antishock8 wrote: Regardless, Muslims need to be challenged. They have a sense of entitlement for respect that is undeserved. Muhammed should be rightly designated a pedophile, murderer, polygamist, and bigot to go along with conqueror, statesman, and leader. No one should fear for his life when discussing the irrationality of Islam, Christianity, Mormonism, or any ideology for that matter.
I couldn't agree more. In fact, I'd go further and say that all religious dogmatists need to be challenged. Anyone who uses religious belief as a basis to enact or impose policies/laws on others need to be challenged. We need to get rid f the privileged status we grant religious beliefs. If history shows us anything, it is that religious beliefs have consequences that affects millions upon millions of persons.
If believers want to put their beliefs in the public forum, they have no rights to expect/demand 'respect' for those beliefs. Respect is earned by the quality of the beliefs and is not granted automatically.
Human society needs far more criticism of religious belief, not less.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
antishock8 wrote: Regardless, Muslims need to be challenged. They have a sense of entitlement for respect that is undeserved. Muhammed should be rightly designated a pedophile, murderer, polygamist, and bigot to go along with conqueror, statesman, and leader. No one should fear for his life when discussing the irrationality of Islam, Christianity, Mormonism, or any ideology for that matter.
I couldn't agree more. In fact, I'd go further and say that all religious dogmatists need to be challenged. Anyone who uses religious belief as a basis to enact or impose policies/laws on others need to be challenged. We need to get rid f the privileged status we grant religious beliefs. If history shows us anything, it is that religious beliefs have consequences that affects millions upon millions of persons.
If believers want to put their beliefs in the public forum, they have no rights to expect/demand 'respect' for those beliefs. Respect is earned by the quality of the beliefs and is not granted automatically.
Human society needs far more criticism of religious belief, not less.
Daniel Peterson wrote: This is an interesting topic. I know a lot about it. A lot.
If civil, substantive, non-demonizing discussion had been possible on this message board, I would have been happy to discuss this topic.
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Wonderful..... you know a lot about it, but won't discuss it, but will tell us that conceivably some people could get killed. I don't believe you. I (like many Jews) find the practice of proxy baptism grossly insensitive and feel like telling those who may not know about it the potential status of some of their religious leaders (again, maybe just names submitted and no work done, I don't know). Do you think they won't find out somehow?
Here's your chance to stop me. Tell us what "a lot" you know so that I won't. I've got to tell you though, that I find it bizarre (to use a phrase punctuated through many of your online writings) that you find culpability in me or other message board slouches and not the church.
Chris <><
Dan-
Interested yet in telling me this "a lot" that you know so that I would know why I shouldn't take what I have gathered so far and send it to C.A.I.R for their input or thoughts?