Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Should Christianity/Islam be classed as hate speech?

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Personally I would allow the "you're all going to hell" brigade to threaten adults with their crazy views, where I get upset is when they inflict children with them.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7GsjNzrw2Q&feature=player_detailpage#t=4844

    So believers, would that little girl go to hell?

    And if not why not?


  • Options
    #33
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    No offence, but I'm not going to watch an hour and 35 minutes of youtube in order to understand your question. Can you give us the gist?


  • Options
    #34
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    No offence, but I'm not going to watch an hour and 35 minutes of youtube in order to understand your question. Can you give us the gist?

    Apologies, the link starts at the appropriate part of the film. You can start there and watch for three or four minutes.


  • Options
    #35
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    I’m no wiser. All I get is an obviously upset boy asking “Is she going to hell?”, with no mention of who “she” is, or why anyone might think she’s going to hell. And, when reassured that she isn’t, he then concludes that he must be going to hell, because “it’s all my fault” - no clue as to what “it” is. Couple of references in there to “like the bible says”, but no hint as to what it is that the bible is supposed to say, and therefore no idea as to whether the bible actually says it.

    So, I’m no help to you, I’m afraid.

    I do note, though, that what seems to be upsetting the boy is not the prospect of his going to hell, but his sense of responsibility for whatever it is that has happened. (If anything, he almost wants to believe that he’s going to hell, since it will represent some king of justice or atonement for whatever it is that he thinks he’s done.) And, for kids at a particular stage of development, this sense of guilt is pretty common. Kids are basically self-centred - I don’t mean this in a judgmental way, just an observation of a child’s world-view - and believe that the world revolves around them. Therefore, if something bad happens, they tend to think that they are responsible. We have this issue in my own family at the moment - my nephew recently had a serious motorcycle accident. By bad luck his six-year-old son happened to witness the accident and its aftermath - blood, pain, police, ambulance, airlift to hospital, family and neighbours rallying round. The boy (who I’m confident has never heard of hell) was traumatised and now thinks it was his fault. There is no shadow of justification for this belief, but the boy has come up with a rationalisation. ("I told Daddy I'd be home before him, so he was racing, so that's why he crashed.") He worries about this, and apologises constantly to his parents. (My nephew will be fine, and with time and reassurance the kid will be fine too.)

    A kid in this situation will often bring up the prospect of hell, if he has been introduced to it. Ironically, it may conceivably help him in the short term, by giving him a sense that some kind of atonement for his “fault” is possible, which buys him space and time within which to process his feelings. (Not that that’s a reason to be telling him he’ll go to hell!) The real issue here is not his belief in hell, but his sense of personal responsibility for the world, and that’s going to arise regardless of his religious or moral views; it's just a developmental issue. As I say, I have no clue as to what is going on in the film clip, but at this point I have no reason to think that the boy would feel any less upset or any less guilty if he had never heard of hell.


  • Options
    #36
    EganTheMan
    Registered Users Posts: 53 ✭✭EganTheMan


    Any religion that preaches intolerance and incites mobs to attack other sectors should be classified as hate speech


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    EganTheMan wrote: »
    Any religion that preaches intolerance and incites mobs to attack other sectors should be classified as hate speech
    Inciting mobs to attack others is already classified as hate speech. I don't think it makes any difference whether the motivation is religious or not. (Unless you were looking to limit it so that unbelievers could incite mobs to attack without being accused of hate speech?)


  • Options
    #38
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    I’m no wiser. All I get is an obviously upset boy asking “Is she going to hell?”, with no mention of who “she” is, or why anyone might think she’s going to hell. And, when reassured that she isn’t, he then concludes that he must be going to hell, because “it’s all my fault” - no clue as to what “it” is. Couple of references in there to “like the bible says”, but no hint as to what it is that the bible is supposed to say, and therefore no idea as to whether the bible actually says it.

    So, I’m no help to you, I’m afraid.

    I do note, though, that what seems to be upsetting the boy is not the prospect of his going to hell, but his sense of responsibility for whatever it is that has happened. (If anything, he almost wants to believe that he’s going to hell, since it will represent some king of justice or atonement for whatever it is that he thinks he’s done.) And, for kids at a particular stage of development, this sense of guilt is pretty common. Kids are basically self-centred - I don’t mean this in a judgmental way, just an observation of a child’s world-view - and believe that the world revolves around them. Therefore, if something bad happens, they tend to think that they are responsible. We have this issue in my own family at the moment - my nephew recently had a serious motorcycle accident. By bad luck his six-year-old son happened to witness the accident and its aftermath - blood, pain, police, ambulance, airlift to hospital, family and neighbours rallying round. The boy (who I’m confident has never heard of hell) was traumatised and now thinks it was his fault. There is no shadow of justification for this belief, but the boy has come up with a rationalisation. ("I told Daddy I'd be home before him, so he was racing, so that's why he crashed.") He worries about this, and apologises constantly to his parents. (My nephew will be fine, and with time and reassurance the kid will be fine too.)

    A kid in this situation will often bring up the prospect of hell, if he has been introduced to it. Ironically, it may conceivably help him in the short term, by giving him a sense that some kind of atonement for his “fault” is possible, which buys him space and time within which to process his feelings. (Not that that’s a reason to be telling him he’ll go to hell!) The real issue here is not his belief in hell, but his sense of personal responsibility for the world, and that’s going to arise regardless of his religious or moral views; it's just a developmental issue. As I say, I have no clue as to what is going on in the film clip, but at this point I have no reason to think that the boy would feel any less upset or any less guilty if he had never heard of hell.

    Ok, I should not have used this film excerpt. However the point of it is that a thirteen year old girl and a thirteen year old boy become friends. The boy is from a religious family, the girl is from a non religious family. When the girl dies in an accident the boy asks his father if his friend is in hell because she was not a believer in Christianity. The question is 'is she'? And if not why not?


  • Options
    #39
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    obplayer wrote: »
    Ok, I should not have used this film excerpt. However the point of it is that a thirteen year old girl and a thirteen year old boy become friends. The boy is from a religious family, the girl is from a non religious family. When the girl dies in an accident the boy asks his father if his friend is in hell because she was not a believer in Christianity. The question is 'is she'? And if not why not?
    She's not. Why would she be?

    This particular boy may come from a religious family which teaches him that all unbelievers to go hell (though, if the man in the clip is his father, he does not come from such a family) but I don't.

    Neither do most of the Christians of your acquaintance, I'm willing to bet. The belief that all unbelievers go to hell is not a mainstream Christian position.


  • Options
    #40
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    obplayer wrote: »
    Ok, I should not have used this film excerpt. However the point of it is that a thirteen year old girl and a thirteen year old boy become friends. The boy is from a religious family, the girl is from a non religious family. When the girl dies in an accident the boy asks his father if his friend is in hell because she was not a believer in Christianity. The question is 'is she'? And if not why not?

    Surely the answer is 'yes if you believe she is' and 'no if you don't believe she is'. There can hardly be an objective answer to a question about the occupancy of what may or may not be an imaginary plane of existence?


  • Options
    #41
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Absolam wrote: »
    Surely the answer is 'yes if you believe she is' and 'no if you don't believe she is'. There can hardly be an objective answer to a question about the occupancy of what may or may not be an imaginary plane of existence?
    The question as originally phrased by obplayer was addressed to "believers". Unbelievers, obviously, don't think that anybody goes to hell; obplayer was enquiring to what extent believers thought that an unbelieving child would go to hell. The answer, I think, is "not to any very great exent". That would be a minority position, certainly in our society.

    Obplayer did go on to ask "if not, why not?", suggesting that there was at least some kind of default assumption that unbelievers were headed south. But there isn't. I don't feel any need to offer a religious justification as to why this girl wouldn't go to hell unless and until somebody offers an argument that says she will. Nobody, so far, has done that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    The question as originally phrased by obplayer was addressed to "believers". Unbelievers, obviously, don't think that anybody goes to hell; obplayer was enquiring to what extent believers thought that an unbelieving child would go to hell. The answer, I think, is "not to any very great exent". That would be a minority position, certainly in our society.

    Obplayer did go on to ask "if not, why not?", suggesting that there was at least some kind of default assumption that unbelievers were headed south. But there isn't. I don't feel any need to offer a religious justification as to why this girl wouldn't go to hell unless and until somebody offers an argument that says she will. Nobody, so far, has done that.

    But even amongst believers, there are some who will say unbelievers go to hell, and some who say they won't. Without any objective measurement of who's in hell, it remains that the child is only in hell if you believe she is.


  • Options
    #43
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Absolam wrote: »
    But even amongst believers, there are some who will say unbelievers go to hell, and some who say they won't. Without any objective measurement of who's in hell, it remains that the child is only in hell if you believe she is.
    Well, yes. And I think that what obplayer is doing is attempting to find out whether the belief that she is is prevalent among religious believers. Or to suggest that, logically, religious believers ought to believe this and may be embarrassed to have to justify not believing it. Or both.


  • Options
    #44
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    There's always been this underlying idea that atheists were a lot more rational and logical than overly religious types. Certainly, there’s always a condescending tone of more intelligence, on average. And tbh, I would have said it was probably true in the past.
    But threads like this really inject a whole lot of balance to the swing of things.


  • Options
    #45
    Marion Morrison
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 33 ✭Marion Morrison


    RikuoAmero wrote: »
    Now, I got into a discussion on the christian section of these forums and the person I was talking to said that as a non-believer, I choose hell or deserve hell. In other words, by rejecting God (or as I put, by not being convinced) I have earned it. Stop and think for a second. I, a fairly good and decent person, have earned eternal conscious torment because I didn't believe in something that I could not see, hear, feel, smell, or in any other way detect and for which there was no evidence at all. How is this fair?
    Just like how it wouldn't be fair if I denigrated another person because of their sex or race.
    If I in public say "You're a woman, get back in the kitchen", I would face all sorts of social consequences at the very least. I could lose my job, be kicked out of my home (my landlady is a woman)
    However, if I'm told "You're a nonbeliever, you're going to hell to suffer eternal torment (in some fashion or another)", somehow that's okay?

    In my view, THAT is the worst and vilest hate speech imaginable. Infinitely times worse than calling someone of middle-eastern descent a "rag-head, go back to Iraq!"

    So who else here is sick of being told that? If someone does go the "You deserve hell for not believing" route, do you shame them? I will from now on.

    That's quite shocking, what exactly did they post and how did they word it, have you a link to it ?


  • Options
    #46
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    Mellor wrote: »
    Certainly, there’s always a condescending tone of more intelligence

    I've never been conscended to by an atheist in my life, even during the period when I believed. But I've sure been conscended to quite a lot by religious people, especially after they find out I don't believe (there is a certain caste of religious mind which believes not believing in god makes a person of a lesser, impaired, intelligence).

    What certain religious people don't get (and they are in a minority, albeit the most vocal) is that us atheists don't give two shakes of a lamb's tail about their beliefs, as long as they are kept to themselves. What we worry about is religious people trying to force their beliefs on us, as if them having a religion give's them an inside track on morality, on the truth or anything else they can think of that we don't, simply because they can hold an unevidenced position and we can't.


  • Options
    #47
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    I've never been conscended to by an atheist in my life, even during the period when I believed. But I've sure been conscended to quite a lot by religious people, especially after they find out I don't believe (there is a certain caste of religious mind which believes not believing in god makes a person of a lesser, impaired, intelligence).
    Whee you every an extreme fanatical believer?
    There prob 100s of examples on this forum. I'm sure you know the type I mean. Highlighting the ridiculous extremes out there.
    What certain religious people don't get (and they are in a minority, albeit the most vocal) is that us atheists don't give two shakes of a lamb's tail about their beliefs, as long as they are kept to themselves. What we worry about is religious people trying to force their beliefs on us, as if them having a religion give's them an inside track on morality, on the truth or anything else they can think of that we don't, simply because they can hold an unevidenced position and we can't.

    If course you don't any people forcing their beliefs on you. Or criticising your different belief. I don't either, but that's not related to my point.

    I honestly find the idea utterly ridiculous. That the OP could be deeply offended, by a religious person believing he'll go to hell, hell: a place he believes to fundamentally not exist. To then compare it to racism, sexism and hate speech. Not only that, to "pretend" it was the vilest, most disgusting thing he can imagine. If Christian beliefs* offend somebody, why would they bother reading/engaging on the Christianity forum.
    The whole thing strikes me as somebody simply looking for an arguement, then coming back here parading a statement out of context, purely to try and tarnish.


    *do Christians even believe that non Christians go to hell? I wouldn't have thought so, but I don't know.


  • Options
    #48
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    Absolam wrote: »
    Maybe it should be more like 'Should wishing torment on another person be socially unacceptable?'?
    Not that I think it should be socially unacceptable, but in terms of absenting the monotheist/religious element from the question maybe it's more apt.

    But I think there's a distinction to be made between wishing in your heart of hearts for the eternal damnation of that so and so two doors down who's trained his rat like excuse for a miniature dog to crap in your front lawn every evening, and screaming red faced imprecations of torment in the face of a young woman on her way to seek pregnancy advice. From the point of view of the effect it has on another person, rather than from the effect it might have on their immortal soul, which could lead you to a different perspective.

    Yes, that's a very good way of putting it. Wish I had thought of wording the question that way myself. Thanks.
    Peregrinus wrote:
    Ironically, it may conceivably help him in the short term, by giving him a sense that some kind of atonement for his “fault” is possible,
    I would have to disagree with you there, since hell is talked about in forever terms. Telling a child who's done something bad that he'll suffer an eternal punishment introduces to the child the concept of a punishment that does not fit the crime.
    EganTheMan wrote:
    Any religion that preaches intolerance and incites mobs to attack other sectors should be classified as hate speech
    One thing I should have thought about before I started this entire thread (especially with it's original title) is that there are members of C and I who cherry pick what to believe from their holy books. So, you could see a Westboro Baptist Church member expressing delight in their belief that so and so is going to hell and burn forever, but then you could get a member of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_universalism who doesn't believe that people suffer in hell...despite both people using the same source book. At that point, the latter person would say "Why are you calling my belief hate speech?"
    Marion Morrison wrote:
    That's quite shocking, what exactly did they post and how did they word it, have you a link to it ?
    Go into the Christian section here, look in the list near the top for Debates about God and start at page 557 and continue on. I have a discussion going on there with a person named Festus who expresses the belief that there are no atheists, and that I am rejecting his god, and that logically, after death, the only place I can or ought to go is hell.
    In his/her defense, s/he has not used the term "deserves" or outlined exactly what they believe hell to be like, but from how they talk, it's clear what they mean.
    Mellor wrote:
    *do Christians even believe that non Christians go to hell? I wouldn't have thought so, but I don't know.
    Whenever I examine a given religion or given christian denomination's set of beliefs, right near the top is the teaching that there is an afterlife believed to be good and pleasant, and that to get in, one must subscribe to the belief of the existence and supremacy of that religion's god. Reading that logically, this then means that non-believers in that religion are thought to not go into that pleasant afterlife, merely for not believing (instead of doing any negative actions such as murder)
    However, I will admit, there are branches that don't teach the latter, such as universalism (which then brings up a headscratcher as to why bother subscribing at all, if one can enter this afterlife anyway without it?).

    I will admit, I didn't fully think things through before I started this thread, and I'm happy to have been corrected. I'm still of the opinion that publicly expressing "You deserve to go to hell to burn forever because you reject God!" (or words to that effect) is a vile thing to say, on par with racist or sexist statements (irregardless if the person the commented is targeted towards doesn't believe it, it's still vile).


  • Options
    #49
    Marion Morrison
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 33 ✭Marion Morrison


    RikuoAmero wrote: »

    Go into the Christian section here, look in the list near the top for Debates about God and start at page 557 and continue on. I have a discussion going on there with a person named Festus who expresses the belief that there are no atheists, and that I am rejecting his god, and that logically, after death, the only place I can or ought to go is hell.
    In his/her defense, s/he has not used the term "deserves" or outlined exactly what they believe hell to be like, but from how they talk, it's clear what they mean.

    I've had look, but can't see what you refer to, can you post the actual quotes ?

    I'm confused, so they've not used it, as you claimed ? People can easily claim someone else's post, or what some says 'means' something else 'from how they talk' ?, but that's termed as a classic thinking error under CBT.

    Have you asked the poster what they mean if you don't understand it ?

    Even more importantly than some indivuduals post what's the church he claims to follow official teaching on the matter ?


  • Options
    #50
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    Marion Morrison wrote: »
    I've had look, but can't see what you refer to, can you post the actual quotes ?

    I'm confused, so they've not used it, as you claimed ? People can easily claim someone else's post, or what some says 'means' something else 'from how they talk' ?, but that's termed as a classic thinking error under CBT.

    Have you asked the poster what they mean if you don't understand it ?

    Even more importantly than some indivuduals post what's the church he claims to follow official teaching on the matter ?

    This comment here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93070376&postcount=8376

    which was on that thread's page 559
    Festus has expressed this
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93071563&postcount=8387
    on page 560
    "I believe atheists probably don't exist."
    So in Festus's view, atheists have a belief in the supernatural (even while saying they don't), are actively rejecting his god, and therefore choose hell by default.


  • Options
    #51
    Marion Morrison
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 33 ✭Marion Morrison


    RikuoAmero wrote: »
    This comment here

    I'm not sure why you don't post it, but his quote is :

    "That's not what I said. Where you go after your judgement is up to God. Unless you remain obstinate in your rejection of God and choose hell by default. "

    I'm not seeing what you claimed here.

    He seems to be refering to the fact that where you go is up to God at judgement, and if you choose to reject him face to face at judement, you choose hell where there is no God. Quite a few athiests always state that even if God does turn out to exist they will reject him.

    RikuoAmero wrote: »

    which was on that thread's page 559
    Festus has expressed this

    on page 560
    "I believe atheists probably don't exist."
    So in Festus's view, atheists have a belief in the supernatural (even while saying they don't), are actively rejecting his god, and therefore choose hell by default.

    "Does your sister actually play Call of Duty? If so she not only believes it is fun she indulges in it.

    In that case what about people who believe killing other people is fun and they indulge in it. Is it wrong and harmful to punish them for their beliefs?

    As for non-belief. I don't believe in non-belief. If. I believe atheists probably don't exist. I believe there are people who call themselves atheists who claim to believe in nothing but nothing does not exist so they are claiming to believe in something that does not exist which is confusing. To remove the confusion some use the language of spin to redefine their belief system as non-belief. And they call us gullible. In actuality all humans believe in something because they are hard wired to and it is impossible to believe in nothing. "

    All I'm seeing in that post is just something that does not make any sense.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Well, yes. And I think that what obplayer is doing is attempting to find out whether the belief that she is is prevalent among religious believers. Or to suggest that, logically, religious believers ought to believe this and may be embarrassed to have to justify not believing it. Or both.

    I am attempting to find out how prevalent this belief is, that it exists among religious people is unquestionable but how common I don't know.


  • Options
    #53
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    obplayer wrote: »
    I am attempting to find out how prevalent this belief is
    Why?


  • Options
    #54
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 33,867 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Mellor wrote: »
    If course you don't any people forcing their beliefs on you.

    They've largely given up on that with adults, but still do it in 96% of primary schools here.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Options
    #55
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Absolam wrote: »
    Why?

    Why not?


  • Options
    #56
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    obplayer wrote: »
    I am attempting to find out how prevalent this belief is, that it exists among religious people is unquestionable but how common I don't know.

    Also I would like to re-iterate my original point, inflicting this kind of terror on children is vile and unforgiveable.


  • Options
    #57
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    lazygal wrote: »
    Why not?
    Well, because it doesn't seem to make any difference to the op, and because any monotheists posting on an Atheism & Agnosticism can hardly be considered a representative sample of monotheists, so asking the question here would be unlikely to provide a credible answer, whereas looking up say the 5 or 6 largest monothiest religions practicing baptism and professing a belief in hells positions on the matter would most likely provide a more immediate, accurate and comprehensive answer.
    Or in short, it would seem to be a waste of time compared to the more obvious method of obtaining the information.
    obplayer wrote: »
    Also I would like to re-iterate my original point, inflicting this kind of terror on children is vile and unforgiveable.
    I think inflicting any kind of terror on children could be considered vile and unforgivable. But then again, insulating them entirely from the concept that their actions have consequences for which they are responsible could be considered vile and unforgivable.
    Actually, there are tons of things people could do to children that could be considered vile and unforgivable. Thankfully, most people don't do them.


  • Options
    #58
    padohaodha
    Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭padohaodha


    Atheism is so dull.cheer up folks.i dont know if there's a god or not but none of ye or the religious will ever prove the other wrong.well...maybe in the next life hee hee


  • Options
    #59
    Michael OBrien
    Registered Users Posts: 533 ✭✭✭Michael OBrien


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Oh, and since you ask . . .


    Most Christian traditions do find room for a concept of hell, though there are exceptions. (The JWs, from memory, see extinction, not hell, as the destiny of those who don’t make the grade, and there would be others.) But it’s certainly not the case that most Christian traditions teach that non-Christians or atheists will all go to hell. The Catholic church, in particular, which is the dominant Christian tradition in Ireland, explicitly does not teach this, and neither do the Anglicans. That’s not to say that there might not be individual Catholics, Anglicans etc who would assert this, but it’s not mainstream.

    I was raised catholic, surrounded by Catholics, with priests and nuns in my family and the Catholic church does indeed say if you don't believe in Jesus you will go to Hell. While not as bad as protestants, which primarily put works as largely optional over faith, faith in jesus and his rules are key still in going to heaven. This follows on from baptism, where original sin is supposed to be washed away or you will NOT go to heaven. Limbo was also an issue here for newborns that died before baptism. If newborns could not make it to heaven, what chance was there for anyone else.

    Islam may have many varients, but Hell is prominent in that too. Thanks to the contradictory verses, there is a predestination and also supposedly free choice at the same time. Yes, Allah may show mercy but the quran calls all non-believers (non-muslims) the vilest beasts in creation. Practically every Surah has threats of torture in it for non believers and even christians are called wishful thinkers if they think they are saved.

    The only 'possible' mercy Allah might show non-muslims are those that submitted to Islam and they HAVE to be children of the book. Any resistance or independance of thought is haram.


  • Options
    #60
    Michael OBrien
    Registered Users Posts: 533 ✭✭✭Michael OBrien


    padohaodha wrote: »
    Atheism is so dull.cheer up folks.i dont know if there's a god or not but none of ye or the religious will ever prove the other wrong.well...maybe in the next life hee hee

    While deism cannot be disproven, theism in regard to the abrahamic faiths have been disproven in multiple ways. They made historical and scientific claims to support their god that are wrong. If they are wrong, their god is disproven.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Michael OBrien
    Registered Users Posts: 533 ✭✭✭Michael OBrien


    My 2 cents on the OP is the following:
    The religions are not hate speech as they consist of more than JUST the bad parts.
    Anyone who spreads any aspect of the bad parts, including concepts of Sin and Hell, sincerely believing they are true, are not necessarily hateful, just incredibly gullible and credulous.
    However I disagree with some defences, just because I don't believe their lies does not make it any less hateful. Spreading it in society including to our children, as Truth with a capital T is hateful if the person spreading it believes it and is content by it. Is it hate speech however. It depends on the motives involved.
    There are leaders and apologetics that DO commit hate speech by using scriptures to cause hostility towards other people.
    Comparing it with childish beliefs like threats of santa, is inaccurate but terrifying a child with threats, even fictional threats, is still hateful.
    It all comes down to intent of the person expressing it.


Advertisement