Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

I do say so..

It's all about wanting. If I see people from turkish, french, filipine, russian, lithuanian, maroccan, ... descent who speak dutch so well I can't see why others aren't capable..


edit: and not only the language: also habits, clothing style,

I do not wish them to assimilate, especially not their kitchen, it's great to learn from them
(edited)

1. what is "amalgam" ?

2. what did you want to say by that connection riot - Muslims and islam ? Why are they making riots, or what was point of your denying connection riots - muslims - religion ? I just want to know more about your opinion.

3. I read some part of koran, I had koran book at home :-) and yes there were some statements about connections like: killing any man not in islam faith is direct way to heaven or that alah needs you to spread islam everywhere till the time when there is just islam everywhere and so...

3. I read some part of koran, I had koran book at home :-) and yes there were some statements about connections like: killing any man not in islam faith is direct way to heaven or that alah needs you to spread islam everywhere till the time when there is just islam everywhere and so...
But to what extent is this practiced. I know a girl who is quite strict Islamitic, but she tried to make me hook up with an another (really beautiful) Islamic girl. In that sense you can be really strict but on the same time being really tolerant.

I just wanted to say that also Christians are not tolerating other religions
- define 'tolerate' -

ok, I should rather use the word "accepting". It means they can tolerate other religions but they are not able to accept you as "full-value" man if you are not in same faith. They will always consider you in way like "he is not in our faith so he is not good guy".

I am not talking about radicals or about Christian's official statements or formal behavior - this is nice, they are trying to pretend open mind... they are not talking about this directly but they are behaving in such a way, they are not able to accept you, they think about everybody not in their faith that he just need help and that he is on bad way and doesnt belong to circle of "chosen" and what is worse that he is bad. Of course this can be normal, they have true in their point of view but I like much more people who can accept everybody, no matter about faith, color or sex and so. And I dont like people who are talking about tolerating but are not able to accept anybody in their "circle" just because you are bad guy not in their faith.

It is normal that some group of people want have their own ideas, faith and so and they are not forced to accept everybody...this is ok, but they should say this directly and not saying opinions like: we can accept everybody we are the best one of religious people but their behavior in society is different.

I am not sure if I described it well so you can understand what I wanted to say really :-)


In short way, this long post is about honesty and pretense and hypocrisy. Islam is proclaiming their opinion open and Christians are hiding they real face :-) But both of them are same, they are not able to accept the others.

I think that European islam can learn to be much more tolerating religion... but this is possible in europe. islam in middle east is really problem for world. But I dont want to say, that Christians are something like example of good religion, they are bad too.

And I think that people in both faith are very normal and good people, except extremist. Everybody can be tolerating, it is just about people, not about faith. But I am not sure if people in middle east can became so much religious tolerating as they can became in europe :-)

1)When you realy believe that non-believers end in hell
2)When you realy care about other people
What shall stop you from saving mankind from hell for whatever costs? That Christians are annoying and moslims blow themselves sometimes are quite moderate manifestations when you think more about it :0 - Believers are very dangerous, the problem is that they are somewhat culturally accepted. In far future they will be probably cured in mental clinics.
(edited)

Let us ban rating agencies and religions. The world would be far better =p

:-DD

It means they can tolerate other religions but they are not able to accept you as "full-value" man if you are not in same faith. They will always consider you in way like "he is not in our faith so he is not good guy".
I have stayed silent during this discussion. Rumpil, just want you to know that I do not agree with you. Sorry.

He is right though. Religion implies intolerance. There is no religion which does not exclude people who do not believe properly or, even worse, have the wrong sexual preference. Religion may save some, but it damns everyone else. I strongly believe that all religion is inherently evil as exclusion implies a ready excuse for violence or willful neglect. Only if you can truly say that everyone, believer or not, is equal both in the here and now and the afterlife, religion will cease to be evil.

My statements was from my surroundings/region and religious people around me. Maybe it is different in your region.

I think that religious people just felt sorry about you. :=)

Ok serious answer.
I think it has a lot of do with fact that here is religiosoity very minor. Elitist thinking has a lot of do with number of followers. Catholicism was pretty common, while Jews and later protestant were minorities, so they were chosen ones by God to be saved and have to more care about their practice. Of course since 16th century the both groups becoming divided so in some countries is majority protestantism and in other ones catholicism. Feeling better than other is quite logical psychological reaction, but in other regions its normal be religious. I would say that in some religous places it has to be quite common that actually atheists think that they are so smart and unique because they are different from majority.

I strongly believe that all religion is inherently evil as exclusion implies a ready excuse for violence or willful neglect.
Schepel, do you believe that those who may use religion as "a ready excuse for violence" would act any different if they were NOT religious? or that they would be violent persons void of religion? I know of no mainstream religion that preaches violence. In Christianity we are taught ( or at least I was taught) to love believers AND non-believers as beings God created.
As to 'religion implies intolerance'- ANY group has some level of tolerance or intolerance towards those not in the same group. Students from different schools, even members of different churches of the same religion in the same city.
Only if you can truly say that everyone, believer or not, is equal both in the here and now and the afterlife, religion will cease to be evil.
Schepel, I can not say that, as that is not my core belief. God gives us opportunities to repent from our sins. As a Christian I believe that God ultimately separates those who do not believe in Him from those who do believe in Him, in Heaven and Hell.
That I believe this does not make me evil, or that my religion believes this makes it evil. If I were to go and kill people who did not believe the same as I do, that would make me evil, and if my religion told me to go out and do that, in my opinion, that would be evil.

My statements was from my surroundings/region and religious people around me. Maybe it is different in your region.
OK, I can accept that. However your experiences certainly are not universal.

Schepel, do you believe that those who may use religion as "a ready excuse for violence" would act any different if they were NOT religious?

I do. Most people are just people. For bad things to happen, one needs motive and opportunity. Religion may afford both. Mind, it's not just about violence, it's also about the way others are treated. Take for example gay people. Otherwise nice and generally tolerant people are in a habit of denouncing gay people for no other reason than their sexual preference. To cut a long story short, there is a very strong causal relationship between truly open society and a lack of strongly felt religion. (The same can be said about nationalism, by the way.)

I know of no mainstream religion that preaches violence.

If you take the main holy books (bible and kur'an) literally, then you'll find a strong call for violence in both.

ANY group has some level of tolerance or intolerance towards those not in the same group.

That is of course completely true. However, religion is toxic. It asks from the believers to believe without question and do God's work. The potential for very bad things is enormous. The really sad thing is that out of the best motives, horrendous acts are perpetrated. After all, is it not God's work and God's work always good?

Schepel, I can not say that, as that is not my core belief. God gives us opportunities to repent from our sins. As a Christian I believe that God ultimately separates those who do not believe in Him from those who do believe in Him, in Heaven and Hell.

Which is where you denounce everyone not of your faith as second rate human beings.

That I believe this does not make me evil

I never said you were. :-) Acts alone may make people evil. However, religion is a concept, an idea. My conviction is that the idea itself is problematic, evil. Followers of the idea itself are people who deserve to be judged on their own merits, not on their beliefs. Ideas alone are never enough to be judged as an evil person. It is what you say and what you do. For an idea, a concept, it's a different issue altogether. That may be judged on its potential. (In the case of religion, it can also be judged on past results. There is nothing which has caused so much misery as religion in the history of mankind.)