[ExI] Religions and violence.

John Clark jonkc at bellsouth.net
Mon Aug 2 20:37:34 UTC 2010

On Aug 1, 2010, at 5:37 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:

> This was part of their official philosophy. It promoted nobilitation of 
> one group (called Aryan race) while enslaving and eradicating  other 
> groups seen as inferior (Jews, Gypsies, Black people, and a little later, 
> Slavic peoples). This was ideology, i.e. theory.

Do you find the official Islamic philosophy to be significantly more ennobling? I don't, in fact most Islamic leaders were very sympathetic to the Nazis. Mohammad Amin al-Husayni was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Osama bin Laden's intellectual godfather; he was given the equivalent of $10,000 a month for making propaganda broadcasts on radio Berlin. In March 1944, he said on the radio that there should be a jihad to "kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion." After the war he fled to Egypt which protected him from extradition for war crimes, in return he recruited former Nazi thugs to work in dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser's government. 

And by the way, the Arabic translation of Hitler's Mein Kampf is the 6'th largest bestselling book of all time among Palestinians. 
>  As I have mentioned in one earlier post, such overreaction is a sign of weakness or 
> lack of confidence. This might be connected with possible cultural shock, 
> that Islamic world experienced after WW2

Maybe maybe not, who cares. Let me say yet again, explaining why something sucks does not stop it from sucking.

> I am not defending it.

Like hell you're not!

> I refuse to attack it before I find good reason for this.

Holy shit! If you can't find something hateful in a philosophy as evil and incredibly stupid as Islam then there is something seriously wrong with you. 

> nobody has given such proof [that God exists], so we have to stick to probability. In 
> case when there are different events possible but we cannot tell anything 
> about their nature, we should give them equal probabilities. I don't 
> recall whose idea this was. However with it we have 50% chances that God 
> actually does exist.

I can neither prove nor disprove that there is a bright green teapot in orbit around the planet Uranus, therefore there is a 50% chance there is a bright green teapot in orbit around the planet Uranus.

> if you want to escape from belief, you cannot use belief-based arguments. So, if you 
> would like to prove that God does not exist, you should use rational arguments.

Are you really suggesting that the infantile fairy tales that are the foundation of Christian and Islamic theology needs to be taken seriously? Is that why you took offense when I said it was all based on a colossal lie and your insistence on putting the word lie in quotation marks? Do really want to defend that stinking pile of colossal BULLSHIT?!!  

  John K Clark 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100802/82c560e6/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list