-
I don't think anyone is mocking anyone else, are you simply saying that religious ideas should not be challenged ?
No, of course I'm not. I'm suggesting that people should feel comfortable speaking as it's interesting to listen to multiple viewpoints.
-
There are no disbelievers during severe turbulence on a flight
There are.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z0LoC7sh2s"]YouTube
- Megadeth - High Speed Dirt (With Lyrics)[/ame] -
^^I am not a convert
-
No, of course I'm not. I'm suggesting that people should feel comfortable speaking as it's interesting to listen to multiple viewpoints.
They should, regardless of their views, I don't think anyone would disagree. I just thought I saw a glimpse of the 'respect' that people feel should be afforded to religion.
-
Nah. Well, none from me anyway.
-
I would LOVE to hear this scientific basis for hating the Jews. Off you go then.
They have acid for blood.
Glenn Beck said.
-
I would LOVE to hear this scientific basis for hating the Jews. Off you go then.
If you're being serious here goes...
Simply put the argument runs along these lines:
- Jews are a race.
- They maintain their 'race' through selective breeding.
- Different races have different characteristics.
- The characteristics that Jewish people possess are negative / inferior.
If you follow this line of Anti-S, there are two main issues;
If Jewish people mix with non-Jews then it will have a negative impact on non-Jews via a supposed infection of the non-Jewish bloodline. However, people also tend to extend this to socially mixing, which isn't logical but follows the idea/theme of infection.
The selective/internal breeding makes it all the more necessary for non-Jews to establish a strong racial identity, in the same way Jews do.
This whole view is born out of pseudo-Darwinism-ish logic. It is premised first and foremost on the idea that Jews are in themselves a separate race. I think an Isrealie (history?) academic has recently done a very thorough study discrediting the idea of a 'Jewish Race' or even cognisant lineage stretching back to biblical times (the last bit has upset quite a few Isrealie politicians for obvious reason).
The point about it being different from earlier anti-S is that it is concerned specifically with race and *not *religion.
It seems fucking ridiculous to have to put this, but I will for the sake of morons:
**
I AM NOT AN ANTI-SEMITE. I AM EXPLAINING THE ARGUMENT FOR SOMEONE WHO SEEMED TO EXPRESS AN INTEREST** - Jews are a race.
-
Help! How many aliases does tynan have?
-
Can some translate SP's post? Not sure I get it.
I thought it was a pretty debatable post, to be honest.
-
Help! How many aliases does tynan have?
tynan, Help!, Odin, Vishnu, Krishna, Zeus, God, just off the top of my head.
-
Excellent stuff here.
To pick up on Tynan bringing Mein Kampf into the discussion, I’d humbly say that it can teach lots of things, prominent amongst them being how not to write. Adolf could not write, bless him. The translator’s introduction to the volume of it that I have makes this clear several times before you get stuck into the book proper. Despite the effort of freely translating several hundred pages of humiliating wind, the translator seems not to have enjoyed the process one bit, and to begrudge the literary Hitler entirely. Hitler repeats himself page after page. Is he not another of the historical speed-freaks, the ones which Lou Reed claimed in the sleeve-notes to Metal Machine Music were responsible for all wars? Adolf sure wrote like one. I couldn’t even finish Mein Kampf. To write a pile of boring bilge which by rights should explain the beginnings of one of the most fascinating ‘events’ (if that’s the right word) in all of history is quite a feat.
No, it is entirely consistent with the well-known problems with the Nazi regime. I haven't read it, but those people I know who have read it (who include at least one history student, who bought the book, which you can't buy in Germany, when he visited me here) found the most chilling passages chilling enough not to be bored by repetition or other aspects of low style in other passages.
Had Goebbels, had he already been in the picture then, written this book, it would without a doubt have caused a huge outcry. As it was, it remained relatively unread as the ramblings of an uneducated fantasist. However, I don't believe that it was quite as unread as a lot of people claimed.
No wonder no one read it when it first came out.
It's true that few people read it when it first came out. However, as the NSDAP gathered traction, a new edition was published, which rapidly sold a lot of copies--1.5m in 1933 after Hitler seized power according to this source:
I can't imagine that it 'wasn't read' during this time. I think it's certain that a lot of people would have read at least part of it, and that the most notorious passages would have attracted enough attention to have been shared among people--in those days, of course, people shared books a lot.
I do think it's true that it was read less again after this surge, although with an estimated 10m copies in circulation by the end of the war, you'd think that more people must have read it than later admitted it--this was the new Imperial Chancellor's book.
The question of who knew what is a very thorny question in German history and needs careful differentiation.
-
i believe that 'angels do god's work' and are among us..
Why?
because i believe in love and the human spirit..
from an ancient belief which pre-dates Islam that originates from north africa..
Can you explain to someone (me!) who has never seen (or otherwise experienced) an 'angel' what form they take or what they do ?
(just trying to get an idea of quite what you mean by the idea that there are 'angels' amongst us doing 'god's work')
-
Can you explain to someone (me!) who has never seen (or otherwise experienced) an 'angel' what form they take or what they do ?
(just trying to get an idea of quite what you mean by the idea that there are 'angels' amongst us doing 'god's work')
Angels appear in christian and islamic beliefs, you are familiar with the Archangel Gabriel?
well he is considered to be the the most important, and the only one who gets closest to God. His appearance to the Virgin Mary (Annunication) and Prophet Mohammed (revealing the words of Allah) which in turn became the Qu'ran are just two examples. I don't confess to seeing angels, i don't need to prove their existence, but i understand their purpose.. as celestial beings here to guide us, as messengers of God.
Another example. All muslims are taught that everyone possesses two angels. one on each shoulder. throughout there lives muslims are expected to greet them, acknowledge them, respect them, these angels never judge only observe and record each deed, one book for good, one for bad. when muslims die, these books are compared, and then that muslim is judged in their life to whether they go to cycling heaven or scrapheap hell.
I never feel alone, never truly alone, even if i haven't seen anyone all day, that inner peace is what keeps me strong. every challenge i face i do without fear. Every failure and success, is a test or a lesson, and some have been monumental. in fact humility is a powerful asset.
This is why I have belief. I don't confess to being muslim but i do understand how its teachings work. There is a greater love out there, you use your heart to find it.
Help!
StandardPractice
hippy
TheorySwine
Crispin_Glover
hugo7
n3il
almac68
Oliver Schick
CYOA
andy.w-
Post a reply
About
Religion. Discuss ( or should that be argue )
Posted by
Why?