some people are really brainless over their religon

[AmbroseRookwood]

Yemen protesters storm US Embassy - World News - MSN News UK

check it out and write your opinion, these people will go and destroy buildings kill people over someone presenting the facts written in their own holy book, fuck logic >.<

[nightmare67]

Yea no sympathy from me... That is what you get when you invade another country, rape their woman and kill their child - Iraq, Afghanistan, South African countries etc . I am surprised that they have not blown the building up into pieces.

For the record, they don't say "Death to America because they are Christians" so do not believe in media saying that they dont like Christians. They just hate americans, nothing to do with religion...

Here is another example of how the media is so fkin biased.

Guy took a shotgun and went to a movie theatre killed innocent people who were just there to watch the new Batman movie. Media did not say whether he was christian, jew or buddhist or anything else BECAUSE he was not a muslim. Even though his act was of terrorism - killing innocent people - they just said he was not right in the head.

If you are terrorist and you say you are a muslim, you are a terrorist because you are a muslim. If you are not a muslim but a terrorist, you are mentally ill. Clearly, all the terrorists who say they represent their religion Islam - the word LITERALLY means "Peace" btw - if they say they are muslim, they are obviously right in the head. Thats what the media wants you to think.

Ofc there is no footage of villages getting raided down, woman getting raped, kids being killed by crusaders in middle east because they control the media. Unfortunately, the idea of asking questions is erased from people's mind with media too. Look at all the countries who have the same show as "American Idol" totally fkin useless. What is the education in that?

Organized religion is a big big big market. It is ALL a lie. You can change what bible says but it is a bigger fuss when you try to change something in constitution. There is none to very little tax on religion. If buddhists were as populated as muslims and as financially active, trust me, they would have been labeled as terrorist too and you would see troops in Tibet.

[Zealous]

Beware of the text-wall and ignore this post unless you know shit about shit.

You asked for opinions? Okay, so lets go.


While I'm not an atheist, I can understand some atheist's viewpoint.

With that being said, this "religion causes more war, pain and suffering" rebuttal so often postulated doesn't stand as a valid argument to validate anti-religious sentiments. It's a logical face-value conclusion, validated by the fact that it's often copy+pasted by many moderately intelligent middle-class westerners (who's lifestyles enable enough time, self-sustainability and protection from many real injustices and grievances that are experiences throughout other parts of the world). However it is an incomplete conclusion; one which has been considered whilst detached from a broader context.

I think it would be fair to acknowledge people have always found a reason to fight with one another - whether it be desire to increase personal wealth and resource availability, unfounded misgivings towards fundamentally insignificant differences within humanity (race, gender, disability - BELIEFS, you name it), or simply for ego, pride and vainglory. In general, humans are competitive (as a combination of how we're wired and raised). There is a urge to want to be the best or, at the least, better than most. In fact, humans subconscious desire to let personal benefit trump that of compassion or collective ambitions of peace is so ingrained into our psyche's that it is even evident within the language we use. Purely for the sake of example, look into the common etymology of the words 'river' and 'rival' (rival literally meaning "one who uses the same stream", eventually evolving to mean "competitor").

More to the point, anyone who knows a bit about historical crusades / jihads would know that territorial, political and economic desires were often achieved and conducted under the, seemingly, more honorable veil of religion or in accordance with 'divine righteousness'.. Religion is a tool and, similar to a tool, is ineffective when used incorrectly. But, like a tool, cannot be blamed for an error in craftsmanship - just as you do not blame a pencil for a spelling mistake.

..Now for a second, imagine the context. When people live in a time and place where social injustices are far more prevalent and the value of life has less intrinsic meaning, many find the need to hold religious beliefs as a foundation to explain life's pertinence; as a fantasy to cope with harsh realities associated with the time in which they exist. So when a corrupt leader or political figure would attach a religious significance to confrontations (which, in reality, were to further an individual or small groups personal interests), some would face the choice of fighting for their beliefs, or see their root philosophies on life crumble. Even though it may result in deaths, it is often all that can be done to preserve a sense of dignity by those who have been dealt a raw deal in life. While I see it as wrong, I can at least sympathize, and I daresay, hold some degree of unbiased respect (for want of a better word).

Christianity is novelty and, statistically, fading. It's purpose has been diluted in the west as a result of the increases in living standards. On the other hand, among the lower standards of living in parts of the east there is a niche for higher purpose waiting to fill voids, just as there was during the times of early Christianity..

..But that's neither here nor there. What I'm trying say now is that there is no need for people to insult others beliefs (like desecrating religious texts). It's basic compromise. This christian-denomination, lower-ranking clergyman holds the belief that it's okay to burn the Quran or make visual representations of Mohammed, while Muslim's hold the belief that this is an offensive act. Western societies believe that people have the right to freedom of speech, while Muslim's believe that fatwah, or revenge killings, are justified if someone is trying to offend their belief systems, with some "shit got real" rammifications. Clearly there are some contrasts in beliefs. So why not compromise for the sake of everyone's benefit? There's no need to offend someone else's faith and there will be no need for retaliation. If you believe in freedom of speech it enables you the benefit of being able to say as you wish; but it doesn't revoke the right for the bloke you're speaking to from knocking your front teeth out, if that is what he beliefs is right. Ofcourse, he would face judicial consequences, just as you faced the consequences of a stern left jab to the chin. Had you kept your mouth shut, he would of kept his fist away from it.

Compromise.

Disclaimer to QQ's and tl;dr's -> I aim to provoke thought rather than argument. I'm not Christian and I'm not Islamic; I am not religious nor am I non-religious. I am simply a man of thought and spirituality, who respects peoples right to personal beliefs and, therefore, holds no disrespect for whatever those particular beliefs may be.

Kudos if you managed to read and keep up this deep into the post.

[razor]

Tl;dr.

too long post for so few people that actually read this forum / section / or your huge post.

My opinion? those people are just like animals. Not only they get mad about someones point of view, they are also stupid enough to take revenge on innocent people that have nothing to do with that.

Human trash.

[ilterates]

[Zealous]

Tl;dr.

too long post for so few people that actually read this forum / section / or your huge post.

My opinion? those people are just like animals. Not only they get mad about someones point of view, they are also stupid enough to take revenge on innocent people that have nothing to do with that.

Human trash.

Some people put in more thought than others into making sure their opinions their own.

@ilterates - lol, ricky gervais' / karl pilkington's talk on religion is golden.

[thing]

I'm not surprised they're angry, but their retaliation is a bit extreme.

There's really too much to say about the topic, and I don't feel like writing an essay like Zealous.

[AmbroseRookwood]

This is the video Innocence of Muslims - Muhammad Movie - FULL HD - YouTube
how could one be so stupid to be anger'd by something as foolish as this?