Moohamed didn't like detractors. In his Quran he states:
"...4:56
Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the
Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for
fresh skins that they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty,
Wise..." http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/4/index.htm#56 Even today, in Islamic countries atheists are threatened with death or jailed:
“Criticism of religion is not only the starting point of all criticism. It is the prerequisite of any kind of criticism. In a society where religion cannot be criticized, everything becomes religion from the length of your beard to what hand to use when wiping your backside. Where there is no criticism of religion, life and society in their entirety become religious and the littlest squeak against the existing order is an act of blasphemy.”
My familiarity with administrative hearings
and the pinheads who run them leads me to believe on first glance that
Dorner may have been wrongfully terminated, solely from the perspective
of supposedly false statements about another officer...
I
wonder if he would have been treated better by the LAPD, if he
could have then been helped in other ways with counseling, and stayed
on. Then the people Dorner killed would still be alive? It's a worthy
thought experiment to conduct, especially for people who run
administrative hearings and who run police departments...
So
far the guy is confirmed to have killed four people. So, in his case
it's good that he's dead. But everyone should realize the part they may
play in the course of actions of someone who is unstable enough to do
such things. They need to be treated with more care, and not sent to the
wolves, where they can act out in negative ways. They should be a.)
treated fairly, and b.) guided toward necessary mental health
counseling. So while Dorner is responsible for his actions, and it's good that he's dead, there is simultaneously other people who're responsible for tipping a person with a propensity for being unstable over the edge via an apparently unfairly harsh & retributive environment (at the LAPD).
During the service the following item was read, as from article 10 of the Japanese Seventeen Article Constitution, by Shōtoku Taishi:
Let us cease from wrath, and refrain from angry looks. Nor let us be
resentful when others differ from us. For all men have hearts, and each
heart has its own leanings. Their right is our wrong, and our right is
their wrong. We are not unquestionably sages, nor are they
unquestionably fools. Both of us are simply ordinary men. How can any
one lay down a rule by which to distinguish right from wrong? For we are
all, one with another, wise and foolish, like a ring which has no end.
Therefore, although others give way to anger, let us on the contrary
dread our own faults, and though we alone may be in the right, let us
follow the multitude and act like men.
Shōtoku Taishi - authored in 604 and published in 720 CE
Also we have article 6:
Chastise that which is evil and encourage that which is good. This was the excellent rule of antiquity...
'How can any
one lay down a rule by which to distinguish right from wrong?' - contrast that with the claim that we should '...Chastise that which is evil and encourage that which is good. This was the excellent rule of antiquity...' ?
Human morals come from a combination of socialization and genetics.
Additionally the preacher guy stated that people who come to his church from other religions should consider going back to their religions. How uneducated can a person be about what actually happens in other religions?
In response to the story here, the following comment was posted & then censored by the BBC:
Crazed old virgins have no appreciation for human nature. Mass child rape, enabled by the institutions they foster. Locking women up for being 'too pretty,' in Ireland (Magdalene asylums). These men have an abusive relationship with existence, and the institutions they lead and foster show it.
What's up BBC, is the truth too much for you? Are you willing to tell the truth? Yes, we're 'shocked,' so 'shocked' that a man who helped protect pedophiles is deciding to resign.
Everything isn't equal.
A trimmed down version was published by then later however. In any case, who do crazed old farts get to run abusive religions? Cults of personality, a religions run by men who exist in their own little self-supporting bubble. Everyone loves them. They have their own terminology. People who're critical on the outside are considered devils. It's all par for the course for such systems.
"...For example, an atheist has no need to decide what kinds and occasions of profanity or blasphemy can be tolerated and what kinds should be confronted. Persons who don’t believe in God or in absolute truth in moral matters can see themselves as the most tolerant of persons. For them, almost anything goes. This belief system can tolerate almost any behavior and almost any person. Unfortunately, some who believe in moral relativism seem to have difficulty tolerating those who insist that there is a God who should be respected and that there are certain moral absolutes that should be observed..."
My response: What a shallow, obtuse, non-sequitur, and just plain wrong evaluation of what & who atheists are. We fight against abusive religions like yours because there's good reason to do so. And no, being an atheist does not automatically make one a moral relativist. I am not one, Mr. Oaks.
Back around ~2005 I lost about 110 pounds. I'm back on a more regimented diet for a short while. Here's links to recent spreadsheets to show what I'm eating & my progress:
Sucralose (splenda - or store brand equivalents from any store in the yellow bags), added to the oatmeal, and also used to make sugar-free lemonade or koolaid.
Today I'll be buying more cocoa powder, which is also good to add to the oatmeal.
I'd prefer to have tuna over the protein powder, but I'm not having a lot of tuna due to mercury concerns. I found some whey based protein powder which is lower in sugar and higher in protein, which is almost as good as tuna on a calories per gram of protein basis.
The Salt Lake Valley Atheists group held their monthly Utah Atheist Bunch, on Sunday February 3rd, 2013. Here's a clip from that meeting,
and then subsequent commentary added on from the 5th and 6th:
The talk at the meeting regarded whether atheism is a religion. At the front of his talk the speaker stated that "evangelical atheism" is just as bad as other forms of evangelical religion, and he said that atheists should not be "moral busybodies."
After his talk the speaker took a more conciliatory tone to some extent and said that he was mainly concerned about tactics. Also during his talk he said that it may be appropriate to respond to other religionists if they were procreatory.
Is atheism a religion? Not in the traditional sense. In religions usually there's leaders who cannot be questioned. Atheists tend to value science & try to reject dogma. Scientists get ahead in science by actually disproving, overturning, or adding to previous theories. Usually religious organizations reject and resist change and challenges to their core leaders & doctrines.
There is a lot of provocation going on from regligionists. Mormons send out their missionaries, they interrogate children and adults about masturbation,necking,petting,sex outside of marriage, and even oralsex in marriage. Catholic priests rape children en masse, and Catholics & conservative Anglicans have thrown their pretty women and women who had sex outside of marriage into asylums. Islamic people require that their women live in the prison of the burqa, niqab, and hijab.
Ok, so this is turning out to be a long standing issue. Examine the history of science & religion. In the past scientists got locked up for doing science, because their work challenged the contemporary views of the world. And even today, atheists are being sent to prison for speaking their mind.
Galileo was found to be "...vehemently suspect of heresy," and later sentenced to prison. A relevant excerpt from his sentence - but read the whole thing when you get a chance:
We say, pronounce, sentence, and declare that you,
the above-mentioned Galileo, because of the things deduced in the trial
and confessed by you as above, have rendered yourself according to this
Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely of having held and
believed a doctine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy
Scripture: that the sun is the center of the world and does not move from
east to west, and the earth moves and is not the center of the world,
and that one may hold and defend as probable an opinion after it has been
declared and defined contrary to Holy Scripture. Consequently you
have incurred all the censures and penalties imposed and promulgated by
the sacred canons and all particular and general laws against such delinquents.
We are willing to absolve you from them provided that first, with a sincere
heart and unfeigned faith, in front of us you abjure, curse, and detest
the above-mentioned errors and heresies, and every other error and heresy
contrary to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, in the manner and form
we will prescribe to you.
Furthermore, so that this serious and pernicious error
and transgression of yours does not remain completely unpunished, and
so that you will be more cautious in the future and an example for others
to abstain from similar crimes, we order that the book Dialogue
by Galileo Galilei be prohibited by public edict.
We condemn you to formal imprisonment in this Holy
Office at our pleasure. As a salutary penance we impose on you to
recite the seven penitential Psalms once a week for the next three years.
And we reserve the authority to moderate, change, or condone wholly or
in part the above-mentioned penalties and penances.
And then later we have the Scopes Trial, where teaching evolution was illegal in Tennessee.
No conflict between science & religion? That's what the Templeton Foundation would have us believe.
It almost goes without saying that creation "science" (which is not a science) is a direct response from religionists who see science as a threat.
The approach of the creationist religionists is as follows:
We don't like the answers science gives, they disprove our literalist interpretation of scripture. Therefore we shall simply redefine what science is and what science means, and we'll blow as much smoke as possible and muddy the waters with half and partial truths regarding what the true state of scientific discovery is.
This is precisely the approach taken by the "creation scientists:" blow smoke, change definitions, and lie when you have to.
And, the exact same approach is taken by the Mormon Church in the following articles, as they pathetically attempt to respond to DNA evidence refuting key claims in their founding religious documents on the origins of the American Indians. Check out:
A talk by Dr. Southerton to at an Exmormon Foundation conference: http://exmormonfoundation.org/audio2006.html
...look under the text on that page that says
"Simon Southerton, Ph.D.: 'Losing a Lost Race: From Radishes to DNA and Outer Darkness'"
Mormon scriptures that directly tie American Indians with Israel:
2 Nephi 26:19
19 And it shall come to pass, that those who have dwindled in unbelief shall be smitten by the hand of the Gentiles.
Enos 1:16
And I had faith, and I did cry unto God that he would preserve the records; and he covenanted with me that he would bring them forth unto the Lamanites in his own due time.
D&C 3:18
18 And this testimony shall come to the knowledge of the Lamanites, and the Lemuelites, and the Ishmaelites, who dwindled in unbelief because of the iniquity of their fathers, whom the Lord has suffered to destroy their brethren the Nephites, because of their iniquities and their abominations.
D&C 3:19
19 And for this very purpose are these plates preserved, which contain these records---that the promises of the Lord might be fulfilled, which he made to his people;
D&C 3:20
20 And that the Lamanites might come to the knowledge of their fathers, and that they might know the promises of the Lord, and that they may believe the gospel and rely upon the merits of Jesus Christ, and be glorified through faith in his name, and that through their repentance they might be saved. Amen.
D&C 19:27
27 Which is my word to the Gentile, that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and look not for a Messiah to come who has already come.
D&C 28:8
8 And now, behold, I say unto you that you shall go unto the Lamanites and preach my gospel unto them; and inasmuch as they receive thy teachings thou shalt cause my church to be established among them; and thou shalt have revelations, but write them not by way of commandment.
D&C 32:2
2 And that which I have appointed unto him is that he shall go with my servants, Oliver Cowdery and Peter Whitmer, Jun., into the wilderness among the Lamanites.
D&C 54:8
8 And thus you shall take your journey into the regions westward, unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.
D&C Section 57 Introduction - 1986 Edition
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, in Zion, Jackson County, Missouri, July 20, 1831. HC 1: 189-190. In compliance with the Lord's command (Section 52), the elders had journeyed from Kirtland to Missouri with many varied experiences and some opposition. In contemplating the state of the Lamanites and the lack of civilization, refinement, and religion among the people generally, the Prophet exclaimed in yearning prayer: "When will the wilderness blossom as the rose? When will Zion be built up in her glory, and where will they Temple stand, unto which all nations shall come in the last days?" Subsequently he received this revelation.
D&C 57:4
4 Wherefore, it is wisdom that the land should be purchased by the saints, and also every tract lying westward, even into the line running directly between Jew and Gentile.
[Footnote on the bottom of page 103 of the 1986 D&C:]
4b IE by metonymy "Jew" here refers to the Lamanites, and "Gentile" to the white settlers.
But notice, in the Doctrine & Covenants sections referenced above, we have The Mormon God, Elohim, speaking directly to Joseph Smith, right? Hey, Mormon Church, and FARMS, can you get around that?
The Mormon Brain Software, which was running in my own brain for several years, was a set of memes that operated rather like a virus or a biological system that put up defenses.
...and they do in all religions. If you have a doubt, that's from Satan. So, this is the last resort of all religionists. A newer tactic is to try to redefine what science means and what science is. That's the tactic of creation "scientists" and Templeton Chumps alike. And another longer standing tactic is to blow smoke. And then, if all else fails, just threaten people with the fear that any doubt comes to them via an evil spirit. How perverse, but it's par for the course in cult-type religions.
At the North American Museum of Ancient Life, in Lehi (near Provo), Utah (also should be known in my view as the 'Provo Dinosaur Museum'), they have a lot of nice exhibits. But
one key thing missing is any mention of human evolution, or that there were other 'homo' species, such as neanderthals. What's up with that? So
yes the place is nice & pretty, but they aren't telling the full
story with the glaring omission of human evolution. Zero mention in the
place - from what we saw. Nice & pretty to be sure, but not the full story of "ancient life." Video from our February 2nd, 2013 visit:
A talk by Dr. Southerton to at an Exmormon Foundation conference: http://exmormonfoundation.org/audio2006.html
...look under the text on that page that says
"Simon Southerton, Ph.D.: 'Losing a Lost Race: From Radishes to DNA and Outer Darkness'"
Maybe we can all try to mutilate our daughters on World Mutilation Day or marry off our girls on World Child Marriages Day? How about a day when our male guardians can track our whereabouts to make sure we aren’t leaving the country.
I know adult women have a right to wear the hijab (given the threats and compulsory nature of it in most places – this is very often just a formality but nonetheless) but to ask others to wear it is a tad absurd – if I’m being polite.
I am sorry but I don’t think I am the cause of fitna/chaos in the world and therefore find the veil abhorrent.
So here is my tribute to the hijab..."
Click here for the original article. The above image comes from there.
"...Islam and muslims have a hugh PR problem in the West. We need to help non muslims understand our religion and Islamic culture. Seriously, you need to think of it as a form of dawah..."
Indeed, and World Hijab Day isn't helping our view of your religion.
Here's info on local atheist groups in & near Salt Lake:
Salt Lake Valley Atheists. Meets the 1st Sunday at Sizzler on 4th South
at 11:30AM. Kirk Robinson is the speaker this month. Eat if you wish,
but it's not required. Come to the back room. For more info: http://nowscape.com/a
Atheists of Utah is a 501C3 type group and so is "officially"
politically neutral, but attendees can have whatever views they wish
& debate & discuss freely. The coffee chats tend to be a
churning type of experience, and they can be fun if you decide to simply
talk to your neighbor. Location Mestizo's Coffeehouse, 7-9:30PM. More
info on the website.
The above groups, and this group, are members of UCOR, the Utah Coalition of Reason. http://reasonutah.org/
The yearly Exmormon Foundation conferences in Salt Lake have never had a
"Christian" agenda per se - mostly a secular one of learning to live
life after being in the circle of the cult. http://www.exmormonfoundation.org/
There are two Unitarian Universalist congratulations in the Salt Lake
valley and some former mos attend. My own personal satisfaction level
with each congregation has varied & wavered over time. From a
cultural perspective the meetings & layout are more similar to
Catholic & Anglican services rather than Mormon. The kids are, for
example, sent away to rooms instead of being allowed to stay with their
parents. Also they tend to have a paid preacher - who does admittedly
tend to be very socially liberal, but still it's usually the same person
speaking every week. The UU's in general have some taboos about being
truly honest about he problems with religion though, and so sadly they
have their heads in the sand as much as other religions to some extent.
But nevertheless they are a socializing option you could consider if you
wish. My further concerns about UUism: http://tinyurl.com/beqls4b
My view on such things is that people are unfortunately jumping from
one cult to another. That's my view, and I won't belong to any group
that would seek to censor my trying to speak my mind. I try not to be a
cultural relativist, so I could say "if that what floats your boat, so
be it" but I won't because doing so makes me feel bad.
Here again is a more full list of groups that ARE stronger advocates for secularism and the fruits of the Enlightenment: http://reasonutah.org/groups/
Try them all - as on that site. And don't forget that in some there is a
weekly or monthly churning. So if irritating people show up one week,
maybe next time you'll find more interesting people - or you could be
the interesting person yourself.
My video on Islam & Unitarianism has had
two views (so far) from Saudi (as per the stats page for the video). They're
checking me out...
Here's a video of an atheist visiting Mecca:
The previous occurrences of the account were deleted via trolls. For example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGmOpVrYJ5Q has been terminated. So watch the newest incarnation of the atheist in Mecca video while you can.
And here again is a film where an apparent atheist visits a Mormon temple, to view the ceremony where they show a film:
and here's the version of the Mormon temple ceremony that has live actors:
Hi again, guys and (hopefully) gals from Saudi Arabia. Thanks for checking out my videos. I'm glad you were able to stop by...
January 19, 2013 video commentary on atheists, exmormons, and people who've left other religions "moving on."
Are you uncomfortable being around atheists, ex-mormons, ex-Muslims, or people who've left other cults - people with a lot of "religious baggage?"
Here's a video commentary for you, and also about whether people are free to speak their mind while inside various religions or not. Also avoiding cults of personality, even in atheist groups.
Even some some atheists wonder about the anger of exmormons & fellow atheists.
Why? Why? Why are we so angry?
Because we have damn good reasons to be. Check out the links above. Read what people actually say.
All that baggage. Why don't we just "get over it?" We do live our lives and we move forward. But we never completely "move on." Why? Because the petrified penis of Mormonism still stands tall over Salt Lake. Because the "Miracle of Forgiveness" is still sold in the Mormon Church distribution centers. Because asshole Boyd Packer is still spewing human spirit destroying filth. Because the Mormon Church continues to oppress people. Because we're upset at being lied to. Because some of our families disowned us. Because some of our fellows committed suicide because of the pain.
Some people who had a fluffy exit from Mormonism, or who were only ever liberal religionists or who have always been non-religious, these people often have no idea what life was like in Mormonism or other conservative cults.
Why don't we just "get over it?" Ask us in a more respectful tone & maybe we'll tell you.
I will not disparage people for seeking social support after they leave a cult. You shouldn't either.
Why is it such a mystery to some why these people have "so much religious baggage?" Because they do. And maybe they need some help learning how to be more free from the cult they spent many years inside.
Atheist groups serve as a social support for people who leave various religions. People with a "lot of religious baggage" may well show up to such meetings, and if that offends you, too bad. It's par for the course at such meetings. Maybe those people need your help.
Related site & a good quote: http://new.exchristian.net/2011/02/why-are-atheists-so-angry.html
"...Atheists are fully justified in their anger, and that anger may be the last, best hope for our species surviving our own ignorance and gullibility. If religious forces ever manage to quell our anger, then they will have won the battle . . . and lost the world..."
I think his views are influenced in part by the death threats he has received due to his past writings & work. Nevertheless I agree that more can be done to keep guns out of the hands of nuts, and perhaps out of the homes of people who have nuts living there.
Death threats do tend to sharpen the mind I'm sure. All these people tend to be hawks when it comes to Islam, and for good reason - because they have first hand experience with what happens when we encounter a medieval cult still with wide reaching power over people.
Pat Condell - I very much appreciate his tone & his positions on religion. I may not agree with all of his politics, but I nevertheless love the way he states his positions: http://www.youtube.com/user/patcondell
-----
video commentary is from January 9 & 10, 2013 videos combined into one
As an atheist I whole heatedly disagree with Peter Singer’s positions on abortion, infanticide, and human rights.
Notes from video commentary, with additional thoughts:
Religion is a natural phenomenon. So the good that comes from religion is natural. There are atheists who are concerned about abortion, and who absolutely do not agree with Singer.
Without god everything is permitted? No. There is no god, and not everything is permitted. So the answer is no to that proposition.
In Averick's article on Singer he doesn't need to paint all atheists as immoral. We aren’t - we’re human just like him, and humans have human morals.
And as for Singer, I recommend you read this post and an earlier post, which includes notes on Sam Harris & Christopher Hitchens, on the problems with moral & cultural relativism, and an advocacy for discouraging abortion.
Can a middle road be taken on abortion? How about: First & second trimester: legal but highly discouraged. Third trimester: illegal. After birth abortion: equivalent to murder. How's that?
Morality comes from a combination of socialization and genetics. Check out Steven Pinker, Sam Harris, & Daniel Dennet on the subject of morality, religion, and the thankfully evolving & improving moral zeitgeist.
I admit that I have built in morals, as do most people except for sociopaths, and except (in part) for people currently tied down by meme sets that are infecting their brains & making them less moral than they would otherwise be.
Religion can make people less moral than they would otherwise be (eg: suicide bombers as one example). The ivory tower of academics can do the same, for example where students learn the "value" of moral & cultural relativism, and the lie of the blank slate.
Did your god have sex with Mary the mother of Jesus? Does your god live on Kolob? Is Mohamed god's messenger? If you don't believe any one, two, or three of these three points, then maybe it's notillusory to be a so-called atheist.
We aren't required to choose between the ass hole tea baggers of Fox News & the current Republican Party, and the similarly anally retentive feminazi zero population growth ultra lefties who love PETA and similar groups, and who believe that women who're homemakers are selling themselves short. A pox on both of their houses. We're moving forward, as natural humans who're interested in truth and what science reveals about everything. And when your preconceived or inculcated notions are debunked, then drop them. I'll try to do the same.
