Saudi court sentences poet to death for renouncing Islam - Polidicks

Do people even read one page of a thread before responding? It sure doesn't seem so.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49202644]Christianity has this problem to a much lesser extent. Christians are far more selective and pretty much limit their backwardness to hating homosexuals (and even killing them)[/QUOTE] The reason for homosexuals seen as a sin has more with to do politics then sin. Without members who produce children, the spirit or church will have less power. Breeders only. Every sperm is sacred.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;49201927]Books of religion are meant to be taken figurativly.[/QUOTE] books of religion aren't meant to be taken as anything other than ancient and outdated guides for living, let's be honest shall we? unfortunately, some fools do take them seriously

[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;49202669]Yeah and it also says this: and this and this Oh wait those are from the bibile Is this Christianity in a nutshell? How can anyone interpret these spiritually. I guess you could say that part of religion is contextualisation, and that the point in a religious text is the overarching themes of charity and love, not the little details about faith wars, that were written during times of religious persecution and war. Also IIRC the part about drawing mohammed isn't in the Quran, and is a belief that came way later that isn't unanimous. This guy nails it.[/QUOTE] The old testament is obsolete and not relevant, at least for christians.

[QUOTE=Dr.C;49201902]This is like getting mad at baptists for something catholics did. Saudi's practice a very extreme form of Islam and fund a lot of sunni extremists. You really don't hear about shit like this happening in a place like Jordan.[/QUOTE] I'd say there is a very real problem with Arab nations curbing freedom of speech and violating human rights, and these violations are purely based on religion. Comparing the Saudi Arabia with baptists kind of downplays the large problem the Middle East has concerning human rights violations. In how many Arab states is it for example legal to leave the Islam? ( Apostasy ). In most Arab countries you'd get the death penalty for doing so. Likewise you'd get convicted for Insulting Muhammad in most Arab countries. Also it's not like these regulations are unpopular with the Arab populace. You see, most Arab countries have a somewhat democratic system with a form of representation but the political parties in the system are more interested in political Islam than in human rights, you don't have democratic parties which are both Islamic and respectful for democratic traditions like the Christian democrats in Europe. In the end, the horrible oppression in most Arab countries is made possible by traditional Islamic values. Of course you have Jordan, Turkey & Tunesia, but those are the rare exceptions where people are guaranteed most of their human rights. Interestingly that's also because of what I said earlier, Jordan, Turkey and Tunesia have democratic parties, which altough they are often Islamic, honour most democratic values. You can compare them with let's say, Christian Democrats in Europe.

In countries where human rights violations are a severe, religion is just a part of the problem. In this case as in many others it's little more than a tool of power. Claiming that religion is the cause of the violations / the authoritarian society is incredibly short sighted and will solve nothing.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;49202451]People try to attribute the failings of people to Islam, but if we look at who created Islam (people), who keeps enforcing Islam (people), who keeps manipulating people with Islam (people), and who keeps enabling the awfulness of Islam (people), it's always people. People are the problem. If there are people who can peacefully practice Islam, there's no excuse for people not to follow suit save for their own personal failings.[/QUOTE] You nailed it. If you look further there are two types of people. Smart, kind thoughtful people like you and fanatics who are emotional disturbed and exactly not kind. In one of these threads, some one said religion as a way to live. Hardly. If you before the era of mono theism,. the folk lore or myths, it was a way to interact with the spirit world. According to this folk lore, that side of "reality" was a nasty, vile, cruel and lacking morality. The idea religion is a moralizing force is a recent idea. For those who say Christianity through out it history was better then Islam, not really. It was Islam that preserved the texts that once recovered was what brought about Europe out of its dark ages.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;49202451]People try to attribute the failings of people to Islam, but if we look at who created Islam (people), who keeps enforcing Islam (people), who keeps manipulating people with Islam (people), and who keeps enabling the awfulness of Islam (people), it's always people. People are the problem. If there are people who can peacefully practice Islam, there's no excuse for people not to follow suit save for their own personal failings.[/QUOTE] What you basically said is that animals and unliving things don't practice Islam. Saying "People are the problem" is not really very profound, because that's really the case no matter what. "National Socialism wasn't the problem, people were!"

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;49201919]Extreme form of Islam? It says it right in the Quran to cut off fingers, heads and other body parts for those who criticize Islam, leave the religion (like the poet did) or draw pictures of a certain prophet in such a way. [I] Quran (8:12) "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"[/I] Its right there, plain as day. This is Islam as a religion in a nutshell, and it badly needs a reform.[/QUOTE] Same man! And as a Catholic I always look forward to the weekly stoning of women for committing adultery!

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;49201919]Its right there, plain as day. This is Islam as a religion in a nutshell, and it badly needs a reform.[/QUOTE] A religion undergoing major reform like you propose usually ends up causing civil wars and genocide, and the new version created doesn't really end up any better than the previous one. You've already got the Sunni-Shia split which has caused a fair share of both for the past 1350 years, there's no need to have more of that.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49203037]What you basically said is that animals and unliving things don't practice Islam. Saying "People are the problem" is not really very profound, because that's really the case no matter what. "National Socialism wasn't the problem, people were!"[/QUOTE] They were. If you look past any ideal (religious or other wise) you will see the same patterns and the same types of people committing or obeying the same people to commit those acts. [QUOTE]books of religion aren't meant to be taken as anything other than ancient and outdated guides for living, let's be honest shall we? [/QUOTE] No they were guides for dealing with the spiris world. If you look at myths and folk lore pre monotheism, you'll see any thing from that side is rather cruel, brutal and unfair. So its not a guide for morality.

Can he seek asylum in a country that doesn't kill people for insulting islam? He could come to the UK and be fast-tracked through the immigration process.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49203053]A religion undergoing major reform like you propose usually ends up causing civil wars and genocide, and the new version created doesn't really end up any better than the previous one. You've already got the Sunni-Shia split which has caused a fair share of both for the past 1350 years, there's no need to have more of that.[/QUOTE] If Islam as a religion wants to integrate with a tolerant and liberal western society, there needs to be better treatment of women and a more mature attitude towards western ideals. [QUOTE=CrumbleShake;49202669]Yeah and it also says this: and this and this Oh wait those are from the bibile Is this Christianity in a nutshell? How can anyone interpret these spiritually. I guess you could say that part of religion is contextualisation, and that the point in a religious text is the overarching themes of charity and love, not the little details about faith wars, that were written during times of religious persecution and war. Also IIRC the part about drawing mohammed isn't in the Quran, and is a belief that came way later that isn't unanimous. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzusSqcotDw[/media] This guy nails it.[/QUOTE] Actually he dodges several questions as something that's to do with the government of Middle Eastern countries, rather than the practices of Islam as an ideology. He also calls criticism of Islam "bigotry" when we aren't criticizing people, we're criticizing ideals and practices. Religion has nothing to do with race and skin color, and for some reason people keep ignoring this and its becoming very frustrating.

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;49203107]If Islam as a religion wants to integrate with a tolerant and liberal western society, there needs to be better treatment of women and a more mature attitude towards western ideals.[/QUOTE] I don't think this is something very possible for Islam as a whole. It's generally why the religion is in decline and is entering another severe crisis right now.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49203056]They were. If you look past any ideal (religious or other wise) you will see the same patterns and the same types of people committing or obeying the same people to commit those acts.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying people weren't the problem, I'm just saying that people are [I]always[/I] the problem, so you're basically saying nothing at all. So I guess we just have to conclude that people are just people and there's nothing to do about it? It's a dumb way to exonerate whatever you're trying to talk about.

[QUOTE=Dr.C;49201902]This is like getting mad at baptists for something catholics did. Saudi's practice a very extreme form of Islam and fund a lot of sunni extremists. You really don't hear about shit like this happening in a place like Jordan.[/QUOTE] I think the problem is that right now on planet earth, Islam is causing serious issues in a lot of places. While you will easily find extremists in ALL religions, and horrible acts being committed due to religion daily, as of [U]right [/U]now Islam is much bigger in the spotlight since its legitimately affecting entire countries and a lot of lives at this moment in a negative way. While the majority of Muslims and Islamic folk are peaceful, and even with if some have dumb views, they are still not violent or going to cause harm, but their is still a very large harmful side of it that really isnt so niche right now. Islam is affecting a lot of different places right now in a very negative way. Islam is in a really shitty place right now, shitty enough to see that its not like some tiny group making it look bad, its a lot of it making it look bad because so many assholes are involved with it right now. Also the type of faith and people this religion can create isnt like others. You dont really hear of people suicide bombing or massacring so casually like you do from Islam. These arent assholes with picket signs, they are assholes with bombs and guns who have no fear of using them even if it means they die, some even fucking look forward to it. This really isnt coming from a lot of other big religions right now. So now even the good muslims and islamic people cant even really do anything against them because they would just fucking kill them. Its fucked right now.

It boggles my mind knowing that you could get sentenced to death for something so meaningless as this.

[QUOTE=kweh;49203216]It boggles my mind knowing that you could get sentenced to death for something so meaningless as this.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure like the Roman Empire like at the start of fucking A.D. had a better legal system.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49203164]I'm not saying people weren't the problem, I'm just saying that people are [I]always[/I] the problem, so you're basically saying nothing at all. So I guess we just have to conclude that people are just people and there's nothing to do about it? It's a dumb way to exonerate whatever you're trying to talk about.[/QUOTE] What I am saying there is a specific type of person who causes problems. There is a book titled "The Lucifer Principle" by Howard Bloom. The other for starters would be Eric Hoffer, True Believer. Both Illustrate that a fanatic is a person of specific traits, despite of religion or ideal. Mostly of an unsound mind or unsettled emotionally. It is something that is easy to observe, and repeatedly so. Once you focus on just the behaviors, compare and contrast and ignore the labels, you will see this to be so. The solution is has less people susceptible to fanaticism. Less awful people, better future. [QUOTE] whatever you're trying to talk about[/QUOTE] I'm not making sense to because I have an idea that not familiar to you. Familiarity doesn't mean what is considered sensible, is actually sensible.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49203257]What I am saying there is a specific type of person who causes problems. There is a book titled "The Lucifer Principle" by Howard Bloom. The other for starters would be Eric Hoffer, True Believer. Both Illustrate that a fanatic is a person of specific traits, despite of religion or ideal. Mostly of an unsound mind or unsettled emotionally. It is something that is easy to observe, and repeatedly so.[/QUOTE] Sure, people who are less resourceful are more likely to be radicalised - how does that disagree with what I'm saying? When you're in a spot where you don't really have any direction in life, it's easy to pick up on a set of ideals to govern your life to an extreme degree. That doesn't absolve those ideals from criticism. You could then say that they'd pick up any ideals (and thus that the content of the ideals doesn't really matter), but I don't think that's necessarily true. People who become neo-nazis and people who join ISIS may have many of the basics in common, but there probably isn't a lot of cross-over. You edited your post, and of course I agree that less awful people would result in a better future. These people aren't born as awful people, though.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49203303]Sure, people who are less resourceful are more likely to be radicalised - how does that disagree with what I'm saying? When you're in a spot where you don't really have any direction in life, it's easy to pick up on a set of ideals to govern your life to an extreme degree. That doesn't absolve those ideals from criticism. You could then say that they'd pick up any ideals (and thus that the content of the ideals doesn't really matter), but I don't think that's necessarily true. People who become neo-nazis and people who join ISIS may have many of the basics in common, but there probably isn't a lot of cross-over. You edited your post, and of course I agree that less awful people would result in a better future. These people aren't born as awful people, though.[/QUOTE] There is neuro logical differences. [url]http://2012election.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004818[/url] However at the root is emotional imbalance. Poverty may play a role but isnt the main driver here, The trick is create an idea that makes fanaticism cannibalize itself. As for not born awful, I disagree. Emotional imbalances are passed from generation to generation. So are the traits of a person susceptible to fanaticism. What happens over time is people who are tolerant, smart, sane and kind (such as your self) end up having to deal with these people. These people end up destroying the people the likes of you and me. Which ends in creating a world of more awful people. It is truly a you versus them situation.

[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;49202669] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzusSqcotDw[/media] This guy nails it.[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;47NFTbbrFOA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47NFTbbrFOA[/video] [QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49202717]The reason for homosexuals seen as a sin has more with to do politics then sin. Without members who produce children, the spirit or church will have less power. Breeders only. Every sperm is sacred.[/QUOTE] Well its in the scripture and people follow it to this day. Hell, in the past US/Canada both parties were opposed to it.

[QUOTE=Annoyed Grunt;49202768]The old testament is obsolete and not relevant, at least for christians.[/QUOTE] That's not really true at all. Sure, Christians don't follow the law of Old Testament Israel, but that's an extremely small part of the Old Testament. In fact, Christianity wouldn't even make sense without the OT.

[QUOTE]Well its in the scripture and people follow it to this day. Hell, in the past US/Canada both parties were opposed to it.[/QUOTE] Right, but here is my logic. The Creator, the true God is good. Everything that is created is good, for it comes from god. If it were not good, it would never been created. Non hetrosexual exist. Therefore are good. Therefore the gods of the Bible or Koran are not the true god (Creator). So either the religion isn't from the creator (but a deity pretending to be the one and only), or someone corrupted the text. Which would make the scripture false. The idea that mini "Gods" not caring for people who do not give children is not new. The same thing is rumored to happen in Africa Religious systems. In that system, it is customary for the adherents to be "Ridden" (possessed). From what little I understand (I may be wrong) if you violate any one the taboos, the spirits may just leave you (so you have no power) to what I heard one story a woman being influenced (horsed) to throw her self off a cliff. The woman in question was found to have laid with another woman. This class of spirits only can manifest through blood lines. So if you have an orientation that won't allow you have descendants, you are literally taking food from their mouths and their ability to exist. Doesnt make them happy. How would you like it if I took your ability to exist and your ability to sustain yourself from you? Thats the paranormal side. The political side is more likely. A church filled with those who don't have children isnt going be powerful for very long or sustain it self beyond the short term. A church that has contacted with the truly divine would welcome all for he created all. Why not welcome all with that in mind? This is the logic.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49204174]The Creator, the true God is good. Everything that is created is good, for it comes from god. If it were not good, it would never been created. Non hetrosexual exist. Therefore are good.[/QUOTE] Are you talking within the Christian worldview? If so, then you're not really presenting it correctly. Firstly, let me quickly define two types of good that we might be talking about. One type is immediate good. So this would be how God created the original universe. On the other hand, there's ultimate good. So it may be that any creation that allows free will inevitably lead to sin. This would mean that God created the universe in such a way to that it is ultimately the best possible creation, but it would still contain non-immediately good things within it. The Christian worldview generally holds to the universe being the latter thing. It is ultimately good, but not everything in it is good. The Bible clearly states that lots of "natural" things are not good. (Pride, for example, is extremely natural, but also considered to be one of the most foundationally evil things)

[QUOTE]Are you talking within the Christian worldview? If so, then you're not really presenting it correctly.[/QUOTE] No. Talking about my world view I made up to counter bs on both sides.

[QUOTE=Maloof?;49201985]The Christian bible has stuff that's just as ruthless though? I'm pretty sure every religion that takes direction from a series of manuscripts written before contemporary values were developed is in pretty much the same state.[/QUOTE]Cite it. Don't pull from the Old Testament because that's the old covenant and doesn't apply to Christians. [QUOTE=adam1172;49201989]That's because chapter 8, Surat Al-Anfal is about the Battle of Badr, it was literally an invasion attempt by the Pagans in Mecca towards the Muslims in Madinah. It does not say you should cut off the fingers, heads and other body parts of those who critisise islam. Its really just a war speech literally telling them "lol just kill them and win this war already".[/QUOTE]Do note the first fucking line, "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve." Just because it's about a specific battle doesn't mean that it isn't establishing precedence (which is a big fucking thing because religious law is based all around shit like this, hence the "interpretation") for how to treat those who willfully refuse to believe. [QUOTE=sgman91;49204149]That's not really true at all. Sure, Christians don't follow the law of Old Testament Israel, but that's an extremely small part of the Old Testament. In fact, Christianity wouldn't even make sense without the OT.[/QUOTE]It's still true though, just because it's there for context doesn't mean it's relevant or not obsolete. Oh, and for those who are wondering why it's included yeah, see above. I assume sgman91 is an actual practicing Christian, I'm just focused on the truth of things and it burns my ass when people go "YEAH WELL WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE" as a half-assed attempt at defending Islam. [I]By the fucking way[/I] regarding that point, even if Christianity was literally built on the idea of sacrificing babies and ritually slaughtering kittens that doesn't make anything about Islam okay or not okay. You can't use one religion to defend a completely different one, even if both have the same origins.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49203037]What you basically said is that animals and unliving things don't practice Islam. Saying "People are the problem" is not really very profound, because that's really the case no matter what. "National Socialism wasn't the problem, people were!"[/QUOTE] What I'm trying to say is people latch so easily onto the idea that Islam is bad. Well, no, not really - in this case you can clearly see it's the shitty government. All those beheadings from the terrorists? That's because they're terrorists. People go to this cop-out of mental thought that is blaming it on Muslims, but statistically speaking Muslims aren't the problem - crazies are. Fight the crazies, not the ideology. Anyone can have any ideology and turn it to shit.

[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49204502]No. Talking about my world view I made up to counter bs on both sides.[/QUOTE] Your original response was directly responding to someone talking about Christianity. So I wasn't quite sure. So how does your position not lead to the belief that literally everything is good because God created everything? You said: [QUOTE]The Creator, the true God is good. Everything that is created is good, for it comes from god. If it were not good, it would never been created. Non hetrosexual exist. Therefore are good. [/QUOTE] You can replace "non heterosexuals" with literally anything and the statement would still apply, for example: [QUOTE]The Creator, the true God is good. Everything that is created is good, for it comes from god. If it were not good, it would never been created. [B]Murderers[/B] exist. Therefore they are good. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=sgman91;49204556]Your original response was directly responding to someone talking about Christianity. So I wasn't quite sure. So how does your position not lead to the belief that literally everything is good because God created everything? You said: You can replace "non heterosexuals" with literally anything and the statement would still apply, for example:[/QUOTE] Well that gets into what The creator wants. Not what WE as humans think we want. Has it occurred that what the creator wants for himself may come at our expense?