Is Islam Responsible for the Charlie Hebdo Murders?

[gsa]

PS; Denmark and Norway are "Christian" Nations!

and a few others on the silly article's list like Finland

yes... all Christian Nations


*life is best in USA in my opinion, I Love USA!
**some of its citizens that is another story

They are *nominally* Christian nations. In Norway, for example, you are automatically registered with the state church if one parent is a member, but most Norwegians are only culturally Christian.

 

[Elusive Truth]

They are *nominally* Christian nations.

yes... they are all Christian Nations.

The article can be thrown out the window, it is of no use and can not be admitted as evidence.

Thanks

 

[lewisnotmiller]

yes... they are all Christian Nations.

The article can be thrown out the window, it is of no use and can not be admitted as evidence.

Thanks

Not going to comment on the article, since I haven't read it.
Outlining Norway and Denmark as 'Christian' nations is a stretch. I know a LOT of Scandanavians very well due to work, and they'd beg to differ with you.
I've also lived in Australia and New Zealand, both of which are practically secular.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm a former Christian, there are some atheists who have given me doubts about the existence of an Abrahamic God. I suppose there are some atheists who have had healthier and more prosperous lives than most theists. Do you think that most theists are better off ( healthier and wealthier) than most atheists? Could you please provide some objective evidence that most theists are better off ( healthier and wealthier) than most atheists? According to health and economic statistics, it seems to me that nations with a high percentage of agnostics and atheists are usually better off than nations with a high percentage of religious Christians or Muslims. Countries with more atheists and agnostics better off

Hey Salvador,

I've thought about this from time to time. For me personally, atheism is beneficial. However, the main reason for this benefit is because I actually believe it reflects reality, and I don't experience cognitive dissonance trying to reconcile my religious views with what I encounter on a daily basis.

Ultimately, though, I think this benefit is not about being an atheist, per se, but instead about being honest and truthful with oneself, regardless of where that leads you. If that leads someone to a spiritual view of the world, then so be it.

So I wouldn't worry too much about trying to make a judgement call on who is happier, wealthier, etc. The important thing is to be completely honest with yourself, not only about religion, but about the world and your place in it. This is not an easy thing to do, as most people have the ability to look at the world in either an overly optimistic or overly pessimistic manner.

In terms of the stats presented, I would suggest it is hard to make a case that people in those nations are necessarily happier and healthier due to higher rates of atheism. I'm personally a strong advocate for secularism, and think it is the most appropriate and respectful means of governing nations, and the same nations you are suggesting have high rates of atheism also have strong secular principles which should help not only atheists, but all citizens lead a life where they get to make their own choices in relation to their own minds and bodies.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Darwinism is Atheism is Marxism is Communism.

Try as you may... you will never separate one from the other.

We have physical tangible evidence... "History"

Marxist–Leninist atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is actually complete rubbish.

I suppose 'Darwinism' could mean either 'Social Darwinism' or 'Evolutionist' (much as I despise those terms) so my personal checklist would be as follows;

Evolutionist? Yes
Social Darwinist? Absolutely Not
Atheist? Yes
Marxist? No
Communist? No

I wouldn't think I'm particularly unusual.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There is a common cause between "militant atheism" and "radical Islam" indeed.

Depending on what you mean by 'militant atheism', I can see some sense in this. Any position, sufficiently fundamental and controlling in nature, will start to have commonalities.

 

[Godobeyer]

I have only been a member for a year. So my vehement opposition to the invasion of Iraq and subsequent blasting of the USA government won't be found here. I have no problem at all criticizing the government, the culture, and Christendom in general.
I do it quite frequently. I see other people doing it too.
Syria and Libya I tend not to express opinions about so often. That is because I don't understand the players or the issues very well.

I learned most of what I knew about the Republican invasion of Iraq from the Muslims I could find.

I just want the USA to get out of middle east meddling. Stop supporting Israel. Stop buying petroleum. Stop supplying weapons. Stop sending drones.
Get out!

And if you read all my posts this would be clear. I just don't start threads.

Tom

I knew your opinion i am glade that we share almost the same opinions, and many Western members post critic opinions against Western involving in middle east .

i am just curious why no one (from whom against Western policy in Middle East) don't open a thread or poll !!!

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I don't know if the fact that it's more recent makes it more important. Whether it happened yesterday or thousands of years ago, it was still significant. But both were unnecessary deaths in the end.

Of course Muslims face persecutions in other countries, just as other religious groups face persecution. Whether it's in Israel, Burma, ect.

We can agree that the deaths were unnecessary; but of course the fact the Holocaust is more recent makes it more important. There aren't any living witnesses to the Crusades but there are still a few to the Holocaust and the horrors of Nazism. We don't treat or view Turkey like the Ottoman Empire, do we? Nations don't make policy informed by events that happened, say, 500 years ago; they make policy informed by events which happened more recently because the effects of those events are much more relevant than the effects of, say, the Crusades. Why on earth would a nation enact a law based on events that happened 800 years ago as opposed to 70?

The only countries I can think of where Muslims face violent persecution from non-Muslims because they're Muslims is in Burma and in the Central African Republic. In most other places it's Muslims doing it to each other because they're the wrong kind of Muslim. But religious minorities are persecuted in quite a few Muslim countries to the point where their religions are more or less illegal. So no, Muslims, on the whole, do not face anything like the same kind of persecution their religions inflict on others.

 

[Elusive Truth]

Not going to comment on the article, since I haven't read it.
Outlining Norway and Denmark as 'Christian' nations is a stretch. I know a LOT of Scandanavians very well due to work, and they'd beg to differ with you.
I've also lived in Australia and New Zealand, both of which are practically secular.

It does not matter if the citizen disagree with me,

The only thing that matters is that they are not on the list of secular nations. (wiki link posted)

The founding documents or charter state otherwise and that they are anglo Christian Nations.

*It does not matter if they were Muslim nations, they are not secular, the list is invalid.

 

[Elusive Truth]

This is actually complete rubbish.

I suppose 'Darwinism' could mean either 'Social Darwinism' or 'Evolutionist' (much as I despise those terms) so my personal checklist would be as follows;

Evolutionist? Yes
Social Darwinist? Absolutely Not
Atheist? Yes
Marxist? No
Communist? No

I wouldn't think I'm particularly unusual.

It does not matter, the facts are in.

We have history to determine this for us and it would appear the truth is not so elusive as it may seem.

"Communism begins where atheism begins -Lenin

 

[Elusive Truth]

Depending on what you mean by 'militant atheism', I can see some sense in this. Any position, sufficiently fundamental and controlling in nature, will start to have commonalities.

There is a educational video I have posted for you.

This is militant atheism, and also any individual who agrees with this philosophy is a militant atheist.

Atheism is militant and authoritarian by default... it has to be (dialectical materialism)

*Famine will destroy peoples faith in God -Lenin

Dialectical materialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It does not matter if the citizen disagree with me,

The only thing that matters is that they are not on the list of secular nations. (wiki link posted)

The founding documents or charter state otherwise and that they are anglo Christian Nations.

*It does not matter if they were Muslim nations, they are not secular, the list is invalid.

Let me get this straight...you are hypothesising that the usa is more secular than norway, and suggesting that the opinion of Norwegians is less important than that of a wikipedia graph?

Ok.

Explain how this wikipedia graph determines secularism, then outline the relevance of this to the current societal attitudes on religion if you would be so kind.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It does not matter, the facts are in.

We have history to determine this for us and it would appear the truth is not so elusive as it may seem.

"Communism begins where atheism begins -Lenin

Nice way to completely avoid addressing my post and continue to simply post about communist Russia.

Clearly, posting a communists opinion of atheism may be a slightly skewed view, no?

Should I post the views of an Inquisitor from the Spanish Inquisition and posit it as proof of Christian intent?

 

[Jumi]

Elusive, making up new moves is not chess.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There is a educational video I have posted for you.

This is militant atheism, and also any individual who agrees with this philosophy is a militant atheist.

Atheism is militant and authoritarian by default... it has to be (dialectical materialism)

*Famine will destroy peoples faith in God -Lenin

Dialectical materialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My goodness, even when someone agrees with a point you have made, you need to take it and extrapolate until the point loses coherence.

Not all atheists...myself included...are dialetical materialists.
Not all dialetical materialists are militant.
Not all militants are authoritarian.

I swear to the same God I don't believe in there must be a bunch of people running around here at the moment wondering why the dictionary has so many words since they seem to think many of them simply mean the same thing.

 

[leibowde84]

Christians? I don't blame Christians for what the atheist went and done with it... and ruined my homeland.

All of that is changing now back home but it is still too late.

There is talk of conspiracy again and people are saying the Church is now in control of the Union.

This is dangerous talk and it is to be feared...

I was just pointing out that it is a logical impossibility for Darwinism to be the same as Communism or Islamic extremism. Two are political ideologies, but darwinism is merely a scientific hypothesis that eventually led to the scientific theory of evolution.

 

[Elusive Truth]

Nice way to completely avoid addressing my post

There was nothing to address,

How can one address a false and incorrect pretext?

You tell me please...

Some people mine as well be speaking a foreign language, it does not flow into me and is hard to comprehend.

Please try to be more like music.

*and "Socratic"

 

[Monk Of Reason]

There was nothing to address,

How can one address a false and incorrect pretext?

You tell me please...

Some people mine as well be speaking a foreign language, it does not flow and is hard to contemplate.

The ties between communism and atheism have been refuted over and over. Is there something new you would like to propose?

 

[leibowde84]

This is from my point of view.

Militant (organized) Atheism is also not knowing God and is dangerous in my opinion/view.

So, wait, have you been talking about "militant atheism" this whole time?! You should have clarified that, as nearly all atheists are not "militant atheists."

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There was nothing to address,

How can one address a false and incorrect pretext?

You tell me please...

Some people mine as well be speaking a foreign language, it does not flow and is hard to contemplate.

Yep. And some might as well have their ears painted on for all that they are interested in listening and conversing.

False and incorrect pretext, huh?

Am I a social darwinist?
Am I a communist?
Am i a marxist?

Which thing is it about myself that you are so clearly aware, and I am not?

Is this too confusing to request a simple and honest answer?