If You're a Christian, Muslim or Jew - You are Wrong (3 Viewers)

[Calculon]

Yes but Saddam's regime was an overt tyranny whereas the US is in there claiming to be liberating the Iraqi's

Yeah but I'd suppose (someone correct me if they have evidence) it'd seem logical that the bulk of the deaths would be in the first few months (ie during the initial entry, until Baghdad and Tikrit were captured), and thus at present significantly lower numbers are dying than under Saddam.

 

[sly fly]

haha I love soha's sense of humour

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Yes one would think that, in theory, the deaths should get exponentially lower... assuming security can be maintained and set-up. It's just that this has been an uphill battle so far - and on that point the future doesn't look particularly bright at the moment. The brunt of the deaths are likely to be spent in the main assault whereas ongoing insurgence-related deaths are of a seemingly of a far lesser (but significant) quantity.

 

[Calculon]

So you think it’s okay for someone to mortify and degrade someone’s beliefs? When someone makes insulating accusations and comments obviously you have to defend your religion/race/homeland etc, no-one likes seeing their beliefs being besmirched.

I personally think all religion is just a crutch used by the weak of spine because they're afraid of not knowing the answers to everything.

 

[sly fly]

Yeah but I'd suppose (someone correct me if they have evidence) it'd seem logical that the bulk of the deaths would be in the first few months (ie during the initial entry, until Baghdad and Tikrit were captured), and thus at present significantly lower numbers are dying than under Saddam.

Uhh did you read my post.....I thought I said that the death toll shouldn't be the only thing that should be taken into consideration. Plus, the US aren't in there to kill people remember....they're 'liberating' them. So why would you compare it to Saddam, who obviously had a tyrannical policy of killing people in their masses.

 

[sly fly]

I personally think all religion is just a crutch used by the weak of spine because they're afraid of not knowing the answers to everything.

Oh but they HAVE found the answers.........religion

 

[Calculon]

Uhh did you read my post.....I thought I said that the death toll shouldn't be the only thing that should be taken into consideration. Plus, the US aren't in there to kill people remember....they're 'liberating' them. So why would you compare it to Saddam, who obviously had a tyrannical policy of killing people in their masses.

If I recall correctly the orders for the atrocities at abu ghraib did not come from Bush. These things are regrettable, but they are in no way part of the plan or intent of the coalition's mission there.

 

[sly fly]

If I recall correctly the orders for the atrocities at abu ghraib did not come from Bush. These things are regrettable, but they are in no way part of the plan or intent of the coalition's mission there.

Yes but they wouldn't have happened had the US not been in Iraq

 

[Calculon]

Yes but they wouldn't have happened had the US not been in Iraq

They affected perhaps 20 people. This is 0.0001% of the Iraqi population.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

I personally think all religion is just a crutch used by the weak of spine because they're afraid of not knowing the answers to everything.

To be sure, it is a very potent comforting force. You have someone there to look out for you, to welcome you after this life, who allows you to bond with other people and share in united comfort, who you can turn to for hope in bad times, who isn't human so you aren't answerable to them in human affairs, and who relieves you of difficult thought about important questions.

I can see why it has such a strong influence and why even intelligent people are drawn to it. It becomes central to a lot of people's lives as well, to the point where questioning it seems unthinkable and might prove crushing to those intensely brought up with such beliefs. So on the one hand, for those who have structured their whole lives around religion it is wise to tread as lightly as possible. It is also one argument as to why unfortunate people, by nature or circumstance, should not be deprived of their hope.

But on the other hand truth is so much more important to me than comfort so that I hate to see what I consider a waste of life. Religions that place the emphasis on "the next life" steal from the potential of human beings. Not only that, but blindness can be very dangerous. I personally think humanity stands a better chance of finding prosperity through applications of reason and compassion, not the dogma of our own myths. They may serve some purposes such as comfort. But if we learnt to 'worship' each other instead of a deity we would be much better off. Humankind has come a long way and we don't need religion anymore.

Unfortunately, it is a residue of the past that still shackles much of the world today.

 

[sly fly]

They affected perhaps 20 people. This is 0.0001% of the Iraqi population.

Uhuh and that completely justifies it

(not that there were 20ppl, there was more than that, but just assuming that there were)

 

[thorrnydevil]

But on the other hand truth is so much more important to me than comfort so that I hate to see what I consider a waste of life. Religions that place the emphasis on "the next life" steal from the potential of human beings. Not only that, but blindness can be very dangerous. I personally think humanity stands a better chance of finding prosperity through applications of reason and compassion, not the dogma of our own myths. They may serve some purposes such as comfort. But if we learnt to 'worship' each other instead of a deity we would be much better off. Humankind has come a long way and we don't need religion anymore.

Unfortunately, it is a residue of the past that still shackles much of the world today.

The fact of the matter is, people try and live their lives better (the majority anyway) so they can gain eternal life in heaven. It doesn't steal from their potential, but adds to it.

Also, most religions promote kindness to other people and respect them for who they are. This gives people the satisfaction of helping others, while also living their lives as helpful christians/muslims/hindus/whatever.

People will always need religion. It gives us a sense of comfort in that we will spend eternity in paradise with God - human feelings are not something one can just grow out of.

I personally don't believe I should impose my beliefs on others-that's your path to choose. However, in the end, I believe I am right, as you believe you are.

 

[Calculon]

You're right, it doesn't justify it, but to judge tens (hundreds?) of thousands of soldiers and their overall cause upon the actions of so few makes no sense.

 

[physician]

Americans don't walk down the street shooting people because they don't like the look of them. Accidently, or purposfull killings only happen when some conflict erupts.

really?... as harsh as it may sound... to an extent, that is the case!

Accidental?... so when American soldiers fire at someone... and kill another we call it accidental.. but when Iraqi's fire at Americans soldiers.. its called terrorism!...


The killing of inncocent ppl needs to stop, from both sides... killing more innocent ppl wont resolve this!

it's ok for Iraqi muslims to defend their homeland from invading US christian infidels.. So .. i should be able to defend my homeland Australia, against invading plague like Muslims who are threatening and invading my homeland?

As long as I'm not holding a gun in my hand.. then NO!... u have absolutely no right to lay a finger on me!

invading: Dude I was born in Australia too! its my homeland as much as it is urs!
By the way, there's a difference between threatening to invade and actually invading!... and we're doing neither here in Australia!

 

[MoonlightSonata]

The fact of the matter is, people try and live their lives better (the majority anyway) so they can gain eternal life in heaven. It doesn't steal from their potential, but adds to it.

That rests on two very critical premises: that there is a Heaven and that there is a God. Neither of which you can prove.

Also, most religions promote kindness to other people and respect them for who they are. This gives people the satisfaction of helping others, while also living their lives as helpful christians/muslims/hindus/whatever.

Gay people might tend to disagree on that one. But I do take your point that a lot of modern religions do emphasis doing good. Take the religion down a tangential path though, and all hell breaks lose.

People will always need religion. It gives us a sense of comfort in that we will spend eternity in paradise with God - human feelings are not something one can just grow out of.

I agree that a lot of people will always feel the need to go to religion. I suppose I have had the advantage of living a very comfortable life and have both (a) not been indoctrinated into religion and (b) have also studied reason and critical thinking. So I've never really had the need for the comforting pull of religion nor been taken by a lack of reasoning.

I personally don't believe I should impose my beliefs on others-that's your path to choose. However, in the end, I believe I am right, as you believe you are.

True, but the difference between us is that my beliefs are founded on reason. Faith on the other hand, is belief without proof.

 

[sly fly]

The purpose of me highlighting that to you wasn't to judge the cause of all the soldiers by the actions of a few (though I can tell you what I think of their stupid cause, I hope they die soon!). The purpose was to make a comparison between Saddam's regime and current occupation in Iraq......two 'totally different' causes, yet which have brought about the same outcomes.

 

[sly fly]

Physician, just a piece of advice......

When a dog barks at you do you bark back? The answer is obvious and so is the moral behind it

 

[Calculon]

The same outcomes, but on a massively different scale. On that basis you could argue that the problems of poverty here are exactly the same as they are in central/northern africa on the basis of a few people here being just as poor as a vast number of africans.

 

[sly fly]

The same outcomes, but on a massively different scale. On that basis you could argue that the problems of poverty here are exactly the same as they are in central/northern africa on the basis of a few people here being just as poor as a vast number of africans.

No, it's not on a 'massively' different scale. Remember that the American's have only been there approx. 2 years...........in time, I'm sure that the death toll will increase to match that of Saddam's regime (if not match, perhaps close to, thereby not making it a 'massively' different scale). Secondly, your example proves that you fail to comprehend my point........we're comparing two regimes. Both claim to have different causes, yet they have brought the same outcomes. Your example is irrelevant to the circumstances.

Anyway, I should sleep...goodnight

 

[Calculon]

Yes it is. You're comparing the torture of thousands to the the torture of perhaps 20-30.