Richard Dawkins on Islamic fundamentalism

A fundamentalist, I believe, truly gets at the heart of a belief system. There is a reason we don't talk/worry about Mormon fundamentalists, but do Muslim fundamentalists. Obviously Christianity has the potential for fundamentalism, but for the most part Christians have adapted to living amongst those with different beliefs. Many Muslims (i.e. the true moderates) have already done this, and I believe Islamic fundamentalism is on the decline. In-fact I have a pet theory that the Middle East is going to be dominated by atheism in a relatively short amount of time (30-50 years) due to the culture's inability to adapt to the rapid cultural changes that it will incur. Religions don't do well in the presence of things like the internet (large exposure to a variety of ideas). I believe atheism and the internet go hand-in-hand, and it all comes down to information flow. 

Richard Dawkins: "Islam Is One Of The Great Evils In The World"

Many people are too afraid to say the things that Richard Dawkins says about Islam. Islam, along with with most other religions, are getting weakened over time by the increased information flow provided by things like the internet, television, etc. People that are only exposed to religions like Islam do not know any different; once these people are exposed to a wider variety of ideas, they will have more to choose from. Like when I was younger, the only belief system I was exposed to was Catholicism, I wasn't truly aware that I had a choice (nothing else to choose from). In 50-100 years I believe we will see ('we' as in humanity) a further rise of atheism and a toning down of religious fundamentalism (especially in Islam). Violence is a response born out of fear, soon enough people will realize there is nothing to be afraid of.  

Why do believers hate atheists?

I often wonder why there is such resentment directed towards atheists by the religious (typically Christians or Muslims). And while they wont admit it, the answer is much more personal. Atheists are hated as they are, not just because we are viewed as evil or because we are hell-bound, and the religious fear for our safety. It is because the religious see atheists as a threat to their world-view.

We all have our own world-view, and we ('we' as in people in general) see those with a different world-view as being a threat to our own. While we will not live forever, our world-view can survive very long periods of time; for example, most people want loved ones to remember them so that their legacy will continue to exist beyond the grave. In a way, many of our beliefs have a life of their own (Richard Dawkins refers to it as a 'meme'). It seems all world-views have certain mechanisms to maintain their existence.

• Religious world-view has faith, hope, love, comfort, etc.
• Scientific world-view has logical thinking, rationality, open mindedness, legitimate truth, useful knowledge, etc.

The point here is that the atheist world-view is essentially a virus to the religious world-view (it attacks it from within)—also, when the scientific world-view (i.e. atheistic) is dominate, the religious world-view can attack it from within (the religious world-view is the dominate one at the moment, barely). In the struggle between religion and science there is often a mixture within an individual's world-view as well as society's (many atheists are spiritual, including myself).  While atheists do not want to admit it, religions like Christianity are a threat to atheism under the right societal conditions (e.g. high levels of fear, poverty, suffering, and general paranoia). At the moment, the societal conditions are just right for atheism to thrive, and it will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. It is hard for me to imagine what it is like to believe in a god—even though I did at one point—my world-view is radically different than a religious person's in this way (obviously). It is also hard for me to imagine the kind of world-view that is responsible for the Dark Ages. There is a lot of grey area when it comes to the struggle between the religious world-view and the scientific; but, keep in mind, there are light and dark shades of grey. Also, the religious world-view can work with the scientific world-view (and vice versa) when it is convenient.

Religion is not much of a threat to atheism at the moment because of the direction our society is moving. But as our history has shown, religion can shift the tides with the right societal conditions.  For example, the Romans were making great advances in knowledge, then BAM! Everyone becomes more religious and intellectual progress back-steps and stagnates for several centuries. The atheist world-view and the religious world-view have much struggling ahead of them, and ultimately I believe that society is too unstable to ever see a clear winner (hopefully I'm wrong). It is more possible than we would like to admit that society could fall apart in the next few centuries, and religion could make a comeback in a huge way—doesn't that sound like fun.

Thunderf00t on Terry Jones burning the Koran

It's funny the value people will place on silly things like paper. It will be interesting to see how YouTube (Google) will handle the Draw Muhammad Day. I assume they will do the right thing—which is nothing—in the spirit of freedom of speech.

Which is more offensive?

A). Burning a book


B). Large scale violence/murder  for burning a book.

The problem here is that some people learn that violence is the way to deal with those they disagree with. To give into their threats of violence over and over again will cause them to impose themselves more and more onto our way of life (which they disagree with). Many people are trying to be peace-keepers, when in reality they are nurturing this sort of behavior by not condemning it (i.e. they are causing the perpetuation of violence). We should never condone this violence by not condemning it. They need to learn that the reason we protest by drawing their prophet (which is silly when thought about) and burning certain books is because of their violent reactions. Imagine if it were the other way around. What if people overseas were drawing Jesus—causing Christians to flip out by cutting people's heads off and burning effigies in the street?

Here are two common sayings that I think speak volumes here..

"If you give them an inch, they will take a mile"


"The squeaky wheel gets the oil"


Oh, and by the way, isn't idolatry a sin for Muslims? Why do they idolize a prophet and a book? Me thinks Allah might be a little pissed (just kidding, a word cannot be pissed).

Terry Jones burning the Koran (an atheist's response)

If it were atheists that went around killing people because someone burned an Origin of Species, people would automatically place blame on the atheists (as they should). There is a double-standard in the world today. While yes, there are some good Muslims (weird how I always feel compelled to put this disclaimer out), many of them are so culturally behind that they stick out like a sore thumb. I view this sort of thing as mere growing pains for certain Muslim peoples (referring to the kind of Muslim that violently lashes out, murdering people because of things like cartoon drawings and book burnings).

Many Muslims need to be shown that their religion is one among many, and is not immune to criticism (regardless if it is justified). Just because a person criticizes another's beliefs, this does not give that person the justification to be violent, no matter what god they worship. We cannot give Muslims special privileges over other groups. For example, if it was the KKK (a Christian dominated group) that was acting this way towards someone burning the bible, obviously it would not be tolerated. Muslims that are killing those people need to be held fully accountable. A guy burning a book is not responsible for their actions. The PC Nazis are using Terry Jones as a means of diversion from the actual problem because they are afraid of calling a kettle black. Perhaps not all kettles are black, but it can't be denied some certainly are.

Let's say some foreigners burned an U.S flag (which they do all the time). Would it be justified for Americans to run around killing people because of it? This obvious double standard needs to be done away with, it is clouding our (i.e. the world's) perception of reality.

In general, if people lash out violently, and get their way/get away with it, they will continue behaving that way as an automatic response (because it works). We cannot bow down to threats of violence/actual violence, if we do, we will never rid ourselves of it. Respect is a two way street. 

Jealous Of Atheism? (stems from hatred of imaginary gods)

This is going to be a rant about why I think believers are jealous of atheists. Obviously believers will strongly disagree to this concept, but I believe it gets at a very real phenomenon.

It seems many people strongly dislike or even hate atheists. But why is this? I do not believe atheists are hated because we are thought of as being demonic or sinful (these ideas may be used to cover up an awareness of jealousy and maintain hatred). It seems as if deep-down there is much pent-up jealousy directed towards atheists. To put it simply, atheists don't have to deal with the physiological draw-backs of religious belief (e.g. Christianity, Islam, Scientology, etc.).

Do atheists have much less perceived accountability than a believer in God? It cannot be argued that atheists have more freedom in this life to act out of freewill (one would think this would be the preferred way to test people's character).

It cannot be denied that many (most?) Christians, and believers of other judgmental faiths, have a nagging skepticism that they constantly have to battle (more and more so with the growing level of communication in the world).

It is very undesirable to believe that all of your actions are being judged 24/7 by some psychotically angry father-figure. I would imagine in their minds part of them wishes they didn't have to be that accountable for what they do (i.e. to feel as judged). Believers in God (or Allah, and any other judgmental god) harbor negative feelings towards atheists because atheists do not need to go through what they do.

The abrahamic god is a dick (at least in my opinion, which is shared among many). I can safely assume that most believers would prefer a godless world  (even though they would deny it out of fear); very few people would enjoy the company of a person with the personality of God (check out God's personality disorder). However, they aren't willing to accept a godless world out of the fear of a possibility that He exists and that death is permanent—atheists do not fear the permanence of death as much because tend to accept it.

An atheist world is a world with much less fear/paranoia (judgmental religions are based and fueled off human-fears), which is why atheist-dominated countries are typically much more peaceful. This however is something I do not think believers 100% believe, but perhaps they worry about.

For just a moment,  imagine the psychological burden religion places on an individual. I believe on some level the religious are able to recognize this burden. Sadly, believers refuse to rid themselves of the unnecessary burden they carry out of fear. Like a person who suffers with depression, they may feel that others "just don't understand". In reality, all of their pain, all of their feelings of guilt and jealousy are a product of their own thoughts, and naturally they would hate those that don't have to deal with what they do (again, referring to atheists). Atheists should recognize the psychological burden religion places on certain individuals, and should do what they can to show them the light.

Atheists should enjoy their non-belief—it protects them from the irrational fear caused by believing in an irrational god. Fear without rationality is worthless. 

only moral because of God?

Many believers make the argument that morality would not exist if there wasn't for God (which implies that god must be real); this argument is very poor for many reasons.

 For the sake of argument, let's say that God exist ('for the sake of argument' =/=  concession that a god exists). Is it good to act morally only because someone is watching? If God is the reason we act morally, then it would seem that without God everyone would act immorally. This sort of mentality is why believers perceive atheists as being immoral, and completely goes against the concept of free-will. On the other hand believers see atheists arguing for moral-relativism, and view them as being moral-less blah blah, so on and so forth.

I would argue that those that are moral because of God are like those little-asshole-kids that are only good around Christmas an their birthday for the reward.

The religious are unable to escape their selfish motives for behaving well. Someone that behaves well only out of fear of punishment or hope of reward, is not moral. I would argue that by default atheists are more genuine because they don't believe someone is watching them like Big Brother, and don't believe in reward post-life.

Someone that behaves morally for the sake of others is genuinely behaving morally; i.e. motives are not out of self-interest, but out the interest of others. It seems that those who subscribe to the 'I'm only good because someone watching' view of morality are sociopaths, but what do you think?

Do believers have a sociopathic-view of morality?

Click the 'agree' button if you agree, or 'disagree' button if you don't agree (buttons are below the post). 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Converting Muslims to Christianity

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is onto something. Some people need a religion; i.e. atheism is not right for everyone. Competition among ideas is a good thing—with competition the best ideas will win out. The problem here is that large numbers of people are not exposed to a wide variety of ideas. I think most people, if provided the right circumstances, would gravitate to atheism (appeals to human-logic). With the rise of the internet we will see the continuation of the rise of atheism (and obviously the down-fall of religion). We have already seen the rise of atheism in America because of this, once the internet starts to take off more in places like the Middle East, atheism will rise there as well, forcing the fundamentalist to take a more secular/moderate stance.

Ken Ham vs. Rev. Barry Lynn Over Tax Funded Bible Theme Park (V+D)

Fairytale themed parks? Don't we have enough of those already?

I don't personally have much of an issue with this. But I do believe that a for-profit private business should not be funded or endorsed by the government. If the government was funding a theme-park centered around Islam, people would be up in arms. Such a double-standard. We need an atheist theme park! I guess it would be kind of boring though. People should keep their religion in the church and in private. The government should not be funding non-science claiming to be science, which will only confuse the children, making it harder for them to learn real science later down the road.

Al Qaeda Populating U.S. With Peaceful 'Decoy Muslims' ?!

If you are offended by this video, you have a poor sense of humor (and sarcasm). This video is obviously satire to point out the irrational fear of all Muslims. Moderate Muslims should not be feared, and I believe the vast majority of Muslims in the United States are moderates. Hell (npi), fundamentalist Christians have been known to be dangerous/offensive, just look at the Westboro Baptist Church (they picket soldiers' funerals with signs like "thank God for dead soldiers" etc.

With that said, I do think that certain beliefs do not mix well inside a secular society, luckily we have a constitution to keep such people in check (not naming names of course). For example, Mormons are not allowed to engage in polygamy, they had to give that up to live in this country (well, unless they live on a secret compound).  

As long as everyones' rights are protected, everything will continue on like clockwork in the United States; as FDR said: "we have nothing to fear but fear itself".

Pat Condell on American Islamophobia

I have to agree with Pat. You can put phobia on any word, doesn't make it a mental illness. Some fears are good, and fear of radical Islam (suicide bombers, etc.), is very rational considering the amount of violence caused by fundamentalists. This isn't to say that all believers should be thought of as being violent, or extreme. I am referring to the fundamentalist.

You see, much violence is found within certain ancient books (not to name names), anyone that takes those books 100% literal may be incited to violently lash out because of it. Fortunately most people don't, however those that do act barbarically (as they have shown). Many people have committed suicide bombings in the name of Islam, this is a cold-hard fact.

The problem here is labeling. While it is not appropriate to label all Muslims as being terrorists, it is appropriate to label fundamentalism as a problem. Another problem is that the "moderates" are not condemning the fundamentalists. To remain silent is to own it, they must disown the violence if they don't wish to be associated with it (at least in my opinion, otherwise people will have a difficulty in distinguishing the difference). I know not all Muslims support the fundamentalists, and they need to speak out so they are not wrongfully associated with the nutty fringe people.

Another problem are the PC-Nazis constantly looking for people to fit the standard for what they view as 'politically correct'. To ignore this problem is to tolerate it, tolerating fundamentalism will cause blood-shed, and that blood will be on the hands of the PC Nazis that fought for tolerance.

Video: Muslim Hatred Towards Jews vs. Nazi Hatred (plus short response to video)

As a disclaimer -- obviously not ALL Muslims hate Jews. This blog post is addressing those that do, along with those that shove this hatred down the throats of their children....brainwashing them to be forever intolerant and close-minded (and sometimes violent).

It's sad that the children are being brainwashed to hate a group of people they know nothing about. Propaganda like this can and probably will lead to a very nasty future. Children should never be taught to hate—being taught to hate (especially that young) will surely cause many psychological issues. This sort of thing should be viewed as a crime against humanity. No culture should be able to brainwash their children to hate another culture -- this is what breeds hatred and intolerance, and ultimately conflict. The suicide bombers of today were the brainwashed children of yesterday (metaphorically speaking). Instead of hatred, children should be taught empathy. There has to be some passages in the Quran that promote empathy? Right? Many Muslims claim Islam is a religion of peace, so by this logic there must be some interpretations that would promote acceptance of others. Hatred is the best way for the nonintellectual to deal with conflict.

Audio: Howard Bloom Rants about Wikileaks, Left & Right Politics, Islam, Economics

I understand this video is a bit long, but it is very entertaining to listen to....well, for nerds like me that don't care who wins the Super Bowl.

Intelligence² Debate: Islam is a Religion of Peace?

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE from Intelligence Squared US on Vimeo.

Jainism is what a religion of peace looks like (any religion with violence in the scripture is not a religion of peace). The fact that this debate is even going on shows something; there is no debate on whether Mormonism is a religion of peace.

Muslim Woman Whipped In Public For Wearing Trousers (Caution: Very Disturbing Video)

How disgusting. Apparently Islam is a religion of peace, could have fooled me...

This is the product of religion, pure and simple (religion is what it takes for people to justify such nasty behavior towards their fellow human). It is incredibly torturous to treat women like this—an obvious human right's violation. Apparently this sort of thing happens on a regular basis within nations dominated by Islam. Like Christianity stifled science in the past, Islam is stifling the progress of human right's. All moderate Muslims should be outraged by this for many reasons.

Humans aren't naturally this nasty, it takes perception altering belief systems to make it acceptable. I say this because in societies with religious freedom (which is really freedom from religion) treat their people much better; there is an obvious correlation here that cannot be denied. To deny that this is caused by religion is to accept human right's violations by turning the other way and ignoring it.

This site would never be seen in a secular society. Religion has no place in government, if it finds itself there, this is what you get. We in secular societies often take for granted the civil rights that we have. And oppression like this should never be tolerated, regardless if it is religion causing it or not. Also to see the men laughing at this is reflective of their lack of conscience. They are complete scumbags for doing what they are doing and thinking it is funny.   

Anjem Choudary: Islam Cannot Survive in a Secular Society

Islam will survive in a secular society when Muslims become truly moderate, and don't take the Koran's words as being literal. Fundamentalist Christianity has a hard time in a secular society as well, for the same reasons. A religion like Islam must evolve or die if it wishes to exist within a secular society; I imagine Islam will have no problem evolving. Sharia law and secularism go together as well as oil and water.

Jewish Girl Converts to Islam in America

Weird how Islam is rising in America, I wonder why that is...Obama? Global Warming?

I also wonder as to why so many Jewish people are converting to Islam; does Islamic culture seem more "Old Testament" to them? Regardless, I expect Islam to rise and then plateau in the United States relatively soon, followed by a decline. People like to feel as if they are original, which is why I believe this Jewish girl converted to Islam—to be different. Being different isn't always a bad thing; sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. If this girl can use her belief in Islam for good, more power to her—not all Muslims can or do.

An Atheist Converts To Islam

part 1


part 2


The shower he is referring to is the blissful ignorance extinguishing the flame of skepticism, as well as the destruction of his individuality; now all he is good for is his wool. 

Dr. Terry Jones -- "We Don't Want the Homos, Queers and Faggots to Go to Hell"

Doesn't Christianity sound like a loving religion? Hate people, just what Jesus would do....right? This is the kind of mentality responsible for war and genocide. I assume he believes atheists will go to hell as well; if I go to hell, I'm taking Terry Jones down there with me.

Islam and homosexuality are partners? Since when? And why is God turning people into Muslims? Does that mean God = Allah? He says that 'Islam is of the Devil', does that also mean God and the Devil are the same guy? Perhaps a bipolar god? So many questions, so little answers...

Why People Believe In God (an atheist's rant on God and faith)

The core of belief systems like Christianity and Islam are built upon its followers having faith (i.e. belief in scientific/historical claims without any supporting evidence). The primary required idea to be believed in is the existence of a god (for the world's most popular religions).

The idea of a god existing, on its surface, seems ridiculous from the atheist point-of-view. Atheists in general have trouble understanding why believers believe what they do. Atheists, when thinking about the existence of anything, look at it with logical-based analysis (is there evidence? is it credible? etc.), while often assuming others do as well. What must be understood is that believers (Christians, Jews, Muslims etc.) don't believe in God because it is logical to them, they believe for emotional reasons (primarily peace-of-mind). It is not the details of the belief which is important (e.g., talking snakes and virgin births), but rather, the way such beliefs make them feel. The human mind is wired to accept an idea more easily if the information is enjoyable to contemplate, than if the idea is boring or in conflict with their particular world-view. The idea of a loving-god can generate a pleasant well-being. Having what is believed as the most powerful conscious being in the universe on your side is an amazing placebo when life feels overwhelming and depressing. The idea of God makes people view the world as if they have total control over it (or at least their imaginary friend does), giving them the cognitive ability to overcome any emotional hardship. Once the idea of a god enters someones mind, and they utilize it for consoling purposes, it becomes very hard to remove—as hard as any drug dependency.

God is more than consolation however. God is a being which has magical powers; i.e. he can turn water into wine and impregnate virgins (proof scripture was written by man). There is something very euphoric about being in the state of wonder. Our world only gets boring when we feel we understand it. This is why magicians like David Blaine get such a following. It isn't exactly what magicians do that is important, but the way they make people feel. Having a sense of wonder is another great coping mechanism (any distraction from pain or boredom is). Not everyone is intelligent enough to be able to comprehend scientific ideas, so they are unable to get any sense of wonder from thinking about them (because they can't). Science is great for creating a sense of wonder, every time something new is learned, for that moment, the world is not boring, it is interesting. The great thing about science and wonder is that the more questions science answers, the more questions are thought of to be asked. But, let's say you are not the sharpest tool in the shed, if you are exposed to science, but are unable to understand it, you are unable to absorb it, and unable to escape the boredom and/or pain. God may be good for certain people that are unable to get a feeling of wonder from science. God creates a sense of wonder in the same way that a sugar pill can relieve headaches; if you know it is a placebo, it probably won't work, and you may not understand how it works for others.

disclaimer
I wrote this post relatively quickly (like the majority of my posts), so it may sound like a rant.