't agree with god. It also tells MEN to OPPRESS Women in numerous scriptures. Now with Islam, you can't cherry pick the the koran for the things you like and ignore the rest and claim to be a true follower of Islam. Their god does not allow for this without severe punishment (death). Islam DEMANDS them to injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, and kill in order to get into heaven.

I have done a lot of research on Islam. I have read many books and watched many videos. They all say the same thing: Muslims truly do want to rid this world of Christians, Hindus and Jews and all non-believers such as I. They will not stop until they do because they are MANDATE by their god to do so. The Clerics and the Mullahs mandate that all Muslims follow the koran word for word. Muslims are already infiltrating Europe. They passed the Sharia Law in England so the laws of Islam will be enforced on its people instead of the laws of England. They will push for the same thing here in America. Iran is setting to stone to death a woman who is accused of commiting adultry. Adultry has a broad meaning over there. It's not just cheating on your husband. Sharia law will allow them to do that in Europe.

This isn't because of people, it's because of their Religion beliefs. A good video to watch regarding how religion is harmful is "The Root of All Evil" by Richard Dawkins. You can find parts 1 and 2 on Google Video. It's a real eye opener to how and why religious beliefs based on 1st century stuperstitions are harmful and why. He interviews many different people of faith. The one interview with the Muslim in Palistine truly is frightening.

Some books that I have read that deal with religions:
"The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason" and "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris;
"The God Delusion" "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins;
"No Gods-No Masters" by Annie Laurie Gaylor; (Addresses the oppression of women as mandated in the bible)
"The Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible" by Ruth Hurmence Green;and
"Misquoting Jesus. The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" by Bart D. Ehrman. HIGHLY RECOMMEND!!!!

Dr. Bart Ehrman also has two vidoes that I highly recommend as well on Google Video:

"Conversations with History - Bart Ehrman" He talks a little about how the Devil and the Apocalypse was invented by MAN and WHY.
"Heyns Lecture Series: Misquoting Jesus" He talks about how the New Testament was created. REALLY eye opening.

His website, if you are interested: http://bartdehrman.com /

Dr. Ehram is a highly respect and esteemed Bible Scholar. He teaches of the U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:

UNDERGRADUATE COURSES TAUGHT:
New Testament Introduction; Jesus in Myth, Tradition, and History; The Birth of Christianity; Apocalypse Now and Then; Heresy and Orthodoxy in Early Christianity; Jesus in Scholarship and Film; The Life and Letters of Paul; Jesus and the Synoptics; The Gospel and Letters of John; The Problem of Suffering in the Biblical Traditions; Introduction to Hebrew Bible.

GRADUATE COURSES TAUGHT:
Problems and Methods in New Testament Studies; Early Christian Apocrypha; The Apostolic Fathers; Literary Forgery in the Early Christian Tradition; The Greek Apologists; Heresy and Orthodoxy in Early Christianity; Christianity in the Early Roman Empire; Readings in the Greco-Roman Religions; New Testament Textual Criticism; New Testament Greek and Exegesis; The Rise of Anti-Judaism.

Another book that I am reading right now is amazingly inspiring and eye opening as well: "Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists" by Dan Barker. Dan Barker became an Atheist back in 1983 after 20 years of preaching the "word of god". He was also a Christian music writer, composer and performer. He is currently the co-president of "Freedom From Religion Foundation" which is a non-profit organization that fights for Separation of Church and State. They are fighting many legal battles all over the U.S. to keep religion out of our government and public schools. He also has become the go to person for ministers, pastors, and priests who are closet atheists that are trapped in their religions because they don't know how to do anything else.

Anyways, I'm sorry this became so long and "preachy" but I feel very passionate about this subject. Religion is bad for everyone.

[earth mom]

77. You forgot to mention that the fundies want to get rid of Islam.

Hagee and his followers and people like Sarah Palin want a holy war in the middle east to bring on the "rapture". :puke:

Here's something to watch if you want to know about the real lie of religion on this planet:

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

[Douglas Carpenter]

102. - no the Muslims do not want to rid the world of

the people you claim and no they are not taught that in the vast overwhelming majority of cases.

And no Europe has not passed ANY laws that enforce Sharia on Non-Muslims!

And no you have not done ANY research on Islam except perhaps reading the ravings of extremist hate-mongers! You have no more researched Islam than David Duke has researched Judaism!

Your post sounds like something straight out of Nazi anti-Semitic propaganda of 1930's Europe with the words changed to vilify someone else.

BTW: I have spent close to half my life in the Islamic world and I have never been treated kinder and with greater respect or felt safer anywhere in the world!

[Jennicut]

53. Religion has always been used in a corrupt way to instigate horrible things on others

Real religions are not for violence. This is a sad thing that happened and I think this woman was right.

[MindPilot]

54. Another terrorism equals Atheism statement

Until the moderates within any religion start owning and condemning this stuff nothing will change.

[riderinthestorm]

55. Yup, 2.5 hrs on the thread before this is pointed out

And how many DUers agreeing with the woman in the OP so far?

It's so depressing. I'm always incredulous when people assert that DU is so anti-religion when it takes this long, and this many views, for a post like this to get called on it's anti-atheism.

edt. clarity and typos. Need more coffee

[Deja Q]

61. Good luck; I remember that in 2001 as well - took forever for moderate muslims,

and I (used to, for obvious reasons) know Muslims that vote Dem because they hate Bush but would otherwise exterminate every GLBT person if it was legal to do so.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

72. Sorry those are the Muslims you know

I have many MANY GLBT brothers and sisters in the Sufi Orders, some of whom are senior teachers.

As for speaking out--it was done, but not picked up on by the MSM. In November 2001, the head of the Sufi Order International held a press conference in Madison WI before a weekend retreat. He answered all the reporter's questions and stressed that Islam is not about terror. Not a mention in the paper about it.

[Ichingcarpenter]

82. Sufi writers are some my favorites that I've read since the 80s

Some amazing stuff that should be included in all Philosophical/religious readings.

Still didn't like the absolute used on soul and religion though

[prostock69]

63. So true.

[Marr]

64. Of course they have religion.

It's very often the motivating factor behind their actions.

People of faith need to acknowledge this fact, and stop pretending that religious murderers are actually secret atheists.

[Fumesucker]

66. Human beings either have "souls" or they do not..

And it is ridiculously easy to get people to do absolutely horrible things to each other, religion or no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Stanley Milgram had almost no difficulty getting ordinary, mostly Christian, Americans to torture their fellow citizens to death, with no coercion at all.

All he had to do was put on a white jacket and act authoritative and people would keep pressing a button to shock another person until they died (or at least that is what the button pushers thought).

[KitchenWitch]

73. I saw that segment and I was really moved by it.

:thumbsup:

[Midlodemocrat]

75. Didn't she seem so earnest?

It completely struck me that she was really really trying to get the word out that the blame didn't lie with the Muslim community. She seemed very sweet to me as well.

I'm glad she and her husband are okay and so sorry for those that didn't make it.

[KitchenWitch]

76. Yes, we need a lot more of here and a lot less of the...

folks who bandy about the term "Islamic Terrorists"...

An overwhelming majority of Muslims are NOT terrorists, and basically just wish to live their lives in peace.

[jmondine]

74. She went through something I can't imagine. I will not disrespect that with an armchair opinion.

[BoneDaddy]

83. But they have a religion

that is why they do what they do in such extremes. They have a very toxic and nihilist form of fundamentalist Islam. Does that mean all of Islam is, no, of course not, but it is their interpretation of Koran that gives them reason to do what they do, and they can find justification, however twisted, to back it up.

[trotsky]

84. Religious bigotry. n/t

[uppityperson]

85. I agree. They have no true religion. I agree.

[Ichingcarpenter]

88. 'They have no true religion'

Care to define that statement?

[uppityperson]

89. What I consider a "true religion" would not advocate violence.

It is when you get the fundamentalist fanatics of any religion that you get problem. I do not consider them having a true religion, just a bunch of ways to be nasty without personal responsibility.

If you look at most every true religion, they have the same basis of be decent people, don't hurt people, don't hurt things, treat others and all with respect. It gets bastardized to "do whatever the hell you want and say it is part of your religion".

[Ichingcarpenter]

91. The 'True Religion Motto'

is garbage because it comes from an absolute
which negates anything else.

[uppityperson]

94. The 'True Religion Motto'

Care to define that statement? What do you mean, "comes from an absolute which negates anything else"?

We could be having terminology issues, which happens.

[Ichingcarpenter]

96. No, you said there was a true religion not me

'What I consider a "true religion" would not advocate violence.
If you look at most every true religion, they have the same basis of be decent people
Now tell me which ones are the false religions? See, you are stuck in an
ambiguous bullshit argument

You confuse religion with morals and the written texts that confuse it.


.

[uppityperson]

98. What "absolute which negates anything else"?

IMHO, false religions are those that confuse morals with something written.

[John Gauger]

118. That's an interesting definition.

The most interesting part of it, to me, is the fact that the truth of a religion has nothing to do with whether or not it is factually true; it's true if its moral teaching are in your judgment good.

[PurityOfEssence]

90. Religion is a package deal

You get the fine Kulmbacher Beer AND the repeated atrocities.

Many people who think religion is "good" tend to dismiss everything bad done in the name of religion as some kind of act that isn't related to religion at all. It's tidy binary thinking: good is god, bad is not. Those who do evil in the name of the whatever are obviously not tuned in to the "real" vibe of the message, even if the scriptures leave plenty of wiggle room.

Religion gives people a feeling of justification and reinforces all sorts of uglinesses. To dismiss this is to claim privilege and hold the rest of us ransom for the joy that one gets from the big cosmic bliss. Hey, I'm a liberal and I'm happy people are happy, but when we're forced to endure all sorts of evil and violence so some can have a fine old time, it's hardly selfishness to point out that this is sociopathic. Besides: what's in it for us? If the believer's happiness is dependent on putting the rest of us at risk for what other whackos will do with their cosmic gold star of approval affixed to their foreheads, then it's just basically a "fuck you" to those who don't subscribe to the party line.

Once the mindset is reinforced that proof is unnecessary, the floodgates are truly open.

[uppityperson]

93. I do not think religion is good and of course people do all sorts of atrocities in name of religion.

Just because you kill someone in the name of a religion does not mean you are acting as that religion says you should. I very much agree "Religion gives people a feeling of justification and reinforces all sorts of uglinesses. " But I also believe those people are not acting out of a "true" religion.

[trotsky]

106. I agree. There are no true Scotsmen. I agree. n/t

[Goblinmonger]

92. Yes, because only an atheist would do that.

What a bunch of shit.
:eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes:

Is it clear how I think yet?

[John Gauger]

119. I like how nobody picks up on that.

She called them atheists, because by definition religious people are not capable of evil. It is in fact their lack of a religion that made them do this.

[Forkboy]

97. I think reducing it to such a simplistic point is a mistake.

People are way too complex for that, even terrorists.

I would have liked to have seen the segment though.

[spoony]

99. For the record, some of us got it.

Sorry your thread has been jacked by ideologues. There's nothing better they like than to deliberately misread something (eg "so you're saying atheists did it??!111111") and get offended or defiant about it.

I hope that most people affected by this criminal act will join with the woman you quoted and not get pulled into a false game of religion vs. religion, because as she said these killers operated outside legitimate religion and certainly weren't guided by the principles they teach. They acted without soul or spirituality, compassion or reason.

[Fumesucker]

101. There was no misreading, the lady in question was calling the terrorists atheists..

There is really no other way to read the statement that terrorists have no soul and no religion.

A large majority of people can be easily induced to torture someone to death, religion or no.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Results

Before conducting the experiment, Milgram polled fourteen Yale University senior-year psychology majors as to what they thought would be the results. All of the poll respondents believed that only a few (average 1.2%) would be prepared to inflict the maximum voltage. Milgram also informally polled his colleagues and found that they, too, believed very few subjects would progress beyond a very strong shock.<1>

In Milgram's first set of experiments, 65 percent (26 of 40)<1> of experiment participants administered the experiment's final 450-volt shock, though many were very uncomfortable doing so; at some point, every participant paused and questioned the experiment, some said they would refund the money they were paid for participating in the experiment. Only one participant steadfastly refused to administer shocks before the 300-volt level.<1>

Later, Prof. Milgram and other psychologists performed variations of the experiment throughout the world, with similar results<5> although unlike the Yale experiment, resistance to the experimenter was reported anecdotally elsewhere.<6> Moreover, Milgram later investigated the effect of the experiment's locale on obedience levels, (e.g. one experiment was held in a respectable university, the other in an unregistered, backstreet office in a bustling city; the greater the locale's respectability, the greater the obedience rate). Apart from confirming the original results, the variations have tested variables in the experimental set-up.

Dr. Thomas Blass of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County performed a meta-analysis on the results of repeated performances of the experiment. He found that the percentage of participants who are prepared to inflict fatal voltages remains remarkably constant, 61–66 percent, regardless of time or place.

[varkam]

103. Glad to see you still have that righteous indignation thing going for you.

It suits you.

[spoony]

105. You are?

I think you responded to the wrong post.

[varkam]

112. varkam. eom

[Goblinmonger]

113. I was hoping your response was going to be "Batman" eom

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

108. "join with the woman you quoted and not get pulled into a false game of religion vs. religion"

Whereas a game of religion vs. no religion is one you play with mucho gusto.

[Goblinmonger]

111. How can you NOT get our point of view.

there is a large population out there that has "no religion." We are perfectly fine individuals that function in society and do not commit terrorist acts. We are not "less" because we lack religion. Yet the statement by the woman in the OP CLEARLY indicates that those without religion are clearly lacking and prone/likely to commit the acts she talks about. And yet you come in here like it is somehow appalling that some of us point out that prejudice.

If this woman had said that the people were really Christians that had done this, people would have dismissed her as crazy. But all she has to say is that they are without religion and you and others just nod your head knowingly while telling those of us without religion to just shut up.

You kill me sometimes, you know that.

[John Gauger]

120. What makes a religion legitimate?

[cosmik debris]

104. What an Idiotic Mess!

Allowing some anonymous person of Indian descent to decide who has religion and who doesn't is just plain stupid.

Perhaps if her own subjective definition of religion is the only one you respect, you can pretend that she is correct. But she doesn't get the final say on what is a religion and what isn't.

It seems clear to me that she is merely trying to defend her superstition from "guilt by association" with other superstitions.

You may buy that crap, but I don't.

[John Gauger]

121. Thank you.

Finally some respite from the madness. How can so many people be so dumb?

[cosmik debris]

122. They work at it. n/t

[Meshuga]

132. What happened to cosmic debris?

His commentaries in this forum are surely missed. Anyway, I hope he returns from his break.

[Douglas Carpenter]

107. Imagine how millions of American Muslims must feel when they hear themselves vilified

even, at times, on what so suppose to be progressive websites.

Imagine how millions of American Muslims must feel when the false accusation of being a Muslim is regarded as being a brutal act of slander. Imagine how that must feel for the millions of Americans who really are Muslims.

To quote General Colin Powell:

http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/10/19/transcript-colin-powell-on-meet-the-press-endorses-barack-obama-october-19/

Well, the correct answer is, he (Barack Obama) is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, “He’s a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.” This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards–Purple Heart, Bronze Star–showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross, it didn’t have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life.

[ZombieHorde]

127. Atheists and Muslims have something in common in the U.S.

[TZ]

110. And the terrorists believe the same thing about us.

How is that any different? I would say terrorists lack compassion/empathy for outsiders but that doesn't mean they aren't religious. Its not comfortable to acknowledge that someone so violent and psychotic shares the same religious beliefs, but the sad fact is that they DO have religion,its just not how WE interpret the religion--I'm going to quote a book I read recently.."no one goes into war thinking that God is NOT on their side."
I personally think terrorists are mentally ill..but that does NOT change the fact that they are using religion as their justification for ugly, ugly acts.

[John Gauger]

116. Utter tripe.

They did something bad, so therefore they must be atheists!

Fucking bullshit.

[Dreamsoldier76]

128. Religious Monsters

Its sad how some people assume that its just non-christian people or atheist that are terrorists. Ive met plenty of people of various religious backgrounds who were terrifying, abusive, and cruel.

[Deep13]

131. They have no soul because no one does.

They certainly do have a religion and their actions as terrorists guarantee that. Nothing short of divine command can make someone believe that murdering civilians is the right thing to do. And if the attack was a suicide bombing, then we know exactly which religion it is too.