Nucks+Cup+♥ Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Hey are you muslim? I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 He's kinda right about atheism being a religion. In that they disbelieve so much and so faithfully that in a sense the 'belief in non-belief' is religious. imo Being agnostic is far superior to being atheist or theist. imo It's ultra-arrogant to pretend to know that a deity does or does not exist for certain, or even to promote your belief or non-belief in that deity. It's also ultra-arrogant to assume that agnostic=atheist. It is not. However, everything can be defined according to their agenda. (eg. atheism is also a religion?) The main disadvatage of being agnostic is that you are labelled a 'non-believer', 'skeptical' and/or 'non-committal'. These labels of course come from those groups who think they have all the answers, when they cannot possibly have any. The main advantage of being agnostic is that things don't bother you as much. The world seems more at peace. And you can focus on getting actual answers, rather than bickering about which truths are real. Knowledge > Belief. The vision of a near future with global peace must be agnostic. We must stop being so arrogant and start learning as a species. Otherwise, there cannot be any progression. Gene Roddenberry had probably the most-appealling vision of the future so far, and he was agnostic. He wanted us to learn, regardless of what the answers were. (And then he predicted that an atheist future after ww3 was the way to a lasting peace.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Sorry, another knock on being agnostic is the constant knowledge vs belief debate. For starters, 'knowledge is an illusion.' Matrix-style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 He's kinda right about atheism being a religion. In that they disbelieve so much and so faithfully that in a sense the 'belief in non-belief' is religious. imo Being agnostic is far superior to being atheist or theist. imo It's ultra-arrogant to pretend to know that a deity does or does not exist for certain, or even to promote your belief or non-belief in that deity. It's also ultra-arrogant to assume that agnostic=atheist. It is not. However, everything can be defined according to their agenda. (eg. atheism is also a religion?) The main disadvatage of being agnostic is that you are labelled a 'non-believer', 'skeptical' and/or 'non-committal'. These labels of course come from those groups who think they have all the answers, when they cannot possibly have any. The main advantage of being agnostic is that things don't bother you as much. The world seems more at peace. And you can focus on getting actual answers, rather than bickering about which truths are real. Knowledge > Belief. The vision of a near future with global peace must be agnostic. We must stop being so arrogant and start learning as a species. Otherwise, there cannot be any progression. Gene Roddenberry had probably the most-appealling vision of the future so far, and he was agnostic. He wanted us to learn, regardless of what the answers were. (And then he predicted that an atheist future after ww3 was the way to a lasting peace.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Can't say for certain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dittohead Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 call me cruel... but I say the US just packs up and leaves the middle east and let them sort it all out themselves. Where will we get our oil from? Hey Canada, how about more trade/business then we already do!? And when a middle eastern country asks for help... "sorry, we're closed" (yes I know this is over simplified and not researched at all... just venting frustration.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Diem Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Just read this: "Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says the deadly attack on the U.S. embassy should “shock the conscience of people of all faiths around the world.” Clinton says the assault that killed the U.S. ambassador and three American members of his staff was committed by a “small and savage group” of militants, not by the people or government of Libya." Repeat, the attack "was committed by a “small and savage group” of militants"... Wasn't committed by Christianity...wasn't committed by Islam...was committed by a “small and savage group” of militants... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I think that the US is going sent in the NAvy seal and take out these people responsible quickly and quietly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I think that the US is going sent in the NAvy seal and take out these people responsible quickly and quietly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 So...saying "imo Being agnostic is far superior to being atheist or theist." is not arrogant? Just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I believe Pres. Obama has already activated the 'FAST' team (.Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team) U.S. officials said some 50 Marines were being sent to Libya to reinforce security at U.S. diplomatic facilities in the aftermath of the attack. The Marines are members of an elite group known as a Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team, whose role is to respond on short notice to terrorism threats and to reinforce security at U.S. embassies. They operate worldwide. The officials who disclosed the plan to send the Marines spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Not sure about you, but I believe that 'knowing whether or not there is a God' is tops on my human arrogance scale. Perhaps 'knowing the meaning of the universe'? Or 'knowing the meaning of life?' Or 'knowing the extent of infinity?' Attributing a set of beliefs - rules - to any of these fundamental questions revolving around our existence at this point is folly. When you think about it in this scale, we know very, very little as a species. imo Being agnostic can only promote growth as a species. Albert Einstein was also agnostic. He'd be the first to admit that we as a species aren't ready to learn about the secrets of the universe at this point. And at this rate, it's getting worse, not better. I hope that turns around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Libya Protests Spurred By Anti-Muslim Film Whose Maker's Religion Is Widely Reported But Little-Known The day following an attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that killed the U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, news reports have focused on a 14-minute trailer for an obscure anti-Muslim film that mocks the Prophet Muhammad and was the target of protests outside the consulate before it was raided. U.S. officials have told news outlets that the attackers may have planned the killings in advance, using the the protest over the video as a diversion. But questions have continued over the film, titled "Innocence of Muslims," that spread via YouTube and Middle Eastern media ahead of the attacks and depicts the Islamic prophet as a womanizer, a pedophile and a homosexual, among other characterizations. Some questions about the movie, the shabby trailer for which was deconstructed by reporters on Wednesday, have been answered. Actors from the film claim they had no idea they were participating in an anti-Muslim movie and thought it was about ancient Egypt. They also said that their voices had been dubbed over. Indeed, the video's audio track indicates that there was dubbing. But it's still unclear who made the film -- and questions have lingered around the filmmaker's religion. While news reports have said he is Jewish, evangelical or hinted at him possibly being Coptic Christian or Muslim, the truth about who made the film and that person's religious background is still a mystery. Initial reports from the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal named the filmmaker as Sam Becile, identified as a Israeli Jewish real estate developer based in California. "Islam is a cancer," the AP quoted him saying. But later, news outlets reported they could not find any public records for Becile in California and there was no history of him as a filmmaker. The search for anyone behind the film did lead the Associated Press to interview a California man named Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who said he was manager of the company that produced "Innocence of Muslims." Nakoula, a Coptic Christian, was previously convicted of financial crimes and court papers showed Nakoula's aliases included Nicola Bacily and Erwin Salameh, among others. From the AP: Nakoula denied he directed the film and said he knew the self-described filmmaker, Sam Bacile. But the cellphone number that AP contacted Tuesday to reach the filmmaker who identified himself as Sam Bacile traced to the same address near Los Angeles where AP found Nakoula. Israeli authorities also told reporters that they had no record of Bacile. The Atlantic quoted a Christian anti-Muslim activist, Steve Klein, who said he was a consultant on the film and claimed Bacile was a pseudonym. He also said Bacile was not Israeli or Jewish. "Nobody is anything but an active American citizen. They're from Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, they're some that are from Egypt. Some are Copts but the vast majority are evangelical," Klein told the Atlantic, describing the 15 people he estimated to have been involved in producing the film. Some in the Jewish media breathed a sigh of relief. "So we're not to blame after all," tweeted Jane Eisner, editor of The Forward, a popular New York-based Jewish newspaper. The initial Muslim-Jewish conflict narrative "served to set up the dichotomy between good and evil, between Israel, on the one hand, and the Islam on the other," Adina Holtzman, assistant director of research at the Anti-Defamation League, told the paper. Adding another twist to the story, Gawker interviewed an actress from the film, Cindy Lee Garcia, who said Bacile was an Egyptian. According to the article, Garcia said "Bacile had white hair and spoke Arabic to a number of 'dark-skinned' men who hung around the set." The filming occurred last July, and Garcia was involved for three days. Most Egyptians are Muslim, but the country has a significant Christian minority, the Copts, who have endured a history of persecution. One Copt, Morris Sadek, has taken credit for uploading the film online and translating it to Arabic for Middle Eastern viewers. Sadek, who lives in the United States and leads the U.S.-based National Coptic Assembly, said in an interview with Reuters that he supported the film because it included a scene about persecution of Copts and that he did not think it was offensive to Islam. Protests over the film have also broken out in Cairo, where demonstrators jumped over the wall of the U.S. Embassy and tore down the American flag. But was "Innocence of Muslims" created by a Jew, an evangelical, a Muslim, a Copt or a person of another faith? Right now, nobody knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Well I guess the plot thickens. In any case I should have known better than to take the first few media reports at face value. The movie might be obscene but that is not justification for the actions of the mob in Libya. I'll be interested to wait and see what the actual story is behind the creation of the movie once the facts untangle them from the misinformation that's being put out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Heck, there isn't even proof on whether or not Muhammed was all those things. Forget about knowing God. We can't even get our prophets right. And they were around a relative microsecond ago. When we put so much energy into such trivial bs, i'm sure God is laughing at us. If he exists. And if he cares about the grain of sand that is our entire existence. Thank God there were prophets around to set us straight, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 We should also remember and honour the reportedly 10 Libyans that were killed trying to protect the U.S. embassy workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Heck, there isn't even proof on whether or not Muhammed was all those things. Forget about knowing God. We can't even get our prophets right. And they were around a relative microsecond ago. When we put so much energy into such trivial bs, i'm sure God is laughing at us. If he exists. And if he cares about the grain of sand that is our entire existence. Thank God there were prophets around to set us straight, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 A world of peace starts with a secular middle east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 We should also remember and honour the reportedly 10 Libyans that were killed trying to protect the U.S. embassy workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 There will never be world peace so long as there is more than 1 religion, there would never be free will if there was only 1 religion. I think there is only 2 options when it comes to the middle east 1) let them be and move out of the area(hopeing to avoid the inevitable conflict. 2) wipe them off the map, before they get great war technology Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.