What faith would you support banning???

[Tigress]

Oops...clicked 'Other' instead of 'None.' Oh well...I don't suppose anyone but Phelps and his gang would mind if we banned his nonsense, would they?

 

[Princess Of Peace]

Muslims say basically the same thing. They say that all babies are born Muslims, no need for baptism.

You can't leave the religion without families and communities harrassing the person who choose to leave. Family would ostracise their own flesh and blood if they don't return to the fold.

:sarcastic
our belief is that babies are born pure of heart and so are muslim. if they then grow up christian, atheist, etc. no muslim or anyone for that matter has a right to force them into islam.

Noble Verse 10:99 "If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!"

and please could you not generalise muslims like that, not every muslim harrasses those that leave the faith. you make it out like its firmly rooted in islam, which many muslims would disagree with.

 

[lamplighter]

I didn't read the whole thread but banning a religion would do little good and in my opinion would cause the situation to get worse. By driving a religion underground you only make the atrocities harder to see coming and cause more radicals to be more extreme and there ratio in the group to be higher. As for the suicide cults you can't protect everybody all the time and people just have to use better judgment, unfortunately there's always going to be the weak minded who suffer be it getting ripped off by some slick salesman selling them a car or selling them a religion, education is the most powerful tool you can give someone so the better the educated the masses the fewer times people get ripped off.

 

[gnostic]

our belief is that babies are born pure of heart and so are muslim.

Sorry for being cynical, Princess of Peace, but not all adult Muslims have pure hearts.

Some are more pure at heart than others, but the majority are like everyone else - HUMAN. Prone to negative behaviours and actions, through misunderstanding, anger, envy, jealousy, etc. Muslims, like everyone else, have human frailties.

Human frailties are not necessarily bad things, because it would be unbearable to live with a perfect person. It is just as well, because in any case, I don't believe in perfection. Perfection is unattainable and illusions. Just because there are nothing perfect, doesn't mean that no great beauty (I don't mean "beauty" as just in "looks") in imperfection.

and please could you not generalise muslims like that, not every muslim harrasses those that leave the faith. you make it out like its firmly rooted in islam, which many muslims would disagree with.

Of course. But it does happen. It happened far more often in societies, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia, when the majority of communities are Muslims. Some take it seriously in the Qur'an, where it require them to destroy unbelievers, whether there is a war or not.

Isn't it strange, when Muslim men are allowed to marry non-Muslim women, but Muslim women can't marry non-Muslim men. This is in order to convert the women.

When there are divorces, Muslim men would kidnap children, even though the court left it in custody of non-Muslim mothers.

Example, a mother won custody of their children in court in Australia. The father had generous visitation rights, but that not good enough for him. During one of these visits, the Muslim father took his kids into Lebanon, during the recent bl#@dy conflict between Israel and Hezebolah in Lebanon. What sort of person would deliberately put their children in danger, like in war-zone.

When the mother sent people to get her children back, father called it kidnapping. What a hypocrite.

How that's for obeying the law of the land?

The mother got back her children, who were very happy to be back with their mother and away from war.

And what if people of mixed faith married, and have children. Do you raise them as a Muslim? Or do raise them in other religion of the partner (or no religion in the cases of atheist or agnostic)?

Or do let the children learn both, and let them decide when they are old enough, preferably as adult, when they can make informed decision?

That's really depends on strict or liberal Muslim father is? If the father is strict and authoritarian, then he wouldn't let the child learn the other religion other than Islam.

 

[Autodidact]

Hey, this is the U.S. of A. Our founding fathers fought and died so that no religion or lack thereof could be banned, and that's what I support. Now if some group, religious or otherwise, is going around advocating denying other people rights, or hurting other people, than that movement or position would need to be banned, but I don't think any of these religions necessarily advocate that, right?

 

[frg001]

Ok. Not been around for a hell(sic) of a long time, but where is the "All" option?

Seriously if I thought it could work, that would be my option.
But I don't. (Some) people need the crutch of religion to get them through the day, and who am I to deny that to them?

Ho hum.

 

[Princess Of Peace]

Sorry for being cynical, Princess of Peace, but not all adult Muslims have pure hearts.

Some are more pure at heart than others, but the majority are like everyone else - HUMAN. Prone to negative behaviours and actions, through misunderstanding, anger, envy, jealousy, etc. Muslims, like everyone else, have human frailties.

Human frailties are not necessarily bad things, because it would be unbearable to live with a perfect person. It is just as well, because in any case, I don't believe in perfection. Perfection is unattainable and illusions. Just because there are nothing perfect, doesn't mean that no great beauty (I don't mean "beauty" as just in "looks") in imperfection.

i said babies are pure of heart when they're born, not adults and that includes muslims. we're all prone to mistakes.

Of course. But it does happen. It happened far more often in societies, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia, when the majority of communities are Muslims. Some take it seriously in the Qur'an, where it require them to destroy unbelievers, whether there is a war or not.

the Quran doesn't say anything about destroying innocent unbelievers and don't assume that forced conversions are more common in places like the middle-east & central asia (although its probably does happen). a friend of mine who is a christian pakistani has made it pretty clear to me that christians living their aren't oppressed and that he feels his muslim friends are like his brothers and sisters.
tbh i don't really see how anyone can be forced to believe in something that they don't believe in. belief isn't that easy to change.

Isn't it strange, when Muslim men are allowed to marry non-Muslim women, but Muslim women can't marry non-Muslim men. This is in order to convert the women.

When there are divorces, Muslim men would kidnap children, even though the court left it in custody of non-Muslim mothers.

Example, a mother won custody of their children in court in Australia. The father had generous visitation rights, but that not good enough for him. During one of these visits, the Muslim father took his kids into Lebanon, during the recent bl#@dy conflict between Israel and Hezebolah in Lebanon. What sort of person would deliberately put their children in danger, like in war-zone.

When the mother sent people to get her children back, father called it kidnapping. What a hypocrite.

How that's for obeying the law of the land?

The mother got back her children, who were very happy to be back with their mother and away from war.

why does him being muslim have any presedence at all. this happens in all faith groups, in all cultures. fathers want to see more of their kids, whether you agree with his actions or not, him being muslim is irrelevant.

the fact that you're even mentioning this to me is something i find very strange.

and to you're question "Hows thats's for obeying the law of the land?". well thats why we have prisons because sometimes people break the law :cover:

And what if people of mixed faith married, and have children. Do you raise them as a Muslim? Or do raise them in other religion of the partner (or no religion in the cases of atheist or agnostic)?

Or do let the children learn both, and let them decide when they are old enough, preferably as adult, when they can make informed decision?

That's really depends on strict or liberal Muslim father is? If the father is strict and authoritarian, then he wouldn't let the child learn the other religion other than Islam.

i would assume then that the same goes for authoritarian christians, athoritarian hindus, athoritarian atheists, etc on whether they force their kids in to the same faith.

 

[Smoke]

and please could you not generalise muslims like that, not every muslim harrasses those that leave the faith.

It's not necessary for every Muslim to do it, as long as there continues to be a steady supply of Muslims who do.

 

[Smoke]

I didn't read the whole thread but banning a religion would do little good and in my opinion would cause the situation to get worse. By driving a religion underground you only make the atrocities harder to see coming and cause more radicals to be more extreme and there ratio in the group to be higher.

The only efficient way to eliminate a religion is the method the Catholics used against the Cathars: kill them all. Don't kill just the clergy, don't imprison a few activists, don't try to burn their books. Just kill them all -- men, women and children. Assuming that no decent person has the stomach for that, our only recourse is to try make sure that religionists don't violate the rights of others.

 

[LumpHammer]

I wouldn't ban any religion. But I would ban religious schools. Kids shouldn't be indoctrinated into any religion, but given the choices available...

 

[Booko]

Isn't it strange, when Muslim men are allowed to marry non-Muslim women, but Muslim women can't marry non-Muslim men. This is in order to convert the women.

This is incorrect, Gnostic. The reason a Muslim man can marry a non-Muslim but a Muslim woman should not is because of the assumption that the man rules the household. A Muslim man, so the reasoning goes, would have no reason to interfere with his wife's practice of, say, Christianity. A non-Muslim man might however interfere with his Muslim wife's practice of Islam, however. This is clearly stated in the text, and in the context of family life as practiced at the time, makes some sense. The assumption is that a Muslim man wouldn't marry a pagan anyway, so that should not be an issue.

When there are divorces, Muslim men would kidnap children, even though the court left it in custody of non-Muslim mothers.

Yeah? We have more cases of Christian men doing the same thing here than I could count, but I wouldn't attach it to their Christianity.

 

[Booko]

I wouldn't ban any religion. But I would ban religious schools. Kids shouldn't be indoctrinated into any religion, but given the choices available...

What about a religious school that, as a matter of religious principle, did teach them the choices available, including no religion?

Such things are possible. Heck, they even exist.

 

[gnostic]

A Muslim man, so the reasoning goes, would have no reason to interfere with his wife's practice of, say, Christianity.

Ah, but that maybe the case. But Muslim man, being the household, would see it that non-Muslim wife to be under him still. A Muslim would see it that the children be subjected to Islamic teaching take precedence over all others as opposed to any other religious or secular teaching, regardless of what his wife's religious background, would they not?

In Islamic court, they would always favour the husbands because they are Muslims and head of patriarchal household, no matter if the wives are Muslims or not, especially in custody of children. Divorced Muslim women (as well as widows) are often shunned among Islamic societies, even if through no faults of their own. The secular courts favoured the ones who can best reared the children, not because of some stupid religious background.

Muslim women are usually ones stoned for adultery. Muslim men committing the same sins often escape such brutal punishment, because like the Christian societies, women are the blame for everything.

Just because a person is religious, doesn't necessarily make a person morally good.

Yeah? We have more cases of Christian men doing the same thing here than I could count, but I wouldn't attach it to their Christianity.

I have no qualm about attaching to Christians or to Christianity itself. Christianity, like Judaism and Islam, are patriarchal Abrahamic religion. So if Christians do the same, then I would have little sympathies for Christianity, Booko. I would have Christian faith banned too.

 

[mcteethinator]

I think the Church of Scientology should be reformed to not be an evil corporation empire, but I wouldn't support banning people practicing it since it's given a lot of happiness to people's lives. People should be able to practice what they choose.

Where has hinduism done it on such a mass scale where the world is scared of them?? Give me one example, or sikhism, or buddhism, or jainism, judaism, or baha'i? hmm??

I know you're banned penguino, but a lot of the stuff you've said is just so wrong.
Hinduism - Caste system, riots that Jaymes mentioned
Jainism - Nothing as far as I am aware
Buddhism - Bhutan, Sri Lanka...
Judaism - read the Old Testament a bit better.
Bahai - No they've always been at the persecuted end of the stick.

Yeah thats good, unless the holy book says kill all non-believers.

Asked and answered

Actually the caste system is merely a classification of people by profession, for eg. we all need a working class, business class, there is a class for holy people etc. This just shows that we all have functions in society - it does not say that one is greater than the other and one is not confined to a particular caste. Someone born into a working class can aspire to be of the holy class. Also God in his avatar of Shri Ram ate food from an outcaste woman - something people would see as forbidden. Shri Ram did this to show us that he does not look at caste, only a devotees love. :yes:

As for the Gujarat riots - these are the actions of some Hindus and not the general consensus of all Hindus. I do not know the whole reason behind those riots though.

Ever heard of the Untouchables? The only thing the untouchables did wrong was be born of another untouchable.

Al Qaeda isn't the general consesus of all Muslims either.

I would Ban Satanists, Luciferians, Pegans, Wiccans, Scientology, Alien-based religions and other such lines.

but that's just me.

How very open-minded of you.

I find Mormonism strange from my weak understanding of it, but I have met a lot of very nice Mormons who are most likely nice because of their faith. A lot of Luciferians like Lucifer better because he's killed less people... a lot of pagans in general are pagans because they don't agree with the actions that God took in the scriptures. A lot of pagans are really moral people and I don't get what the point would be of banning it except if you wanna start a theocracy.

That's the moral equivalent of someone who would stand by and let the Nazis persecute the Jews because they thought Judaism was nothing but secret codes and combinations.

Well, now that we have that settled...

...You just invoked Godwin's Law while defending banning a religion.

because other religious groups believe in a single authority that teaches good things like love, peace, and service to your fellow man. those are good things.

I cannot respect the practice of worshiping Satan, or his followers, or anything of the like.

You don't know anything about Paganism do you?

Mormon theocracy... hm.

I was interested to read recently that the Swiss are denying planning permission for any new mosques, minarets in particular appeear to be causing offence there.

Melissa

Muslims say basically the same thing. They say that all babies are born Muslims, no need for baptism.

You can't leave the religion without families and communities harrassing the person who choose to leave. Family would ostracise their own flesh and blood if they don't return to the fold.

yes we do believe that. We believe that if they had no external influences they would come to worship Allah on their own.

Yeah I don't get Muslim families that do that. "No compulsion in religion" seems to go out the window there.

:sarcastic
our belief is that babies are born pure of heart and so are muslim. if they then grow up christian, atheist, etc. no muslim or anyone for that matter has a right to force them into islam.

Noble Verse 10:99 "If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!"

and please could you not generalise muslims like that, not every muslim harrasses those that leave the faith. you make it out like its firmly rooted in islam, which many muslims would disagree with.

Frubals.

I have no qualm about attaching to Christians or to Christianity itself. Christianity, like Judaism and Islam, are patriarchal Abrahamic religion. So if Christians do the same, then I would have little sympathies for Christianity, Booko. I would have Christian faith banned too.

yes but that's the thing. it isn't related to their religion, fathers just get a bad deal in custody battles irrelevant of whether they were bad parents or not. It has nothing to do with their religion.

 

[Bishka]

I wouldn't ban any religion. But I would ban religious schools. Kids shouldn't be indoctrinated into any religion, but given the choices available...

What about religious universities, do you have a problem with those as well? Or is it just for the younger children?

 

[gnostic]

Here is one religion or sect that I would like to ban.

FLDS, Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints, a splintered group of LDS that supports polygamist marriages. The leader, 51-year-old, Warren Jeffs, who forcibly married off the then 14-old-girl to her older cousin. He is currently on trial as accomplice.

Although, polygamist marriage is illegal, I personally can take place, but only if all members are adults and consenting. This is not the case here.

Clearly, this church leader allowed for pedophiles to marry girls, so he should be jailed, as well as other members of his church. And such church should be banned.

 

[Smoke]

And such church should be banned.

There's no need to ban the religion. Imprison the members for their criminal acts and confiscate their property for the benefit of the victims, sure. And get the kids out of danger. Parents who allow their teenaged sons to be expelled from the community because they're "surplus males" in a polygamist community, and allow their teenaged daughters to be forcibly married to dirty old religious fanatics are unfit parents, period. Of course, enforcing the rights of the victims would necessarily bring the religion down, but that's incidental.

 

[gnostic]

I actually don't have problem with polygamy. My problem is when the men marry under-aged girls. Any religion that encourages these types of practices, are nothing more than pedophiles.

That's why I want FLDS to be banned, and all members that participated in marriage to young girls receive long jail sentence for their pedophilia, rapes and child molestation. The girls in such religion are indoctrinated and brainwashed into believing that this is the way to reach heaven.

The US justice/legal system have failed to protect these girls and failed to stamp out these religions, because it is obvious that the practice have been existence long before Warren Jeff's arrest and trial.

 

[mcteethinator]

Actually yeah I wouldn't mind if the FLDS was banned too, now that I think about it.

 

[mcteethinator]

It seems to me that the FLDS doesn't even seem to have any positive elements in it for anyone except the dirty old men that get lots of wives. It's not like say, Scientology where despite how corrupt the church is, it has given some people happiness, etc. It seems to strike me as a cult.