Ask an American, agnostic and atheist man pretty much anything

[ozymandias]

[B]

Define 'worshipping'.

wor·ship/ˈwərSHip/

Verb:Show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites.
Noun:The feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity: "ancestor worship".
Synonyms:verb. adore - idolize - deify - venerate - revere
noun. adoration - cult - veneration

According to Islam you are worshipping your own desires if you are an atheist.

we are conversing in English -- let's stick to English definitions.

False. Religion and atheism both defy the scientific method. Both START with a pre-conceived notion (existence or non-existance of God), then go about trying why that notion is correct.

I see the source of your confusion. You misunderstand atheism. Atheism is not the 'start', it's the conclusion.

I wouldn't "associate" science with religion or atheism. If anything, true, unbiased science is agnostic by default. It has to be in order to preserve its integrity. So it's a matter of personal choice

Belief is not a choice.

and responsibility whether or not you believe or disbelieve in God. There ultimately can't and won't be any answers in science about religion. Sorry...

I agree. The supernatural is by definition outside the realm of science. All science can do is remove the need for supernatural explainations of natural events.

No, atheists say that since there is no evidence for angels or rational, logical reason to believe, that means that they don't exist. Which is a pure fallacy.

It is a fallacy -- on your part. The atheist stance is *not* an act of belief -- it's a lack of one -- for most atheists. It is not that they actively believe angels do not exist, it is that the do not actively believe they exist. There is a huge, important difference.

You said it. They BELIEVE !!!!11!111

*sigh*

There is only one definition of faith and the scientific method is based on the faith of uniformity of nature.

No, it is based on the evidence for uniformity of nature. Subtle, but important difference.

Objectively, I fail to see why an african who believes in some spirits in the tree would be less trustworthy than you who blindly believe in the uniformity of nature.

The you clearly do not understand science. Science is based on the ability to measure, and reproduce. Someone may believe in that spirit, but they cannot measure or reproduce any evidence for that belief. Science can reproduce evidence and measurements to justify their claims and predictions -- that's how you test their validity.

[badmash_khel]

Morality changes with time. Would you accept applying a tax on Jews and Christians who live in your country? because Sharia does state they should be applied as they are dhimmis? I am sure you would oppose that, as its against your morals.

First of all I don't believe morality changes with time. A wrong act is a wrong act and will never become a right act as long as we are living in this world. For example killing someone without any reason has always been wrong. It doesn't change with time. It is an evil act no matter what the culture or religion or area of the world it is. The only reason something is right or wrong is because God decides it to be.
well everyone has to pay taxes, all foreigners living in western countries have to pay tax. As far as I am aware, jews and christians have to pay less tax than muslims in an islamic state, that tax is their protection money and the benifits the get from the state. I think thats a fair system. very similar to how western systems work with state benifits and such. Muslims have to pay Zakat (charity) 2.5% plus other taxes on their income and so on. What is your problem with that?

Would you sit there and enjoy seeing a women lashed in public for being uncovered? no you wouldnt, as its against your morality. Morality changes with time and so do people.

Why would I enjoy seeing women lashed in public? No sane person enjoys that. If being uncovered is against the rules of a state then she shouldn't walk around uncovered. In western counries I can not walk around naked, I like the cool breeze blowing against my flesh in summer but the police will arrest me for public indecency if I walk around naked. Do you see the point here? What gives poeple the right to decide what is right or wrong? What gives them that authority?

What about modern day slavery? would you be comfortable having a slave in your house, as many Islamic states in the past allowed this practiced, from the Arab Khalifs to the Ottomons?

Slavery has conditions in Islam. Freeing slaves is widely encouraged and slaves are to be treated as your own family members. In ottoman empire people from the balkans (christians) would give away their sons to the ottomans to be raised as "janisarries" soldiers because of how well they were treated. There are many pre conditions, you can't just go around and enslave whom ever you like. Not everything is black and white.
What about colonialism and the chainless slavery the western world and other so called secular governments have enforced through out the world. How about those poor workers in factories of indonesia, combodia and china who have to work in inhumane conditions just so Tom, Bob and so on can look cool in their new shoes? isn't that worse than so called slavery as you claim? Isn't enforcing unfair rules in trade and putting people out of business a form of slavery? The list is endless. If you really care about slavery and not just scoring points then you would look at the world and give more priority to the plight of people being enslaved right now rather than what happened hundreds of years ago.

What about Harems? and the being permitted to keep women as war booty? Would you morally accept that.

Harems are just another one those European fantasies about the Oriental East. It says more about the west rather than islamic states. Harems as Europeans undrestand them are far different from how the muslims undrestand them. Harems are not like Greek homosexual or Roman orgies. Harems contains the family of khalifas including mothers, sisters and wives. Its just a private areas within a palace to give the king some privacy because of his public life.



You wouldnt, thats why I personally feel Religion best suited its time, and now we are in the modern era, where possible a more reformed religion would be needed but limited.

Of course religion derails progression, take the case of Christianity, the priests use to beleive the earth is flat, they persectuted people who opposed this, then it turned out the world is round and they were wrong.

maybe christianity does derail progress but you can't apply the same thing to every religion. Its not Islam's fault that midevil popes and priests of europe didn't want people to think and contemplate. They were afraid of thinking rational beings. They saw them as a threat to their authority. If you read the Quran, you would see that thinking and reflecting and gaining knowledge is widely encouraged in numerous places. Some corrupt muslim kings might oppose science and learning but that doesn't mean Islam is against science and progress. Its very much to the contrary. Infact Quran is so sure that all progress leads to God that it actively encourages questioning. If our pashtun dumb mullahs don't realize this then its our own fault not Islam's. Those mullahs are same as the pope and priests who just want people to remain ignorant so they can have all the power. Islam used in the right way is a very powerful tool for the betterment of pashtuns. If we only realize that. maybe its our backward culture and mentality which focuses on those parts which call to physical jihad rather than soul searching and improving ourselves. Indeed the hardest form of struggle is against one's self. pashtuns maybe choose the easy way out by stressing on physical jihad and shooting with AK 47s. Look at what the persians did after they became muslims, how many great scholars, mathematicians and scientists they produced? We need to look at ourselves rather than at others. If we look inside deep enough maybe we will find something and conquer our demons.
Its easy to blame others, when you point one finger at an Arab, your pointing four fingers at yourself.


Take the case of people hearing voices in their head, they use to say, its the devil speaking, then we found out its a mental illness, associated with psychosis in a way.

I agree, religion can play a good part, if its reformed for this day and age. Sadly, the Muslim world is far from it, and only got to visit Muslim countries to see it, take the example of Pakistan, where people are protesting to kill a Christian women for insulting the Prophet without any evidence. Now how can you progress, when you have people like that.

On a different note, I am not saying we should leave religion aside, I am not interested in converting Pashtuns into my set of beliefs, Personally, I am more concerned on other issues such as

1) how to develop a strong irrigation system in Kandahar to prevent from becoming a desert.
2) how to increase the number of male and female Pashtuns to be able to read and write.
3) work to develop the infrastucuture of the Pashtun hewad.

Thanks.

Well good to know that you care about pashtuns, I hope all your wishes come true, That's why I hope people set aside their differences and work together for our progression. some of us are not mature enough to get over pity differences and thats source of our problems. not Arabs, islam or this or that.

I hope I didn't offend you, some of the comments are general not targeted at you.

your welcome

[ozymandias]

First of all I don't believe morality changes with time. A wrong act is a wrong act and will never become a right act as long as we are living in this world. For example killing someone without any reason has always been wrong. It doesn't change with time. It is an evil act no matter what the culture or religion or area of the world it is. The only reason something is right or wrong is because God decides it to be.

So morals *do* change, and there is no absolute morality. Your god could change his mind, and make the immoral moral, then. Your god could declare the more repellent thing moral, and it would be, according to your own explanation. If your god is the source of all morals, there is no such thing as absolute morality.

maybe christianity does derail progress but you can't apply the same thing to every religion. Its not Islam's fault that midevil popes and priests of europe didn't want people to think and contemplate. They were afraid of thinking rational beings. They saw them as a threat to their authority. If you read the Quran, you would see that thinking and reflecting and gaining knowledge is widely encouraged in numerous places. Some corrupt muslim kings might oppose science and learning but that doesn't mean Islam is against science and progress.

Please do not ignore the fact that the Koran is factually false in places -- but demands to be treated as if true. That is a rejection of science and learning.

[/QUOTE]

[badmash_khel]

So morals *do* change, and there is no absolute morality. Your god could change his mind, and make the immoral moral, then. Your god could declare the more repellent thing moral, and it would be, according to your own explanation. If your god is the source of all morals, there is no such thing as absolute morality.

First of all God doesn't have a mind in Islam. maybe he does in christianity. so no he doesn't change his mind. In Islam, God says"Be, and it is".

I wouldn't say absolute morality but objective morality. Morals aren't subject to human customs, norms or consensus.
can you give me an example of where God changes his mind?

Please do not ignore the fact that the Koran is factually false in places -- but demands to be treated as if true. That is a rejection of science and learning.

some examples please?

[ozymandias]

First of all God doesn't have a mind in Islam. maybe he does in christianity. so no he doesn't change his mind. In Islam, God says"Be, and it is".

So he could, say, declare incest or pedophilia moral? Or is morality simply interpreted by your god?

I wouldn't say absolute morality but objective morality. Morals aren't subject to human customs, norms or consensus.
can you give me an example of where God changes his mind?

I do not have concrete examples from the Koran off the top of my head, but they are not needed. This is a theoretical question. You claimed that morals do not, and could not change, and then stated that things are right or wrong based on the decree of your god. I am simply seeking clarification of your stance.

some examples please?

Embryology, cosmology, the earth being flat, things like that. I can come up with more examples, or clarify as needed, but these are all topics that have been beat to death showing the flaws in interpreting the Koran as literal truth.

[badmash_khel]

So he could, say, declare incest or pedophilia moral? Or is morality simply interpreted by your god?

yes, what ever God declares to be moral is moral. He is not answerable to anyone and he doesn't interprete things as you put it. he is the source of all that exists.

I do not have concrete examples from the Koran off the top of my head, but they are not needed. This is a theoretical question. You claimed that morals do not, and could not change, and then stated that things are right or wrong based on the decree of your god. I am simply seeking clarification of your stance.

I might have confused myself there. My stance is that morals are not subjective to human customs, opinions, desires and reasoning. whatever God declares to be moral is moral. If for example something which was previously allowed is forbidden like the drinking of alcohol which was legal at first and it was made illegal later, then simply god is revealing the law stage by stage, he already knows its morally wrong to drink alcohol but he is revealing the law slowly so us humans can get used to it. This might give the impression of a contradiction but its simply a matter of humans getting used to it.

Embryology, cosmology, the earth being flat, things like that. I can come up with more examples, or clarify as needed, but these are all topics that have been beat to death showing the flaws in interpreting the Koran as literal truth.

ok, i am not that familiar with the language of the Quran but ScimitarXEdge might be able to clear up those points. Since he is yemenite.

[ozymandias]

yes, what ever God declares to be moral is moral. He is not answerable to anyone and he doesn't interprete things as you put it. he is the source of all that exists.

So then there is no such thing as absolute morality? Things are moral or immoral at the declaration of your god?

I might have confused myself there. My stance is that morals are not subjective to human customs, opinions, desires and reasoning. whatever God declares to be moral is moral. If for example something which was previously allowed is forbidden like the drinking of alcohol which was legal at first and it was made illegal later, then simply god is revealing the law stage by stage, he already knows its morally wrong to drink alcohol but he is revealing the law slowly so us humans can get used to it. This might give the impression of a contradiction but its simply a matter of humans getting used to it.

Ah, I understand.

ok, i am not that familiar with the language of the Quran but ScimitarXEdge might be able to clear up those points. Since he is yemenite.

We have actually had several long discussions on these points, and he has not brought up the veracity of the Koran on this issues -- not even to refute my statements that the Koran is false on these points.

[badmash_khel]

So then there is no such thing as absolute morality? Things are moral or immoral at the declaration of your god?

yes, morality only comes from God. God doesn't declare something moral because its moral but because he says something is moral. Something is good because God says it is not because it is good in itself.

[ozymandias]

yes, morality only comes from God. God doesn't declare something moral because its moral but because he says something is moral. Something is good because God says it is not because it is good in itself.

Interesting stance you have there. So pedophilia could be deemed moral?

[badmash_khel]

Interesting stance you have there. So pedophilia could be deemed moral?

Not in this reality but maybe in another reality. The laws of Islam are completed with the completion of Quran, no more laws for us. Pedophilia is deemed immoral so thats it for this lifetime. These notions of moral and immoral and pedophilia might not even be relevant in another reallity.

[ozymandias]

Not in this reality but maybe in another reality. The laws of Islam are completed with the completion of Quran, no more laws for us. Pedophilia is deemed immoral so thats it for this lifetime. These notions of moral and immoral and pedophilia might not even be relevant in another reallity.

Interesting. I would say that an adult having sex with a child would *always* be immoral, given the amount of trauma and harm that would do to the child. As for the Koran being the final word -- that's not true at all, is it? I mean if your god were to declare that it was not the final word, would that not make it so? You just got done stating that your god has the power to make evil, repugnant behavior moral -- adding another book seems trivial compared to that.

[ozymandias]

Not in this reality but maybe in another reality. The laws of Islam are completed with the completion of Quran, no more laws for us. Pedophilia is deemed immoral so thats it for this lifetime. These notions of moral and immoral and pedophilia might not even be relevant in another reallity.

Also, would you agree that pedophilia is currently immoral, and has been for all of our recorded history?

[badmash_khel]

Interesting. I would say that an adult having sex with a child would *always* be immoral, given the amount of trauma and harm that would do to the child. As for the Koran being the final word -- that's not true at all, is it? I mean if your god were to declare that it was not the final word, would that not make it so? You just got done stating that your god has the power to make evil, repugnant behavior moral -- adding another book seems trivial compared to that.

yes, thats right. It will always be immoral.

When i am talking about another reality, I don't mean this universe. I mean when none of this universe will exist. There will be no children, no aging, no time so the point of pedophilia will be useless. pedophilia is only relevent in this world.
Quran is the final word, meaning there will be no more new laws according to Islamic belief. Its already plainly announced there there will be no more laws and it is the final book.
Evil is described in Islam as the lack of good, evil is depended on good just is falsehood is dependent on truth. There is no such thing as evil in itself, evil is only that which is not line with God's will. For example light and darkness, light can lighten a darken room but you can't darken and lit room unless you break the source of light.

[badmash_khel]

Also, would you agree that pedophilia is currently immoral, and has been for all of our recorded history?

yes, but the problem arises when describing and agreeing on what is pedophilia and what is not. At what age do we decide that a child can have sexual relation of their own. Its kinda problematic.

[ozymandias]

yes, thats right. It will always be immoral.

But you just said that your god decrees what is moral -- and not simply recognizes it. Logically this means your god must be able to decree immoral things moral.

When i am talking about another reality, I don't mean this universe. I mean when none of this universe will exist. There will be no children, no aging, no time so the point of pedophilia will be useless. pedophilia is only relevent in this world.
Quran is the final word, meaning there will be no more new laws according to Islamic belief. Its already plainly announced there there will be no more laws and it is the final book.

So your god is limited by a book, and is not all powerful?

Evil is described in Islam as the lack of good, evil is depended on good just is falsehood is dependent on truth. There is no such thing as evil in itself, evil is only that which is not line with God's will. For example light and darkness, light can lighten a darken room but you can't darken and lit room unless you break the source of light.

I understand that -- but that does nothing to refute the implication that your god could declare pedophilia moral.