Chisel away ever so slightly at the thinly disguised objectives of AI and you’ll soon discover their insidious plans for ‘modern Ireland’.
Their banner proudly proclaims their aims, ‘to build a rational, ethical and secular society free from superstition and supernaturalism.’ It’s the latter part of their stated objective that should be of concern to all religious adherents.
Supernaturalism is defined as ‘the theological belief that a force or power other than man or nature is ultimate’. For Muslims, Christians and Jews this force or power would be Allah. Michael Nugent asserts, without any evidence, that the belief in Allah as a supernatural being is ‘false’.
Superstition is a credulous belief or notion, not based on reason, knowledge, or experience. The word is often used pejoratively to refer to religious beliefs deemed irrational. Both terms appear to be AI’s puerile euphemisms for religion and a belief in Allah.
The question arises, if Nugent’s minuscule mob want an Ireland that’s free of religion and a belief in Allah – what do they intend to do with the places of worship and more importantly the worshipers?
In AI’s vision of Ireland, it would seem that there could be no manifestation of religion in the public sphere in the first instance; would we see an end to churches, mosques and synagogues? They’ve also argued for the right to ridicule, offend and insult religious communities, so we could imagine a Nazi type era where ridicule manifests itself as persecution or worse, after all one does not protect what one wants to be liberated from. To begin, religious adherents might be forced to live in ghettos, cut off from the rest of the world because they dared believe in the supernatural. With restrictions on employment opportunities and basic amenities the ghettos might soon become an unsustainable financial burden after which the atheistic society might consider a final solution to the problem of religious adherents.
For all AI’s talk of justice and equality, the future, if their ambitions are realized, looks decidedly unequal and unjust for religious adherents. Remember Atheist Ireland want Ireland purged FREE of religion.
Related posts:
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 3:41 pm
I saw that post about throwing stone’s at a barking dog. I read that and I saw a dog howling at the moon
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 3:44 pm
(Mujaahid refuses to throw a stone)
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 3:48 pm
You already did. Too late
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 4:03 pm
Before I start, I just want to say that I am not affiliated in any way with Michael Nugent or his site. I would describe myself as having Faith, but no defined Religion.
I think you may be falling into two traps here.
The first is the assertion that Atheist Ireland wants to ban religion or beliefs? I grant you that their banner is badly worded and open to misinterpretation, but as far as I am aware, their aim is to remove the current position of religion from the constitution. I confess I have to agree with them on this stance. I have no problem with any religion and will respect anyone’s beliefs provided he or she practices without impacting on my life. I think that is fair?
The other trap is the old Irish one of “if it’s not banned, it must be compulsory”. We had that with the divorce and abortion referenda where people were implying that we would all be compelled to get divorced or have abortions – patently ridiculous.
I wholeheartedly oppose the blasphemy law for several reasons. Firstly I think it drops us back in the Middle Ages. Secondly I think it is completely unenforceable [What is 'religion'? What is 'a substantial number'? What is 'outrage'?] and finally, I think it gives a blank cheque to every fruitcake out there who has a chip on their shoulder and who is ‘outraged’ at the mere mention of something they hold precious.
I think it is nonsense to suppose that if the law were removed that immediately everyone would go around insulting everyone else’s beliefs. The right to ridicule does not presuppose the desire to ridicule. Removal of the law simply underlines the right to freedom of speech?
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 5:32 pm
your proposal for what a non religious ireland would look like is identical to Mohammed proposal for what a one religion world would look like.
the only difference is whose in power
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 6:52 pm
Dara – I think it obvious you have no idea of what an Islamic Ireland would look like, I can assure you that religions would be protected.
Grandad – I encourage you to define your religion through submission to Allah and His messenger, in other words become a Muslim. Most religious adherents carry on their every day lives in a positive fulfilling manner, in this way the impact they have is generally good. On the other hand, the aggressive secularists, who wish to free Ireland from religion are the ones who negatively impact on the lives of people. For them a live and let live attitude is simply not sufficient. Why should part of who I am be restricted in the public sphere, who are aggressive secularists to make such demands and where does it stop?
We welcomed the blasphemy bill simply because in the absence of an incitement to religious hatred act the aggressive secularists/atheists were singling out religious adherents for ridicule, scorn and derision. History has already witnessed too many times the outcome of belittling and demeaning whole communities.
While I agree that the right to ridicule doesn’t presuppose that it would happen, the AI site as well as the Blasphemy.ie site has given every indication that the intention is to insult. Insulting religious adherents is the final desperate attempt of brigands who are defined solely by their opposition, they have nothing else to offer – no answers, nothing!
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 7:58 pm
Hi Mujaheed,
I am an atheist and a supporter of the campaign for secularisation promoted by Atheist Ireland.
In a multicultural society we all share the common objectives of a society where intellectual freedom, including religious freedom and the freedom to be free of religion, is protected by the state. When I say “we” I’m including yourself, would I be wrong?
This is secularism – a society with no state religious affiliation, no state religious education etc. Many religious people as well as atheists promote the objective of a secular state.
So, why do you choose to employ misleading (in my opinion) and inflammatory language in reference to Atheist Ireland and the secular project, it doesn’t help anybody:
- “thinly disguised objectives of AI”, “insidious plans”
-”puerile euphemisms for religion”
-”Nugent’s minuscule mob”
-”an end to churches, mosques and synagogues”
-”we could imagine a Nazi type era”
-”religious adherents might be forced to live in ghettos”
-”a final solution to the problem of religious adherents”
You interpret wording used by Atheist Ireland as “puerile”, are you not in fact responding in a puerile (childish) manner yourself?
Islam has a proud intellectual tradition, I think you are insulting that heritage.
You might benefit from educating yourself about what secularism actually means.
You are correct to highlight Ireland’s lack of a law against incitement to religious hatred. Such a law would be an intelligent replacement for the daft blasphemy part of the defamation act. It is precisely because the Roman Catholic church has had, historically, such a stranglehold on the Irish state (especially in education) that it has its own protection written into the constitution. Secularism, separation of religion and state, would allow for such progress as a law against incitement to religious hatred. Are you not in favour of that?
Perhaps you could communicate with an Islamic proponent of secularism to broaden your intellectual horizons. Not all Muslims, certainly not educated European Muslims, support the notion of Islamic theocracy.
A very Happy New Year to all Irish Muslims!
David
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 8:08 pm
My apologies Mujaheed, I confused you and the “Admin” writer of the article.
So my criticism of ‘puerility’ for the quoted words is directed at Admin and not at you.
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 9:13 pm
David: First, thank you.
I think you’ll agree that secularism as an idea is often conflated with atheist ideals simply because aggressive atheists use it as a platform. My humble understanding of secularism was one of accommodation and understanding,unfortunately it appears to have dogmatically imbued an extreme segregation of religion and state, something which is anathema to most religious adherents. Why should who we are be restricted to the private sphere? Why should what we are be restricted because it doesn’t suit secularists? What does AI mean when it calls for an Ireland free of supernaturalism and superstition?
The language of the article was hyperbolic but none the less couched in historical reality. It is unfortunately true that Nazis singled out a religious community for ridicule and derision as a means of dehumanizing them. The British did the same with the Irish in the UK, and now it seems that AI wish to do the same to religious adherents. That’s what it looks like and I think that’s what the brother tried to convey in his article.
All the best
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 10:52 pm
Any sensible person can see what you are doing Mujaahid. Do not try to twist Atheist Ireland’s words and objectives to fit your means.
الاثنين 20 محرم 1431 at 11:46 pm
الثلاثاء 21 محرم 1431 at 3:10 pm
Religions would be protected, subserviant but protected, how would sharia law protect atheists.
الثلاثاء 21 محرم 1431 at 4:19 pm
I think most sensible people are waking up to the dangers of aggressive and extremist atheists. They will only face ignominy and shame in this life and unimaginable horror in the next if they continue to ignore the truth of Al Islam.
As for the post that claims to be from Nugent above, I suspect it’s a troll – even Nugent is intelligent enough not to stoop to that level, isn’t he?
الثلاثاء 21 محرم 1431 at 9:19 pm
I think what you meant to say Mujaahid was that most people are waking up to the threat posed by islam to the west’s way of life and people are starting to get sick of idiots like you talking shite. You’re an incredibly boring and uncharismatic person I see from your youtube videos – now after converting to islam you have an excuse to be boring.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 2:00 pm
Why do the religious always assume that we atheists will treat them the way they treat others? That’s the whole point! We won’t. No atheist I know wants to ban churches or stop consenting adults do whatever they like in private. I’d even make churches private in that ‘private’ piece – together with whatever adult-focused proseletisation they wanted to indulge in.
We won’t stop you going to church. You can say and believe what you like. I’d personally not stop you standing on street corners to preach or knocking on doors if you want to.
We would stop you targetting the vulnerable and brainwashing kids of course.
So here’s a difference between the religious and the atheist. The religious often indoctrinate their kids in all sorts of disgusting ways. I, on the other hand, tell my kids that many people believe all sorts of things and they should listen carefully to them and make up their minds as adults. I don’t need emotional blackmail (’you’ll go to hell’) type arguments. Rationality is a wonderful thing.
I think we mostly believe that religion will aonly flourish where people are opressed or poor – which is the consistent historic experience the world over. Remove those two, and religion dies, thankfully.
I’m deeply offended by all sorts of peoples views – particularly the religious in fact with what I consider to be bigotry and thinly veiled violence. But I would never try to ban their right to hold whatever views they want.
There is a very big difference between the atheist and the religious. I only need protection from persecution. I can handle being offended. (Funny that god needs laws to protect her though: not very impressive that!).
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 3:11 pm
Jim – I know atheists won’t treat the religious the same way we treat you, that’s evident with the level of offensive, insulting and grossly demeaning posts on Blasphemy.ie and Atheist Ireland. We’ve seen what atheists do when they are in power in the former Russia and other communist countries, we’ve witnessed the persecutions, the need for the religious to gather in secret – yes – we are all too aware of what life would be like under atheism.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 4:43 pm
anything that an atheist does he does so not because he adhere to a belife system. there is no system of beliefs in atheisim. We just choose not to believe those who say there is a God or gods and those who say there is a god or gods have in the entire history of time failed to produce any evidence that proves their claim.
religion was accetable to more people many years ago when man’s understanding of the world was very limited. as our unerstanding grows less of the old ways become acceptable more and more people.
I personally choose to believe that 1 modern scientist has a better understanding of the world than 1 man who lived 1500 odd years ago.
never mind that science isn’t just one man and that it is self testing and evolves.
tell me what were the boys at on septtmber 11 1648 at the gates of vienna when the king of poland sent them back from whence they came.
i am unaware of an atheist movement in vienna or were the muslim hoardes just tring to protect the religious rights of the citizens of vienna
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 6:51 pm
You sound terribly confused Dara, you say you don’t have a belief system but atheists by definition don’t believe in Allah, in other words you have a belief that Allah does not exist. You add to your confusion by stating this is a choice, regardless of whether it is true or not. The latter of course is not a belief, simply willful ignorance.
Your final point is an infantile distraction designed to cover over the very obvious shortcomings in your own system. How did Christians and other religious minorities fare under Stalin? What about religious minorities under Hitler, an atheist in action and deed. The reality is religious adherents know all too well the inherent dangers of allowing people devoid of an objective morality to govern them – it will never happen.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 7:54 pm
Mujaahid,
There are some people who do not warrant an answer – and you really are one of them. Just to be clear – if modern atheists have anything in common with Stalin’s Russia, then likewise I could accuse you, by similar association, of any of the worst attrocities committed by any theist.
Struggling to stay polite but your post is deeply offensive in it’s suggestion: I suspect that, blinded as you are by your faith, you don’t care. That should tell you something if nothing else does. I’m out of this.
Jim
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 8:13 pm
Jim – Nugent’s website has a banner for all to see that expressly states their aim, which to most objective readers sounds like an attempt to free Ireland of religion. In order to do that it appears they intend to remove religion and its adherents from the public sphere.
When you actively seek to remove the convictions and voice of a segment of the population under the pretext that their ideas don’t count, then you have indeed started on the slippery road of Stalin’s Russia and even Hitler’s final solution.
Contrary to your assertions, Muslims would protect religious minorities under their dominion.
You barely wrote six lines without recourse to offense or insult and you admitted it was a struggle. That I think sums up the atheist position, a lot of hot wind, vulgarities and little else.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 8:46 pm
More gymnastics Mujaahid trying to say atheism is a belief system, you boring boring man.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 8:51 pm
Sigh!
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 8:56 pm
Yes I’d say you sigh a lot at your miserable uneventful life. Tell me Mujaahid, is there any spontaneity in your boring self?? Ever go ‘ooohhh I think I’ll do an extra prayer to surprise my wife!!’??
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 9:02 pm
It doesn’t take long for the atheist to revert to insult and offense – a sure sign of defeat. Try for once to argue the point Ross.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 9:11 pm
You didn’t give any sort of argumentative reply to what I said so insulting you wasn’t an admission of defeat.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 9:22 pm
I’m not confused since I gave up religion. I always had quetions about my faith until I realised it was the faith that was questionable.
Mujaahid you are an atheist about Zeus, apollo, mars, aphrodite, Thor, Budda.
all theists are atheist about gods other than their own. I’m just atheist about yours aswell. you can say your not an atheist all you want but the only way to not be antheist is to believe in all gods at the same time.
so again I said “I do not believe those who say there is a god.”
you said.
in other words I do not have a belife that there are gods
not your other words
“have a belief that Allah does not exist”
your confusing (intentionally) believe and belief and using it to set up whats called a “strawman argument”. these are the tactics of the feeble minded debaters. please refrain from stating my beliefs for me.
so let me clear it up for you. I know categorically that those who believe in god/gods are wrong and are wasting their lives out of fear that the world would be a horrible place without a god.
Stalin did not kill anyone because he was an atheist neither did Hitler. they killed people because they were crazy.
There is no evidence to suggest that atheists are less moral than theists, infact theres plenty of evidence to say that theists are less moral than atheists (look at prison populations) because they can use the irationallity of gods to justify all kinds of craziness
Why were ottoman muslims trying to conquer vienna on september 11, 1683?
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 9:42 pm
And you want to convince us you’re not confused
Atheism is defined as a disbelief in the existence of deity or the doctrine that there is no deity. I don’t subscribe to any of those. You must try think for yourself Dara instead of regurgitating trite soundbites from Dawkins’ books. That silliness is almost as lame as Nugent’s ‘ideas should not be protected’. I appreciate your zealousness, and I’m sure you are sincere. But Dara you are sincerely wrong.
Stalin acted based on the belief that there was no accountability for his actions. Indeed he was crazy to think so.
In fact there’s lots of evidence Dara, that atheists are less moral than religious adherents and the proof is evident to all who see. Of course for the atheist morality is a subjective matter and s/he will not abide by the same standards of let’s say a Muslim. Whereas a Muslim would say sex before marriage is immoral, an atheist wouldn’t. So finding a measure everyone agrees on is difficult but some have tried. Let’s consider the issue of charity.
A study by the Barna group concluded that religious adherents actually give more in charity than atheists. ABC News reported the following:
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 10:47 pm
great so we agree on Stalin then. Thanks for all the lovely quotations from such a fine establishment as ABC. Does this mean that a man who recieves charity is immoral because he has nothing to give?
your inahability to refute is giving your game away.
you say I am wrong but you can’t show how I am wrong.
There are many definition of atheisim. I already know you believe in Allah. Do you believe in Zeus? if you don’t answer this quetion in your next post I will assume you believe in Zeus. Allah will be upset with you for causing people to believe, you believe in Zeus, thus giving validity to belief in Zeus.
I have not read any books on atheisim thats the problem you guys have It only takes an education to arrive at atheist convictions, and thats why atheisim is the fastest growing way of life in the world. almost as many of us guys as you guys now. fortunately the world does not require as many sheep as it does leaders
a good idea does not need protection to propagate, it is this ability to withstand even the harshest of criticism that makes it a good idea. if an idea is protected it cannot prove itself to be a good idea.
the greatest ideas can withstand the greatest criticisim
The same is true for a bad idea if it cannot or will not withstand basic critisism it proves it is a bad Idea by hiding behind another bad Idea.
If the idea of a religion was any good it would be able to withstand critisism but because religious ideas are bad they run and hide.
Kinda like the ottomans? The answer to the ottoman quetion is allover the internet why are you refusing to answer it? do you think by ignoring it you are helping your credibility.
you claim allah is great. why then does he chooses to hide behind man made laws. This does not inspire greatness it looks weak/paltry.
The christians look stonger by coming to the debating table?
Think of all the pathetic existences that man made laws refuse to protect and your god is aligning with them, giving them validation. You will not be thanked by anyone for agreeing with this government.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 11:19 pm
It is more blessed to give than receive Dara, my son
The standard of education obviously isn’t what it used to be Dara, especially if your poor syntax is anything to go by.
The rest of the gobbledygook you proffered as a response isn’t worthy of a response.
الأربعاء 22 محرم 1431 at 11:42 pm
I’m not your son, english is my second of four languages.take your leave but the facts are going nowhere. when your finished playing with the fairies, the facts will be here to welcome you or bury you.
الخميس 23 محرم 1431 at 6:16 pm
Mujaahid heres what your own organisation says
http://www.mpac.org/publications/abusing-women-abusing-islam/
remember this as the end of your religion and your way of life.
equal rigths for women under sharia law will prove that education is all thats required to come to athestic convictions. Ironic that its the conviction to spread Islam that will bring about its down fall.
you may not understand how, because of how your mind works, but to me, with a free mind its the best news I’ve had in years. I can see it happening in England where sucessive generations of muslim children are rebeling against the old ways singing pop songs, wearing makeup.
its all over now bar shouting
bye
الخميس 23 محرم 1431 at 8:13 pm
Dara – we are an autonomous group and have no affiliation with MPAC in the States. Quite frankly they are apologists and had you looked over their site and taken the time to compare you’d see that.
1431 yrs ago, the Quraish believed Islam wouldn’t see the light of day. Today it is the fastest growing religion, has over 1.5 billion adherents and is spreading rapidly once again. Allah has promised victory for this religion and dominion over all the earth – it is an inescapable fact and I pray I see it in my lifetime.
الخميس 23 محرم 1431 at 8:16 pm
Dara – have you ever read about Islam for yourself. I mean not what other people have said but what Islam says about itself. I encourage you to do that, it will answer all your questions.
Kind regards
Heba
الخميس 23 محرم 1431 at 10:45 pm
We’re not all atheists…look
الخميس 23 محرم 1431 at 11:55 pm
to believe in one god you must be an atheist about all other gods arguing this point is futile.
I have lived the muslim life for extended periods of time and I know many of your dirty little secrets. your religion has no honour, you are permitted to lie to furthur you cause.
Islam is the fastest growing religion by means of birth rate only.
people who describe themselves as non religious are the fastest growing lifstyle group by absolute numbers.
the number of people who describe themselves as non religious only trails Muslim by 200 million and if the rate of increase continues to accelerate by defection as it is you’ll see something totally different to what you hope for.
the truth
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 2:44 am
I think the point you’re trying to make is futile Dara, you need to think about what you are saying and leave off the parroting of people like Dawkins and Nugent.
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 8:29 pm
unlike people who have faith a man with a free mind use quotation marks when quoteing someone. I doubt the thoughs I have expressed above will be found with the same wording some where else. I suspect both Mr Dawking and Mr Nugent write the language as a mother tongue.
again it only takes a primary school education to confound a theist, How about you THINK about what I am saying.
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 9:02 pm
Mujaahid Says:
January 6th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
It is more blessed to give than receive Dara, my son
i read this a couple of days ago and I just though it was some rambling your were profering as concession now I realise your mistake.
I never asked you about what was blessed, I asked you about what was moral. how about you and your socks stay out of the conversation utill you answer a quetion you were asked.
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 9:25 pm
“it only takes a primary school education to confound a theist” as you’ve yet to confound we might suppose you don’t have the education Dara
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 9:33 pm
It is a mutational defect that results in an additional chromosome. Doesn’t help your case much though, does it? Shouldn’t the ‘addition’ be beneficial according to the theory??
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 9:55 pm
Wrong threat but I’ll answer anyway. Most mutations are detrimental, very few aren’t but beneficial ones do happen such as caucasians being able to drink milk past infancy due to a mutation that stopped a gene for lactose tolerance being switched off.
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 10:16 pm
And where in recorded history have we verifiable accounts of Caucasians being unable to drink milk past infancy?
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 10:26 pm
Eastern asians do not in general consume dairy products because they are largely lactose intolerant. Europeans on the other hand consume a lot of dairy products because they are lactose tolerant due to a genetic mutation.
Babies have a gene turned on that gives them tolerence, as they grow older this gene is switched off in some races whereas in others it is not. They know the gene that causes this and have found it to go back however many years. Before this they have not found the gene. You don’t need an account to tell you they couldn’t, all you have to do is look at their genes. That said I’m sure there are accounts but they would be difficult to find.
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 10:33 pm
Mr Ross,
It’s been a while since I’ve been here, but your last post requires an adequate response.
Mutations do occur in deoxyribonucleic acid but they are rare, and beneficial mutations are even rarer. In fact, the vast majority are detrimental. While mutations may create a weaker plant or animal or human, they never create a new “kind.” The one-eyed fish is still a fish; the two-headed calf is still a calf; Siamese twins are still human. Yet they are worse off because of mutations. If 99% of all mutations are harmful, how can you honestly posit mutations are being a reliable account of organic evolution?
Please be honest with yourself Ross, you know this is not a satisfactory account for a rational human being.
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 10:41 pm
So you don’t have the accounts to prove your point, just guesswork once again.
As for refuting your guesses, what’s the point? They refute themselves:
Oldest footprints found
الجمعة 24 محرم 1431 at 10:49 pm
Again Ross you have not been entirely honest. There have only been a few studies related to lactose intolerance in Asians so attempts to derive an argument from that are optimistic at best. In fact the Japanese have demonstrated a remarkable tolerance in spite of the alleged predisposition.
You sound like an intelligent individual Ross – don’t believe everything you read on a website.
السبت 25 محرم 1431 at 12:46 am
Its you who fails to answer quetions AND NOW YOUR TALKIN ABOUT MILK.
السبت 25 محرم 1431 at 12:29 pm
Round and round in circles we go.
If this is the Islamic position……(put on scared expression)
“They will only face ignominy and shame in this life and unimaginable horror in the next if they continue to ignore the truth of Al Islam”
…..why not let them? Why does it bother you so much?
It can’t be any sense of altruism, the language chosen contains no such suggestion. It would appear more a genuine hope, in which case I’m not sure where the shame lies.
Does “blessed be the persecuted” crop up in Islamic faith? In which case you and the Christians should be ********* at the opportunity to be marginalised. But it would appear to me at least that Islam relies more on the sword, metaphoric or otherwise, to propagate.
I have yet to meet an atheist who is not by nature peaceful. They just believe in one less God than I do.
الأحد 26 محرم 1431 at 6:41 pm
Exactly Stephen – very well put. There seems to be no recognition from the muslims running this site that there is a very big difference between them and the atheists they are so scared of and attack so poorly.
They wish to impose a sharia state on the poor Irish (it’s laughable being so ridiculous). One can only imagine what would happen to the atheists, Christians – and any other non-muslim groups once the bigots here (with their appallingly derogatory language for the apostate…probably actionable if anyone could be bothered) got their way. So the Muslims compare atheism with nazism or communism (utterly foolish: atheism does not equal communism and never has). Some communists also claim/claimed to be atheist. They were also demonstrably human. It does not mean all human’s are communist. etc.
The atheists want to create a state where all views are permissable: it would be actions that are sanctioned. The law would reflect common ground across society – and would have no reference to a single set of beliefs. To that extent – yes it would be common denominator. But anything else is tyrany!
Can you tell me muslims: what Islamic country acts as a model for you? Where are relgious minorities and atheists protected? (We dont need to discuss women: that would just be a distraction here). Where is freedom to believe and speak true to your non-Islamic conscience, protected in an Islamic country? In which Islamic country would offence by a muslim against the infidel be prosecuted with equal zeal as the opposite?
Thanks,
Billy
الأحد 26 محرم 1431 at 10:28 pm
I haven’t sensed any fear of atheists Billy, they are such a paltry number that I wonder why MPAC don’t go for bigger fish myself.
I haven’t seen anything about imposing Shariah on anyone. What I have seen is their calls for each individual to implement Shariah in their own lives, articles about the benefits of Shariah but no calls for imposition. On the other hand, I have seen Michael Nugen call for an Ireland free of religion and a move to remove religion from all aspects of public life – that Billy is an imposition and tyranny.
There is no Islamic country in our time that is a model of what a Shariah state should look like, to find that we have to go back in time to Medina. That is our model, it worked then and it can work now. And I hope MPAC agree with that.
الاثنين 27 محرم 1431 at 2:03 pm
“I haven’t sensed any fear of atheists Billy, they are such a paltry number that I wonder why MPAC don’t go for bigger fish myself. ”
No – I suppose you haven’t. Strikes me that way though with all the anti-atheist vitriol. Hey ho…
“I haven’t seen anything about imposing Shariah on anyone. What I have seen is their calls for each individual to implement Shariah in their own lives, articles about the benefits of Shariah but no calls for imposition. On the other hand, I have seen Michael Nugen call for an Ireland free of religion and a move to remove religion from all aspects of public life – that Billy is an imposition and tyranny. ”
Are you for real? I don’t know if you are a supporter here, a regular or…whatever. Fairly clearly what the guys who post in here want is a Sharia run Ireland. That would clearly be very bad news for anyone who didn’t want to be ruled under sharia! Under the atheist option, your proposal is eminently doable. Anyone who wants to implement sharia in their own life is entirely free to do so. The law of the land though does not relate to any one religious affiliation.
Can you really not see the difference?
الاثنين 27 محرم 1431 at 2:19 pm
“I haven’t sensed any fear of atheists Billy, they are such a paltry number that I wonder why MPAC don’t go for bigger fish myself. ”
Can I just check: does the number of adherents a philosophy or religion have make it more or less true? (Paltry is such a beautifully rude and derogatory word to be applied to people of good will honestly seeking the truth!) If so, think you’d better become a Christian: after all there are more of them than there are of you I believe. (I’d not advise it though…I tried that and it was as patently fabricated by a group of men to subjugate women in particular, as your fairy tale is…). Still – just trying to follow up on the logic of your argument.
Atheism is sort of a threat to all religions in that it causes the adherents to chellenge what they are presented and test it against some reasonable standards like evidence. You can see this trend yourself evidentially from an honest assessment of what happens when you remove coercion and poverty from the equation. Very religious countries are either very poor or highly coercive in my personal experience.
Cheers,
Billy
الاثنين 27 محرم 1431 at 8:14 pm
Just thought of another way of putting it: you think it’s tyrannical to be prevented from imposing your views on others? Think you should look up tyrany in a dictionary.
If you have no interest in imposing your views via law – then way to go: that is your clear right to believe anything you want – however unpleasnt it might be.