Jihadists must die, --- but our real enemies are the Qur’an and Bible.

[Greatest I am]

You try to target the next generation. Change usually flows with generation.

Many countries that are being westernized start with the younger generation.

As for the specifics, well, it will depend on location and environment.

I agree and will work hard to make sure the next generation does not get the same destructive indoctrination by those lines that the fools we must now kill were given.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Books are inanimate objects that hold ideas. Actions are the responsibility of the reader.

No argument but his actions are governed by all he knows and reads and is indoctrinated in by his imam.

Regards
DL

 

[Laika]

That was also the Christian war cry as the decimated all who did not think their way after Constantine bought the church that helped usher in the Dark Ages and Inquisition.

Not the gun part of course.

Regards
DL

Fair point. It's a little unusual to hear the idea of using the government to change religious texts. I'm not outright opposed to such a position as corporate mass media distort things a fair amount already, but the difference between corporations and government doing it is the element of political coercion and the claim to supremacy which goes with it. it is a dangerous one in a liberal society and almost inherently totalitarian in intent as well as being more in keeping with theocracy as opposed to a secular society in which power and ethics are derived from the text and it's interpretation. It will cause serious conflicts with those who take a literal interpretation of the texts as gods word and attacks the integrity of the text as a religious and a historical document. It also well as attacking the right of individuals to free thought by assuming they cannot be trusted to interpret the text in a non-violent way or for a modern context and it would be a case of censorship, and if you decide to replace certain positions with your own, it would be considered propaganda.

The trouble is, is that this necessarily assumes that a text is a 'natural' or 'fixed' state, which in incapable of revision. A humanistic (and atheist) reading of such texts would see them as the long product of political and religious conflicts over the text written, as well as it's interpretation. revising it places scriptural authority firmly in the place of human control as opposed to any divine inspiration, rendering it a political document. I'm not opposed to this entirely, as knowledge is social rather than individual and hence changes over time, but it is a revolutionary break from religious and liberal norms as a form of militant atheism.

 

[Greatest I am]

Fair point. It's a little unusual to hear the idea of using the government to change religious texts. I'm not outright opposed to such a position as corporate mass media distort things a fair amount already, but the difference between corporations and government doing it is the element of political coercion and the claim to supremacy which goes with it. it is a dangerous one in a liberal society and almost inherently totalitarian in intent as well as being more in keeping with theocracy as opposed to a secular society in which power and ethics are derived from the text and it's interpretation. It will cause serious conflicts with those who take a literal interpretation of the texts as gods word and attacks the integrity of the text as a religious and a historical document. It also well as attacking the right of individuals to free thought by assuming they cannot be trusted to interpret the text in a non-violent way or for a modern context and it would be a case of censorship, and if you decide to replace certain positions with your own, it would be considered propaganda.

The trouble is, is that this necessarily assumes that a text is a 'natural' or 'fixed' state, which in incapable of revision. A humanistic (and atheist) reading of such texts would see them as the long product of political and religious conflicts over the text written, as well as it's interpretation. revising it places scriptural authority firmly in the place of human control as opposed to any divine inspiration, rendering it a political document. I'm not opposed to this entirely, as knowledge is social rather than individual and hence changes over time, but it is a revolutionary break from religious and liberal norms as a form of militant atheism.

I hear your well thought out thoughts.

I see governments making the demand for a better less jihadist creating theology. Not so much as the writers of that theology. Most of the objections they would have you show, I see as benefits as then they would have to turn to their experts who generally are more intelligent and able to make better interpretations that theist presently ignore.

Cleaning up theist's ethics and holy books might actually save religion as at present, they are going down quickly.

If some new religion began preaching misogyny and homophobia, government today wouold be quick to denounce their morals.

I see nothing wrong in being as honest with our older religions and drag them into a higher regard of civilization.

Religions presently enjoy respect that is above their station and governments are too slow in bringing them to heel.

Regards
DL

 

[BSM1]

I agree and will work hard to make sure the next generation does not get the same destructive indoctrination by those lines that the fools we must now kill were given.

Regards
DL

But it's still his actions. Flip Wilson's character always used the excuse "The devil made me do it" whenever he got caught messing up. This was funny from him, but it's used to evade responsibility from others.

 

[Caligula]

Governments should force the policies of the Gods to become more acceptable to mankind.

I do agree with what you have identified as being problematic but I do not agree at all with your approach or the solution you've offered. Forcing anything that has to do with ideas/opinions will backfire without a doubt. It will make religion much stronger on both short and long term.

Right now religion is weakening on its own hand. It's moderate religious people that have to reject the fundamentalist views. Involvement of external forces can only add more to the number and power of fundamentalists. Moderates constitute the majority (in a democracy that matters a lot) and are the best supporters for secularism itself. The cool thing is that they are OK with it; they are not forcing themselves into thinking in such a way. Same sex marriages have been legalized in states where the majority is religious.
Right now secularism doesn't have to be white or black and the "moderate" status of religious people "softens" by each passing year. A moderate religious person 200 years ago is no longer a moderate today. The moderates of today will no longer be the moderates of tomorrow. It makes sense that this trend spurts occasionally extremist acts and strengthen fundamentalist views on the short term. I don't care a bit for the number of religious people but only those of fundamentalists. They are the nucleus that keep the atom from disintegrating. As soon as they disappear we could have a meaningful talk about liberals with faith, rather that the "religious liberals" nonsense.

I say we're definitely on the right track here and there's no need to rush things more than we should. The only things I fell the need to do as a secularist is to respect and defend democracy, fight (democratically) for my constitutional rights and educate people I'm entitled or appointed/delegated to, starting with my own child.

 

[Greatest I am]

But it's still his actions. Flip Wilson's character always used the excuse "The devil made me do it" whenever he got caught messing up. This was funny from him, but it's used to evade responsibility from others.

Sure but only by fools and children who have yet to grow up.

Regards
DL

 

[MonkeyFire]

True to a point but we should investigate why we seek a God to submit to and why that God is us.

We are happiness and satisfaction. Both Godly when literal and absolute.

 

[Greatest I am]

I do agree with what you have identified as being problematic but I do not agree at all with your approach or the solution you've offered. Forcing anything that has to do with ideas/opinions will backfire without a doubt. It will make religion much stronger on both short and long term.

Right now religion is weakening on its own hand. It's moderate religious people that have to reject the fundamentalist views. Involvement of external forces can only add more to the number and power of fundamentalists. Moderates constitute the majority (in a democracy that matters a lot) and are the best supporters for secularism itself. The cool thing is that they are OK with it; they are not forcing themselves into thinking in such a way. Same sex marriages have been legalized in states where the majority is religious.
Right now secularism doesn't have to be white or black and the "moderate" status of religious people "softens" by each passing year. A moderate religious person 200 years ago is no longer a moderate today. The moderates of today will no longer be the moderates of tomorrow. It makes sense that this trend spurts occasionally extremist acts and strengthen fundamentalist views on the short term. I don't care a bit for the number of religious people but only those of fundamentalists. They are the nucleus that keep the atom from disintegrating. As soon as they disappear we could have a meaningful talk about liberals with faith, rather that the "religious liberals" nonsense.

I say we're definitely on the right track here and there's no need to rush things more than we should. The only things I fell the need to do as a secularist is to respect and defend democracy, fight (democratically) for my constitutional rights and educate people I'm entitled or appointed/delegated to, starting with my own child.

I hear you and mostly agree but to just let the books that create jihadists go unchallenged as we fight what they produce is to ignore one of our enemies.

I think that just the notion of re-writing the Qur'an would give the moderates and left a real chance to speak up fearlessly because the right cannot kill governments that are attacking their jihadist creating text.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

We are happiness and satisfaction. Both Godly when literal and absolute.

If absolute then everything is up-hill from there.

I hope you are not too young as that would give you many years of stagnation without progression.

Regards
DL

 

[Laika]

I hear your well thought out thoughts.

I see governments making the demand for a better less jihadist creating theology. Not so much as the writers of that theology. Most of the objections they would have you show, I see as benefits as then they would have to turn to their experts who generally are more intelligent and able to make better interpretations that theist presently ignore.

Cleaning up theist's ethics and holy books might actually save religion as at present, they are going down quickly.

If some new religion began preaching misogyny and homophobia, government today wouold be quick to denounce their morals.

I see nothing wrong in being as honest with our older religions and drag them into a higher regard of civilization.

Religions presently enjoy respect that is above their station and governments are too slow in bringing them to heel.

Regards
DL

Can I ask how it is that you think we have the power to judge what others can or cannot believe and therefore what can remain in the texts? I think that is the major source of my disquiet over this. I am a relativist and something of a nihilist, so I lack the objective basis to claim a superior moral knowledge to a text several hundred or thousand years old. I therefore lack your certainty and conviction that this would be the right thing to do as much as I appreciate the sentiments behind it.

 

[MonkeyFire]

If absolute then everything is up-hill from there.

I hope you are not too young as that would give you many years of stagnation without progression.

Regards
DL

How could it be "up-hill" if its absolute? It's like being fulfilled.

 

[oldbadger]

Jihadists must die, --- but our real enemies are the Qur’an and Bible.
Ridding ourselves of Islam’s extremist jihadists is good. But to allow the Qur’an and other Holy books, --- which create the jihadists, --- to remain unchanged is not good.
..........................................................................
Should we urge our governments to force changes to the violent misogynistic Qur’an and Bible to make those documents more civilized?
Regards

You want the Qur'an and Bible rewritten?
I don't know where you live, but you could pressure your government to reduce easy availability of weapons.
But if anybody messed with either book, do you actually think that the faithful would read your version?
That would only intensify the focus on the originals.

 

[rusra02]

Then you do not know how to read.

Only a fool would look at the mainstream religions and say that they are not homophobic and misogynous.

You cannot read but perhaps you can hear.

Regards
DL

Sorry, You seemed to have jumped from the Bible to "mainstream religions". I was speaking only if the Bible, not those who I believe misrepresent what the Bible teaches.

 

[Greatest I am]

Can I ask how it is that you think we have the power to judge what others can or cannot believe and therefore what can remain in the texts? I think that is the major source of my disquiet over this. I am a relativist and something of a nihilist, so I lack the objective basis to claim a superior moral knowledge to a text several hundred or thousand years old. I therefore lack your certainty and conviction that this would be the right thing to do as much as I appreciate the sentiments behind it.

We collectively judge and teach what others are to know all the time. I do not think what people believe can be controlled but to have what we know creates jihadists to just exist without trying to have the good people of Islam remove the offensive language would be the rest of us shirking our responsibility to the improvement of humanity.

Imagine if Germany decided to have Mein Camp read by all German children and that a new S.S. group was being formed because of it and that they were starting to do mischief.

The world would be quite quick to bring that nonsense to a stop.

There is no good reason to give any more respect to Islam's books if they produce the same type of mischief.

Religions deserve no more respect than any totalitarian regime.

If the good people within Islam do not act to clean up Islam then the rest of the world will have to. I have no problem with asking nicely but then demanding if they do not clean up.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

How could it be "up-hill" if its absolute? It's like being fulfilled.

If you have absolute anything, it will sit there forever.

If your happiness at this point in time is absolute, then to improve it is impossible and quite up-hill climb that you would not do as you would not see a goal.

Absolutes are stagnating pools that we should all try to stay away from. They stifle progress.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

You want the Qur'an and Bible rewritten?
I don't know where you live, but you could pressure your government to reduce easy availability of weapons.
But if anybody messed with either book, do you actually think that the faithful would read your version?
That would only intensify the focus on the originals.

Exactly and their misogyny and homophobia would be seen as the evils that they are.

Just the wold discussing those evil documents would help the good religionists demand changes.

Muslims by and large are not stupid and do not want their children to become jihadists and would likely vote to remove the passages that put their children at risk.

The evil jihadist minded wont change but over time those numbers will shrink as the majority move on to a more peace creating Qur'an.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Sorry, You seemed to have jumped from the Bible to "mainstream religions". I was speaking only if the Bible, not those who I believe misrepresent what the Bible teaches.

The majority then are misrepresenting what the bible says because the majority have denied women equality and continue to do so.

If as misleading as you say, then it is even more important for Christianity to change its books as they are being misunderstood.

Seems you have made my argument for me. Thanks..

Regards
DL

 

[MonkeyFire]

If you have absolute anything, it will sit there forever.

If your happiness at this point in time is absolute, then to improve it is impossible and quite up-hill climb that you would not do as you would not see a goal.

Absolutes are stagnating pools that we should all try to stay away from. They stifle progress.

Regards
DL

Absolutes are the goal and quite fulfilling. Perfection is better than eternal progression.

 

[oldbadger]

Exactly and their misogyny and homophobia would be seen as the evils that they are.
Just the wold discussing those evil documents would help the good religionists demand changes.
Muslims by and large are not stupid and do not want their children to become jihadists and would likely vote to remove the passages that put their children at risk.
The evil jihadist minded wont change but over time those numbers will shrink as the majority move on to a more peace creating Qur'an. Regards DL

So you want these books to be re-written?
Learn from Omar Khayya'm.................
You need to read Ruba'iya't.......

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on; nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a line,
Nor all thy Tears was out a word of it.

These books must either be ;picked up, or put down.
You must take your choice, but sadly you cannot choose for others.