Ask an American, agnostic and atheist man pretty much anything

[al-arab]

You don't have time to watch a 20 min. long video but you post here constantly and is only all the time? Very good logic again from you.

You are so little informed that you probably don't even know what I refer to when I mention Wikileaks.

Are you dumb? If they knew beforehand that Saddam did not have chemical weapons why invade a country, lose BILLIONS of dollars, thousands of lives, worser reputation and ultimately a collapse of the American economy?
"Won the war."

Idiot. You did not win anything. You did not control anything, not even Baghdad. As is the case in Afghanistan. Meanwhile 1/3 of the Americans live in poverty.

What a brave choice.

There were no significant rebels under Saddam. I am talking about political movement and the same view point as taken by Nato in Libya.

You also seem to forget that FN opposed the Iraq War and that is was an illegal war. The whole world could see it, just don't dumb Americans and their puppet states.

Very "brilliant" anology from you again when Iraq did not threat your country at all. This was also exposed by Wikileaks when they hacked your countries secret documents about the war.

I thought for a second that your intelligency was a little bigger but a few questions and your were reduced to a pig's intellect.

[al-arab]

Only if you think an average IQ of 90-95 is dumb... and are willing to admit that the Middle East only manages 75-85 for an average...

IQ and Global Inequality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Only one pleading ignorance is you.

Iraq has a average of 99 (from 2011) despite being under dictatorship for 40 years.

To even compare ancient Arab/Middle East civilication to a country with no history (300 years history) is a joke when the cradle of civilazation is found in the Middle East, not in America.

Apart from that all Americans were poor immigrants from Europe who were persecuted so If I were you I would show a bit more respect on a Muslim forum!

Especially as a American with so little history and so much hatred from all parts in the world, even Europe who don't like you. Nobody does. That is why you and Zionists love each other.

[ozymandias]

You don't have time to watch a 20 min. long video but you post here constantly and is only all the time? Very good logic again from you.

The machine I spend most of my time on does not have sound. I have limited time at home, and I typically don't spend them here.

You are so little informed that you probably don't even know what I refer to when I mention Wikileaks.

... Who doesn't know that?

Are you dumb? If they knew beforehand that Saddam did not have chemical weapons why invade a country, lose BILLIONS of dollars, thousands of lives, worser reputation and ultimately a collapse of the American economy?
"Won the war."

Other political goals.

Idiot. You did not win anything. You did not control anything, not even Baghdad. As is the case in Afghanistan. Meanwhile 1/3 of the Americans live in poverty.

Actually, it appears that it is 33% of Iraqis that live in poverty, compared to 14% of American families.

What a brave choice.

There were no significant rebels under Saddam. I am talking about political movement and the same view point as taken by Nato in Libya.

Huh?

You also seem to forget that FN opposed the Iraq War and that is was an illegal war. The whole world could see it, just don't dumb Americans and their puppet states.

Very "brilliant" anology from you again when Iraq did not threat your country at all. This was also exposed by Wikileaks when they hacked your countries secret documents about the war.

Once again, Wikileaks did not expose that until after the war started -- long after.

I thought for a second that your intelligency was a little bigger but a few questions and your were reduced to a pig's intellect.

Really, when was this?

[ozymandias]

Iraq has a average of 99 (from 2011) despite being under dictatorship for 40 years.

Let's compare apples to apples, shall we? in 2002, Iraq had an average IQ of 87, and the US had 98. In 2006, Iraq was still at 87, and the US still at 98.

Where are you getting your numbers? I already cited my source.

To even compare ancient Arab/Middle East civilication to a country with no history (300 years history) is a joke when the cradle of civilazation is found in the Middle East, not in America.

How is this relevant to anything? We were discussing the intelligence of the two populations. You accused Americans of being dumb, while, ironically, Iraq is even worse.

Apart from that all Americans were poor immigrants from Europe who were persecuted so If I were you I would show a bit more respect on a Muslim forum!

Again, this has nothing to do with anything -- in addition to being false.

Especially as a American with so little history and so much hatred from all parts in the world, even Europe who don't like you. Nobody does. That is why you and Zionists love each other.

Or, you know, because you make up things to justify your bias.

[al-arab]

Since who claimed you "won" the war, and talked about your (300 year old culture) as something amazing compared to the cradle of civilization. Don't make me laugh.

Strange to be online all the time but don't have sound. If you don't know, you do not need to have sound to see a video showing genocide.

You, since you did not know what I was refering to when I mentioned Wikileaks. Go figure out.

Political goals. So you admit that your country started a illegal war...Well it only took you 10 years to figure that out.

Again, what has your War changed? Your economy is worser than most Arab countries who have lived under dictatorships, your are not winning any wars, not making progress (people still don't like you and won't) and you have lost thousands of lives and thousands of hard wounded. Not to mention those people who can't function normal anymore because of the war.

WOW REALLY? Is this real? Again, you cannot be that dumb. What do you expect after decades of dictatorship. Still, it is a disgrace that a country that has had so called democracy for 250 years have 20 percent people who lived for under 2 dollars a day and don't have a health care. Your society is rotten.

You also have the most number of prisoners. 3 millions, nearly 1 percent of your population. Every 100 American. Just tells you everything.

Are you stupid? Abu Ghraib, Killings in Fallujah, Guantanamo, illegal occupation of Iraq According to UN where not know from day one? WHo are you trying to kid?

Try and make a guess....

[al-arab]

Arab sources, but it is universally accepted that Arabs always have been clever. Your most successful American in a long time was an Arab (Steve Jobs).

Well the fact is that Iraq is called the Cradle of the civilization while America is 250 yeras old and consists mainly of poor immigrants that arrived from Italy, Germany, Eastern Europe and black slaves. So I don't know who you are trying to kid again.

Relevant because you try to undermine Iraqi culture and claim how wonderful your backward country is. A country that was found by poor immigrants that killed the local population and had slaves just 120 years ago and lynched black people 40 years ago. So let' us just leave it here....shall we?

So you are trying to claim that you are acutally popular? Russia don't like you, as do Japan and China, nor does any Muslim population. Nor does Latin America for clear reasons nor do most of Europa. But again, who are you trying to kid?

America are one of the least popular countries as are your friends in Israel for a reason. Try figure out why that is.

[ozymandias]

Since who claimed you "won" the war,

The objectives were obtained. That means it was won.

and talked about your (300 year old culture) as something amazing compared to the cradle of civilization. Don't make me laugh.

When did I do that? And when did the age of a culture matter?

Strange to be online all the time but don't have sound.

My work computer does not have speakers. *shrug* One day you might have a job where you don't dictate the computer hardware.

If you don't know, you do not need to have sound to see a video showing genocide.

You, since you did not know what I was refering to when I mentioned Wikileaks. Go figure out.

Why would you claim that? I am fully aware what it is.

Political goals. So you admit that your country started a illegal war...Well it only took you 10 years to figure that out.

Actually, no, it took us 10 years to have this conversation. I have known that the war was started under false pretenses long ago.

Again, what has your War changed? Your economy is worser than most Arab countries who have lived under dictatorships, your are not winning any wars, not making progress (people still don't like you and won't) and you have lost thousands of lives and thousands of hard wounded. Not to mention those people who can't function normal anymore because of the war.

WOW REALLY? Is this real? Again, you cannot be that dumb. What do you expect after decades of dictatorship.

Weren't you just bragging about your IQ scores?

Still, it is a disgrace that a country that has had so called democracy for 250 years have 20 percent people who lived for under 2 dollars a day and don't have a health care. Your society is rotten.

Yeah, that's not actually happening. You can't make numbers up like that -- it's embarrassing. If less than 15% of the US is in poverty (less than half the rate in Iraq), how could 20% be only getting $2 a day?

You also have the most number of prisoners. 3 millions, nearly 1 percent of your population. Every 100 American. Just tells you everything.

Are you stupid? Abu Ghraib, Killings in Fallujah, Guantanamo, illegal occupation of Iraq According to UN where not know from day one? WHo are you trying to kid?

*sigh*

Try and make a guess....

About what?

[ozymandias]

Arab sources, but it is universally accepted that Arabs always have been clever. Your most successful American in a long time was an Arab (Steve Jobs).

Ah, so you made it up, since you can't cite sources.

Well the fact is that Iraq is called the Cradle of the civilization while America is 250 yeras old and consists mainly of poor immigrants that arrived from Italy, Germany, Eastern Europe and black slaves. So I don't know who you are trying to kid again.

Once again, you are off topic. This has nothing to do with the conversation.

Relevant because you try to undermine Iraqi culture and claim how wonderful your backward country is. A country that was found by poor immigrants that killed the local population and had slaves just 120 years ago and lynched black people 40 years ago. So let' us just leave it here....shall we?

*sigh*

So you are trying to claim that you are acutally popular? Russia don't like you, as do Japan and China, nor does any Muslim population. Nor does Latin America for clear reasons nor do most of Europa. But again, who are you trying to kid?

You know, if you actually quoted my post, I might have an idea what the hell you are talking about.

America are one of the least popular countries as are your friends in Israel for a reason. Try figure out why that is.

You need to try again. I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

[R3SISTANC3]

I can understand your confusion. I believe that humans do have universal rights for several reasons -- one, the UN decided as a whole that they do, so now they do, but more importantly, because any intelligent human can build a system of morals out or mutual respect, and self interest.

I think that all humans have a basic set of rights, because as an intelligent, compassionate being, I sympathize with my fellow human. I can feel the desire to minimize their suffering, and in turn minimize the risk that I will be in a similar situation. I can look at a person living under an oppressive government, and imagine how I would feel. I can look at the situation from the government's stand point and imagine why they feel they have the right to do what they do. It's not hard for a rational being to construct a logical ethical system that addresses the worst of the problems and construct a moral system that is geared towards minimizing needless suffering and oppression, and protecting the choices I find important, and should be left up to the individual. I can look at certain issues and see that the decisions made regarding that issue impact no one but the person making the decision, and thus that decision should be left to them to make.

It's not impossible, it's not even hard, to come up with rights that are valuable, and not destructive to outside parties, and decide that every human should possess those rights.

Unfortunately I'm not the one who is confused. If there is any confusion it seems that it's coming from your part. I'm sure you are not intentionally ignoring some fundamental facts based on statements you previously made.

Let me address some of the fallacies in your argument:

"I think" doesn't equate to natural or scientific absolutes. I "think" there is a God, yet, just because I "think" there is a God doesn't mean you think or you should think that there is a God. You clearly understand that. Yet you fail to apply that same logic when it comes to your secular humanistic values. Both are beliefs concocted by evolved apes. Science doesn't dictate in favor of neither. Science gives you results, tested results, and based on those results humans give them a value.

What you and I think is limited to our own understanding and outlook on existence. Just because you sympathize with your fellow human beings doesn't make it a natural fact or a scientific positive. Nature (or science) doesnt dictate to us that:

Thou Shalt Not Kill
Thou Shalt Not Steal
Thou Shalt Feed The Poor

Or that, Thou Shalt Not Invade A Nation Over False Pretexts To Pillage It's Resources And Kill Millions Of It's Indigenous Habitants In The Process.

Or that, As Secular Democratic Nations Thou Shalt Consistently Support Israel Based On A Biblical Prophesy Of Returning The Jews To Their Ancestral Homeland Because Their Skydaddy Said So In The Bible.... while killing of the locals indiscriminately in a systematic fashion.

I'm not saying you support these actions or agree with them. Just pointing out obvious double standards.

An intellectually honest atheist would admit that human rights and human values are self-serving applications invented by human beings that sound good theoretically but in reality are very hard to implement due to various reasons such as: conflict over land and resources. In that case Social Darwinian societies (Western) ideologically believe in "survival of the fittest". Which means that Akkkhhmed celebrating his wedding in a far away land is disposable just because you "think" he might be an insurgent after noticing celebratory firing from his side. Human rights and values are ignored, there is no room to question. It's do or die. Which is why the method to train soldiers in Western countries is not to humanize their opponents, but to dehumanize them as "hajis" and "gooks".

I think you haven't really given a serious thought to what being an "agnostic atheist" would actually mean since you believe in the notions of right and wrong, human values and human rights. You also have to prove scientifically that there isn't any God (creator of everything). That would be problematic. To make such a claim one has to know everything that there is to know. Do you?

Hitchens is dying of cancer...here is man who believes that his existence is accidental. In his by-chance existence he has lead himself to believe that educating people about the non-existence of God somehow is of value and matters. Unfortunately, he doesn't realize that with his death, the universe ends. With is death the world ends. With his death humanity ends. What happens after his death is totally irrelevant because he would have no control or say into it. Nor will he be affected by it. An agnostic atheist just like him should realize that his existence, within it what he thinks and believes, are limited only to him. With his/her end means the end of everything.


As for United Nations declaration of Human Rights? That wasn't the first time Human Rights have been addressed under mutual understanding. The first such declaration can be traced back to Persia. The Prophet Mohammad SAW wrote such a constitution in Medina. My point? I'll get to it...

After failing to fight his wars King John of England made a treaty with Pope Innocent The 3rd. To support his wars King John turned over England to the Catholic Pope and became his vassal. King John under duress signed the Magna Carta presented to him by the Catholic Pope. This became the constitution of England, and consequently the Common Law constitution of all Britain colonies including US, Canada and Pakistan. The United Nations human rights are based on values that are born from RELIGION! In this case the Catholic religion. And Muslim states like Pakistan today are based on the laws of the Catholic Church (Common Law), not Shariah.

The reason why polygamy is not kosher in the West is not because of "womenn rights" but because the Catholic churched banned it in retaliation towards other Christian denominations particularly Mormonism. The reason why the age of consent is 16 or 18 is because of the Catholic church, which was in opposition to otherwise belief of puberty being the legal age of marriage in other Christian denominations, particularly...you guessed it..Mormonism.

I suggest that you really look into your beliefs and see where they come from. Realize the "God factor" in establishing the value of humanity, and the "God Given Rights" to human beings. Realize the role religion and God has played in giving birth to "human rights".


And realize what does it mean without.

[ozymandias]

Unfortunately I'm not the one who is confused. If there is any confusion it seems that it's coming from your part. I'm sure you are not intentionally ignoring some fundamental facts based on statements you previously made.

Let me address some of the fallacies in your argument:

"I think" doesn't equate to natural or scientific absolutes. I "think" there is a God, yet, just because I "think" there is a God doesn't mean you think or you should think that there is a God. You clearly understand that. Yet you fail to apply that same logic when it comes to your secular humanistic values. Both are beliefs concocted by evolved apes. Science doesn't dictate in favor of neither. Science gives you results, tested results, and based on those results humans give them a value.

Good thing I didn't use my opinion as justification for absolute morality. I used my opinion as justification for my stance on morality. My point is that morality can be logically derived.

What you and I think is limited to our own understanding and outlook on existence. Just because you sympathize with your fellow human beings doesn't make it a natural fact or a scientific positive. Nature (or science) doesnt dictate to us that:

Thou Shalt Not Kill
Thou Shalt Not Steal
Thou Shalt Feed The Poor

Or that, Thou Shalt Not Invade A Nation Over False Pretexts To Pillage It's Resources And Kill Millions Of It's Indigenous Habitants In The Process.

You are right -- but an intelligent, logical human can imagine the tables being turned, and see that they would not like to be the victim of that -- or that they do not want to live in a society where that is allowed. It's quite easy to see that a society based on theft is not an optimal one to live in.

Or that, As Secular Democratic Nations Thou Shalt Consistently Support Israel Based On A Biblical Prophesy Of Returning The Jews To Their Ancestral Homeland Because Their Skydaddy Said So In The Bible.... while killing of the locals indiscriminately in a systematic fashion.

I'm not saying you support these actions or agree with them. Just pointing out obvious double standards.

If I am against all of these things equally, where is the double standard?

An intellectually honest atheist would admit that human rights and human values are self-serving applications invented by human beings that sound good theoretically but in reality are very hard to implement due to various reasons such as: conflict over land and resources.

Correct.

In that case Social Darwinian societies (Western) ideologically believe in "survival of the fittest".

Correct... basically. The 'fittest' is not so concretely defined as you seem to think....

Which means that Akkkhhmed celebrating his wedding in a far away land is disposable just because you "think" he might be an insurgent after noticing celebratory firing from his side.

Given the political backlash and generation of hate, as well as the fuel given to create new terrorists in response to that action, this would clearly not be an optimal strategy, and thus would not be actions by the 'fittest'.

Human rights and values are ignored, there is no room to question. It's do or die. Which is why the method to train soldiers in Western countries is not to humanize their opponents, but to dehumanize them as "hajis" and "gooks".

This has nothing to do with Darwinism, this is standard military training, and has existed for thousands of years.

I think you haven't really given a serious thought to what being an "agnostic atheist" would actually mean since you believe in the notions of right and wrong, human values and human rights.

As long as I am not basing this on a deity, there is no problem.

You also have to prove scientifically that there isn't any God (creator of everything).

You were doing so well until this point. It's up to those claiming the existence to provide proof. It's not up to the scientific community to disprove every non-scientific theories, it's up to those proposing them to prove them.

That would be problematic. To make such a claim one has to know everything that there is to know. Do you?

Good thing you have that backwards, then.

Hitchens is dying of cancer...here is man who believes that his existence is accidental. In his by-chance existence he has lead himself to believe that educating people about the non-existence of God somehow is of value and matters. Unfortunately, he doesn't realize that with his death, the universe ends. With is death the world ends. With his death humanity ends. What happens after his death is totally irrelevant because he would have no control or say into it. Nor will he be affected by it. An agnostic atheist just like him should realize that his existence, within it what he thinks and believes, are limited only to him. With his/her end means the end of everything.

He realizes, and has admitted, that when he dies, that is the end, for him. What the difference is, between him and you, is that he understands that it is possible to have compassion for his fellow man -- even those that are not alive right now.

As for United Nations declaration of Human Rights? That wasn't the first time Human Rights have been addressed under mutual understanding. The first such declaration can be traced back to Persia. The Prophet Mohammad SAW wrote such a constitution in Medina. My point? I'll get to it...

After failing to fight his wars King John of England made a treaty with Pope Innocent The 3rd. To support his wars King John turned over England to the Catholic Pope and became his vassal. King John under duress signed the Magna Carta presented to him by the Catholic Pope. This became the constitution of England, and consequently the Common Law constitution of all Britain colonies including US, Canada and Pakistan. The United Nations human rights are based on values that are born from RELIGION! In this case the Catholic religion. And Muslim states like Pakistan today are based on the laws of the Catholic Church (Common Law), not Shariah.

The reason why polygamy is not kosher in the West is not because of "womenn rights" but because the Catholic churched banned it in retaliation towards other Christian denominations particularly Mormonism. The reason why the age of consent is 16 or 18 is because of the Catholic church, which was in opposition to otherwise belief of puberty being the legal age of marriage in other Christian denominations, particularly...you guessed it..Mormonism.

I suggest that you really look into your beliefs and see where they come from. Realize the "God factor" in establishing the value of humanity, and the "God Given Rights" to human beings. Realize the role religion and God has played in giving birth to "human rights".


And realize what does it mean without.

I have already addressed this. God may have been used to generate morals originally, but I have already shown that it is not required, so your argument is moot.

[Soldat_Amir]

Arab sources, but it is universally accepted that Arabs always have been clever. Your most successful American in a long time was an Arab (Steve Jobs).

Well the fact is that Iraq is called the Cradle of the civilization while America is 250 yeras old and consists mainly of poor immigrants that arrived from Italy, Germany, Eastern Europe and black slaves. So I don't know who you are trying to kid again.

Relevant because you try to undermine Iraqi culture and claim how wonderful your backward country is. A country that was found by poor immigrants that killed the local population and had slaves just 120 years ago and lynched black people 40 years ago. So let' us just leave it here....shall we?

So you are trying to claim that you are acutally popular? Russia don't like you, as do Japan and China, nor does any Muslim population. Nor does Latin America for clear reasons nor do most of Europa. But again, who are you trying to kid?

America are one of the least popular countries as are your friends in Israel for a reason. Try figure out why that is.

"Arab sources, but it is universally accepted that Arabs always have been clever."

How should one respond to this, sorry to say, I could cite 100s of sources to refute this, but I would be labelled an Islamophobe, so I wont.

How can It be universally accepted, when I dont even agree to that.

You ever heard of the Chinese, their achievements pre dated the existance of the word Arab.

Exactly, who likes the Arab world?

If Arabs are so clever, then how come they need European/Americans to build their towers, buildings, hospitals and roads in Dubai and Saudi Arabia?

Honestly! you need to let go of this false pride! You had your time once, now accept that!

Jews have acheived much more than the whole history of Arabia, within just one century, even the ball point pen was invented by a Jew let alone the Internet too.

Hmmmmm......

[al-arab]

You missed the "cradle of the civilazation" part I guess. Not surprising from a communist kafir. So Chinese culture can not be older and is not older. Try open a book for once.

It is not Americans/Westernes who build does towers but mainly workers from South and West Asia....

Yes, Jews have achieved very much, not.

Next time I expect you to say that Jews created the world.

Silly you.

[gomal]

hello, ozymandias.

please answer this:

are you against hip hop? does it bother you? are you a fan of it? do you think its a negative influence for children?

thank you.

[graveyardofempires]

i think this ozy cant take the questions.

[sanman]

Hip hop is fine, but sometimes the lyrics may be a little too explicit for children.

What I hate is this trance music crap - it's no replacement for hip hop.