Best
211 Comments
Post
  • #51
    !
    Saudi Arabia went from dirt poor stone age savages to trillionaire stone age savages, all because of oil. I can't wait until we find an alternate fuel source so we can let the Saudis starve to death in the dark.
  • #59
    !
    @NormalFlora

    "Saudi Arabia went from dirt poor stone age savages to trillionaire stone age savages"

    Not Saudi Arabia, the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia. The average Saudi isn't doing very well. Per Capita Saudi Arabia has a fairly low GDP. More like second world, not first world or third world.

    A perfect example of what I have said about mixing govt and religion corrupting both. The religion justifies the govt doing pretty much everything, which is why Wahhabi are not popular with a lot of other Muslims.
  • R Load more replies

  • #48
    !
    Every terrorist organization or individual we've ever heard of has held deeply religious views. Not once have I ever heard of an atheist terrorist. Atheists don't get emotionally involved in wars over religion, territory, and power (which all seem to go together, don't they?). An atheist is the least likely terrorist. WTF are they thinking in Saudi Arabia?
  • #87
    !
    That is flat out wrong, there have been plenty of Marxist Atheist Terrorist groups and individuals out there. As well as militant Atheist groups. Not to mention Lennon was one of the biggest mass murders in history as well as very anti-religion.
  • #101
    !
    I was long under the similar impression that terrorism, certainly suicide terrorism, was all or mostly religious-based. As it turns out, I was mistaken; nationalism plays a bigger role, often under a cover of religion. In fact, the Tamil Tigers (a secular group) out of Sri Lanka have far more counts of suicide terrorism to their name than any Middle Eastern terrorist group.

    See Dying to Win by Robert Pape for a full analysis - the book focuses on suicide terrorism specifically, but it's simple to extrapolate to the broader picture.
  • R Load more replies

  • #28
    !
    Living under religious rules is only good as long as it's your religion. This causes some groups to feel more put upon than others (although, to be sure, there are religious groups that thrive on the perception of persecution).

    Secular governments are equal opportunity sources of annoyance.
  • #43
    !
    I'll disagree somewhat. A great amount of law is based upon religious rules. How far these rules go dictate blur the distinction between freedom and the tendency toward oppression. Our laws here do a decent job at drawing that line.

    I'm all for people being able to choose a lifestyle that lives under stricter mandates based on their religious beliefs if they so choose. I'm not for others deciding for me.

    A strong case can be made for many of our laws being based on religious mandates. What else would tell us murder should be wrong?
  • #146
    !
    @Denizen_Kate - Exactly! I could easily come up with a good list of reasons why murder shouldn't be tolerated, and none of them have anything to do with religion. In fact, I find the suggestion that some people might need the Bible to tell them that a bit disturbing.
  • #60
    !
    Why do we consider Saudi Arabia our ally? These monsters are the home of the most virulent form of radical Islam. Saudi Arabia was the spiritual home of the 9/11 plotters. The United States should reconsider how we deal with this country.
  • #20
    !
    oh goodie... I guess this means the atheists are going to stop pissing and moaning about how bad things are in America now right?
  • #68
    !
    @Denizen_Kate now now come on Kate let's be real should I post the links of atheists who cry about everything from Easter egg hunts to crosses at war memorials?
  • R Load more replies

  • #145
    !
    As far as I'm concerned, atheism is just another religion, a belief. They can no more offer proof of their assertions as a believer in the metaphysical can. As long as they don't interfere with me or my rights, they can assert anything they want to. Otherwise they are fair game.
  • #149
    !
    For a Platonist or rational mystic, atheism is only a slight variant of christianism. Same conception of a creator and same belief (not always conscious) in the creation (the material universe). The debate atheism/christianism hides the more deep debate between the Aristotelian and Platonist conception of reality. Aristotelians believe that what they see is the real thing. Platonists believes that what they see is the border or shadow of something else.
  • #153
    !
    @Bruno24

    An atheist has the same concept of a creator as a believer in the metaphysical does? You will have to explain that. I was always told that an atheist doesn't believe in any sort of creator.

    I've always believed in the existence of a God, Higher Power, 1st Cause, whatever you want to call him/her/it. If such an entity didn't exist then Newton's law of physics that says things at rest tend to stay at rest and things in motion tend to stay in motion unless acted on by an outside force is wrong. Somebody or something had to set the Big Bang in motion. Beyond that I'm not willing to say much. There just isn't any evidence. One can go on past the Big Bang to assembling the materials for it, the creation of the materials, etc on into the night, but ultimately we have to come to a starting point.
  • #157
    !
    Not only an atheist does not believe in a creator, but he believes (positively) than there is no creator. Then usually he believes in Aristotle primary matter or nature.(Some uses "atheist" in a more general sense, encompassing agnosticism, though, but that is confusing). I agree we have to come to a starting point. My starting point is given by elementary arithmetic, from this I can show the existence of a web of dreams, using the mechanist hypothesis in cognitive science. Then the *appearance* of a physical reality can be explained by computer science, in some testable way. The test already done confirms (≠ prove!) this up to now. It explains some of the quantum weirdness. Physics becomes a branch of machine psychology, or theology. You can find papers on my URL ( http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ ).
  • #158
    !
    @Bruno24

    I went to your link. I couldn't find the answer to the overarching question. I can speak at 3 languages, unfortunately French (or Flemish) isn't one of them.

    "Physics becomes a branch of machine psychology, or theology".(Burno24)

    This makes no sense to me. For the unsophisticated of us in physics, how can a computer, a machine, prove anything if there is no evidence to function as a starting point? God may have made the Heavens, the Earth, and all the fishes in the sea, but he forgot to sign his work.
  • #9
    !
    I said it once, I've said it hundreds of times.........
    We bombed and invaded the wrong country (not once, but twice) when we went into Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Thanks Georgie......<you too Cheney>
  • #16
    !
    Spot on. Invading Iraq especially was a huge mistake, taking out Saddam an even bigger one. As much of a scumbag as he was, the only thing worse for Iraq than having him was taking him out. Pretty secular and religiously also, certainly no friend of Muslim extremists whom he did a good job of keeping under his boot heel. The Saudis OTOH, finance and coddle terrorists, the King's only restriction being that their activities are for export only...like 9/11.
  • #18
    !
    @RoyFloyd Saddam was already pretty much bottled up and neutered after Desert Storm and the southern no fly zone.
    What was.....8 of the 10 hi-jackers was Saudis? Something like that!
  • #21
    !
    @stepped_in_it Sure Saddam was bottled up and nuttered regionally, but still left to run the show domestically and keep the religious crazies line, which he did well. Even Pappy Bush had the brains to listen to his advisors about the scenario of what might happen in Iraq without Saddam. His idiot son, on the other hand...
  • R Load more replies

  • #73
    !
    The question is should we continue to support Saudi Arabia. We put the monarchy in place and without too much difficulty could take it down. They sponsor jihadists, stifle individual freedoms, and live in a middle ages system. Why should we continue to support such a radical regime? If we truly needed their oil we could take it with little effort. Atheists in Saudi Arabia are not a problem for us, radical Islam is!
  • #31
    !
    Not sure anyone understands the problems in Saudi Arabia or wants to take the time to understand given the complexities there.

    There's two rival ruling classes to Saudi Arabia.

    Wahabi - a member of a strictly orthodox Sunni Muslim sect from Saudi Arabia; strives to purify Islamic beliefs and rejects any innovation occurring after the 3rd century of Islam; "Osama bin Laden is said to be a Wahhabi Muslim"
  • #1
    !
    Slowly getting better. A few hundred years ago I would've been called a witch and burned. Now I can hold a public office in most states and just get arguments over the Internet and funny looks when it comes up in conversation. Also a keyed car once in high school.
  • #148
    !
    Yeh the poor non-believers, things are getting better in the USA for them since they get a sounding board in academia, media, and in courts. There cause is feel good, make others miserable, " Believers are not as enlightened as we."

    Eventually we all die and most believers have a nice place to go. The atheist can't even go to Saudi Arabia
  • #97
    !
    I thought terrorism was some Saudi guys flying planes into the WTC? I guess Saudi's have a different definition of terrorism. Terrorism is also Christians in Nigeria and Kenya being attacked by muslims, bombings in London, Bali and Madrid, foreign workers being attacked by muslims at a gas plant in Algeria, countless numbers of islamic terrorism prior and after 9/11, etc etc etc etc.....the list is long for violence in the name of Allah. Let's not forget some of that terror is even directed at their own people. Let's also not forget the islamic groups, imams and others who promote a non-violent "cultural jihad" against the nations they have immigrated to.

    I think the Saudi's need a lesson that athiesm is not terrorism. So much sand and bowing 5 times a day to their demonic god and prophet warps their already low IQ sick minds.
  • #91
    !
    From what I see is everywhere you go that has a religious or spirituality column you have an atheist there pushing their lack of religion. If they would keep their mouth shut and let other believe what they want too they might not have so many problems.
  • #94
    !
    So basically the superstitious should be able to spew their hocus pocus nonsense and atheists should feel compelled not to point out the glaring stupidity of it.... get real.
  • #142
    !
    Atheists don't like spirituality. So why are they even in the sections. If people want to believe that way they can. It is ok for them to spew it in their areas yes. It is also an atheist choice not to believe it. It is not up to anyone else to tell another how to believe and talk. If you are an atheist they stay out of the spirituality and religious sections of forums and you won't be bothered by it. Those sections are put there so that those kind of people can express their thoughts without bringing it up on others.
  • #165
    !
    @John_Matrix

    Basically, you have proven the point here...atheists are unable to allow spiritual belief by individuals without calling them names...if you chose to not believe, I will grant you that...if I chose to believe, I feel the same should be reciprocated...
  • #168
    !
    @jaybebo84

    I don't go to churches and point out the glaring logical inconsistencies in their beliefs. But if theists of every type can handle some ridicule then perhaps they shouldn't publicly declare that they believe in fairy tales, magic, and other superstitious subjects. You have every right to publicly announce your beliefs just as I have every right to announce mine. Basically you've proven your support double standards so long as they're in your favor... well, too bad, doesn't work that way.
  • #169
    !
    @John_Matrix

    In what way have I displayed a double standard? Did I call you a name? Did I attack your being an atheist? If I did, please supply that proof...otherwise, I accept your apology in advance.
  • R Load more replies

  • #90
    !
    There is no way to know how much the Muslim world will do to people they discover are atheists. But the rest of the world probably has no big problem with atheists.
  • R Load more comments...
Post