//So, the topic is cleverly selected. Suicide bombers, not the Terrorist//
Any topic is cleverly selected. if not it won’t be a topic. It is science talk. not a political talk. Terrorisam is a concept and suicide is a action. One can terrorize without suicide. Governments do most of the time. the motive of the talk is to discuss what is the rationale behind a human male to kill himself while killing others.

I have seen the video before. Do you think such a video could exists in Sri Lanka during war time in Sri Lanka? Or China about China? I dont think so!
Some Americans are ageist military imperialism since the day one. it’s nothing new.

American military is a huge beast. It needs feeding. regularly and in large scale. I don’t think it will be easy to tame it until there is a supply for it. (just a thought)

Again, I never said there is no democracy in America or Americans are bad or etc, etc, and of course I’m not an anti-American.
The issue is not the democracy in USA but outside USA. While America maintain democracy within USA, they (the Army) support undemocratic states outside. Eg, Saudi Arabia.

Terrorism, suicide bombing etc all these is wrong. These Muslims are limited to a specific number.
What is happening is, anti-Muslims are seeking out those with the loudest voices who fit their own agenda rather than fitting the agenda around the more significant voices, deliberately suggesting a cynicism where all Muslims have synonymous views.

For the burning of Quran they said only 50 supporter and cannot accuse all of Christianity for this planned evil. But, 1.5 billion Muslims across the world have suffered for the past 9 years for the deeds of just 19 lay people with Muslim names.

You know polo as a non-muslim, i am especially concerned with the type of people who take the Kuran too seriously. They are all brainwashed nut jobs, and potential suicide bombers.

In making this remarkably intelligent statement that clearly illustrates your tolerant nature and your intimate understanding of the religion of Islam and that holy book, the qur’an, you’re not guilty of subscribing to stereotypes at all, of course, dodo man.

Al Hamdulillah for the existence of intelligent people like you!

Oh please Mahinda, there ARE people who take the quran waaaaay too seriously. Don’t even bother pretending otherwise. Heck, a lot of sane people actually believe it to be the literal “word of god” with no alterations whatsoever and that every single thing written in it is 100% true.

You can just fuck off, you disturbed, racist, fuckwit.

Apologies to anyone else reading my previous comment – it was made for the exclusive benefit of rookie, who is unlike all the rest of us fools on here, in that he has no redeeming qualities.

Now now, I know you got raped as a child, but there is no need to go off the deep end Mahinda. It’s pretty obvious you’re Muslim.

Mahinda, oh please cut the bullshit. In the kuran the prophet himself explicitly advocates wife beating, the subjugation and annihilation of all ‘kaffir’ and promotes martyrdom in the name of their invisible man in the sky. the haddith derived from the quaran are equally disturbing. Anyone who believes dying in the name of their god will get to screw 72 virgin while a horde prepubescent boys serve you food for all of eternity is screwed up.

I can even get you the surah that advocate all of this

Agree with TWOFTD here. There are objectionable things in the Quran (and also in the Bible mind you). This doesn’t mean that the Quran is “bad” or “evil” – just that taking stuff written in it totally literally is dumb. This applies to the holy books of all religions BTW.

Let’s look at some gems from the Quran here:

- Don’t bother to warn the disbelievers. Allah has blinded them. Theirs will be an awful doom. 2:6

- Disbelievers will be burned with fire. 2:39, 90

- If you believe in only part of the Scripture, you will suffer in this life and go to hell in the next. 2:85

- For disbelievers is a painful doom. 2:104

- Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (But if they desist in their unbelief, then don’t kill them.) 2:191-2

- War is ordained by Allah, and all Muslims must be willing to fight, whether they like it or not. 2:216

- Those who marry unbelievers will burn in the Fire. 2:221

—

Can you see how beliving in stuff like that in a LITERAL sense can do damage??

The Bible also has crappy teachings like that in it, so don’t think I’m picking on Islam.

The stuff there is both inanely stupid and virulent.

rookie, pls refer to my comment to you above

dodo, I do hope you feel quite pleased with yourself for passing judgment on the religion in question, and branding those who choose to live their lives in accordance with the teachings of the qur’an as brainwashed nut jobs, potential suicide bombers and wife beaters.

Not passing judgement buddy just noting an observation. Can you deny that the quran advocates all of that and people out there sanctify stuff like honor killings and stoning women for being raped by citing some hadith somewhere.

I know all Muslims aren’t brainwashed suicide bomber, but that’s because they just don’t read the kuran seriously enough or are one of those apologists who try to assign meanings to sentences that are not really there.

“those who choose to live their lives in accordance with the teachings of the qur’an ”

Well this is a teaching in the quran:

“Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (But if they desist in their unbelief, then don’t kill them.) 2:191-2 ”

You don’t think anyone who follows that decree is a nutjob? Yeah OK Mahinda!!

rookie, pls refer to my comment to you above

dodo, I’m not even slightly interested in getting into an argument with you over the relative merits of the Islamic faith or the teachings of the qur’an. I just find it amusing that you even suggest that anyone who studies the qur’an and lives by its teachings will automatically turn into a brainwashed nut job, potential suicide bomber and wife beater, and find your explanation with regards to why more Muslims aren’t brainwashed suicide bombers (that’s because they just don’t read the kuran seriously enough) even more so.

mahinda, do you believe blowing yourself up in the name of islam will take you to heaven. If yes, you’re a potential suicide bomber if no, you don’t believe in that part of the quran which calls for martyrdom.

If this is a personal question directed at me, dodo, then there are a few small issues that will prevent me from answering this question properly.

a. I’m not muslim

b. I don’t really believe in the concept of heaven

c. I’m not really sure your question is even valid – this “clause” in the qur’an surely did not consider people blowing themselves up in the name of Islam, seeing as PE4, electrical detonators, black and tan, crimping tools and batteries etc were a bit difficult to come by back in the day when this noble and most holy book was made into being or whatever…

No mahinda it’s not a personal question. Anyone can answer it, even i can. And your c. is innane. the call is for martyrdom how you commit martyrdom is non issue here. They even have nice word for the martyrs it’s called Shaheed.

Here’s the prophet right before going off to slaughter of his enemies

“For the sake of you, o Allah, send us back to the world again so that we may be martyred once more”

isn’t it funny how christ, buddha and the other religous leaders devoted their lives to helping people, while the prophet went around slaughtering people for a considerable proportion of his life.

And there is the part about him marrying nine year old and all the parts about playing with her while bathing, a mighty pedobear warning if you ask me. Guess what, there are many muslims out there who justify marriages to prepubescent children using those very verses.

Mahinda, if you actually live by many of the teachings in the Quran, there is a high chance you will end up as a brainwashed nutjob:

- Don’t believe anyone who is not a Muslim. 3:73

- All non-Muslims will be rejected by Allah after they die. 3:85

- Don’t be friends with non-Muslims. They all hate you and want to ruin you. 3:118

- Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers. (See 2:65-66) 4:47

- Unbelievers will be tormented forever with fire. When their skin is burned off, a fresh skin will be provided. 4:56

- Oppose and admonish those who refuse to follow Muhammad. 4:63

- Allah will bestow a vast reward on those who fight in religious wars. 4:74

- Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. 4:89

- The disbelievers are an open enemy to you. 4:101

PSYCHO MUCH??? HELLOOOO??

c. aimed to highlight the fact that a due the indiscriminate nature of suicide bombings, the “martyr” cannot choose whom he kills. For instance, how many “good Muslims” do you think would have been killed during all the recent suicide bombings attributed to Islamic extremists?

So when this particular “martyr” turns up at the Islamic equivalent of the pearly gates expecting a real good time, and is questioned on the deaths of the “good Muslims,” what does he say? “ummmm…. collateral damage?”

The fact that some mullah somewhere advocates for suicide bombings by (mis)quoting the qur’an, does not give you the right to go on a religion bashing rant. This is like saying that the legal system sucks and should be scrapped because a lawyer manages to use a loophole in the system or a technicality to get his murderer-client off the hook (in a country where there is a functioning, independent and fair legal system, i.e. not sri lanka, where anything is possible if you know someone).

I personally think your religion bashing is actually counterproductive – people who share your views and spread them around like you do can claim a good portion of responsibility for the ease with which some of these mullahs manage to convince young, impressionable Muslims to resort to such means as suicide bombings to “protect their religion and people.”

Hate begets hate.

If someone is taught from an early age that the qur’an is the holiest of the holy, and someone like you comes along and says “well its actually a pile of shit – why look what it says here…” what sort of a reaction would you expect from them?

wrt to your nine year old issues, well, this is just a matter of perspective. You and I may think that getting hot and steamy with a nine year old is completely and utterly wrong, but the romans considered a female to be of marriageable age when 3 pubes grew down there. Even recently, I heard of a lobby group in that wonderful country, the Netherlands, which was campaigning for the abolishing of the concept of an age of consent.

rookie, pls refer to my comment to you above

Religious arguments are like deaf people playing drums. I don’t want to get in to that. But i cant stop myself saying something about child rape.

//wrt to your nine year old issues, well, this is just a matter of perspective. //
It’s not. If you understand something as immoral, then it is immoral, even if that happened in the next room, next door, next country or other time period. It’s not matter of perspective. We don’t say killing people was the perspective of the “jack the ripper”, so who we are to judge his perspective? (Who are we not to judge? Who are we kidding? We are much better than Jack the Ripper or an ignorant child rapist in Netherlands)

We are capable of identifying what’s immoral by ourselves. We are somewhat capable of sympathizing with Jack the ripper or Dutch child rapists and their ignorance and social circumstances. But only it takes childhood brain washing, (as you rightly put it, teaching children from early age that one thing is the holiest of the holy) to make someone to believe something wrong that they understand as wrong to be right.

“wrt to your nine year old issues, well, this is just a matter of perspective. You and I may think that getting hot and steamy with a nine year old is completely and utterly wrong, ”

Oh right, so its ok for a 50 year old guy like Muhammad to “do it” with a 9 year old girl?

Yeah ok.

Mahinda you are a moron. nine year old issues is not a matter of perspective. It’s a matter of psychology and biology.

The martyr story is yet another one of you narratives, like i said you may believe that collateral damage is a bad thing. they certainly don’t believe in this interpretation of yours.

And please, it’s not the religion bashing that make things easier for mullahs to recruit suicide bombers. that’s nonsense. There are deeper issues there mahinda.

I would also suggest reading the 613 Mitzvot from the Torah.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvot.

Some of the more controversial laws
# To burn a city that has turned to idol worship Deut. 13:17
# Not to cease hating the idolater Deut. 13:9
# The courts must carry out the death penalty of stoning Deut. 22:24
# The courts must carry out the death penalty of burning Lev. 20:14
# Destroy the seven Canaanite nations Deut. 20:17
# Not to let any of them remain alive Deut. 20:16
# Wipe out the descendants of Amalek Deut. 25:19

I like (and not being cynical)
# Keep the laws of the captive woman Deut. 21:11
# Not to sell her into slavery Deut. 21:14
# Not to retain her for servitude after having sexual relations with her Deut. 21:14

It’s hard to beat Numbers 31, here’s a sampler. After all the term midianite solution comes from this ;)

31:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
31:2 Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites:
31:7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.

31:15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

So basically, kill everything and keep the virgin as fuck toys. And i didn’t even talk about the sacrifices to god bit

LOL I’ve stirred up a bit of a hornets nest, haven’t I?

Dodo and Kollu, please note that I do not, under any circumstances, condone underage sex or marriage.

What I was doing was merely putting things in perspective – if the 3 of us went back in time to the days in which the qur’an first came into being, and started to speak out against child sex or marriage, citing psychology and biology experts, I think we’d find that we were the odd ones out.

Similarly, if we returned to a time when slavery was perfectly acceptable, and started to speak out against slavery, we’d again be the odd ones out.

Do you understand?

What we believe (or know, as the case may be) to be the truth does not always matter if the consensus is against us.

dodo, wrt to your statement
“The martyr story is yet another one of you narratives, like i said you may believe that collateral damage is a bad thing. they certainly don’t believe in this interpretation of yours”.

Considering the above statement and the general theme in your previous comments, I would like to ask you why and how you feel able to speak out on behalf of all practicing Muslims in the world. Cos that’s what you’re doing, isn’t it? You’re saying that all practicing Muslims the world over, who study and live their lives by the qur’an, all believe that suicide bombings are acceptable, right? Just where do you get off, my friend??!

btw, I don’t consider “good Muslims” who die in suicide bombings carried out by Islamic extremists as collateral damage, fyi. I think suicide bombings carried out by Islamic extremists (or anyone else for that matter) are acts of terrorism, period. For which the rest of the Muslim world cannot and should not be held accountable.

With respect to your statement

“And please, it’s not the religion bashing that make things easier for mullahs to recruit suicide bombers. that’s nonsense. There are deeper issues there mahinda”.

I beg to differ with the first part of the statement. What you’re doing is basically inciting hatred on religious grounds – by insulting and degrading what some people consider to be a significant part of a whole which is the reason for their very existence (with the significant part being the holy book and the whole being god and religion), you and people like you make it very easy for these mullah types to spread their message of hate and death.

rookie, pls refer to my comment to you above

Kollu, wrt to your statement, which infers that you are morally superior and conscientious individual,

“It’s not. If you understand something as immoral, then it is immoral, even if that happened in the next room, next door, next country or other time period. It’s not matter of perspective. We don’t say killing people was the perspective of the “jack the ripper”, so who we are to judge his perspective? (Who are we not to judge? Who are we kidding? We are much better than Jack the Ripper or an ignorant child rapist in Netherlands)”

I just thought of asking you what you think of the allegations of human rights abuses against the Tamils during the war…

Because some sri lankans claim that this is an internal affair in which other countries/organizations have no right to interfere, but if these other countries/organizations ignore these allegations, it would also be a bit like you listening to your neighbor battering his wife and choosing not to do anything about it because, surely, that is an internal affair in which you, an outsider, had no right to interfere in…

Mahinda, I don’t think you know crap all about islam. Tell me two things. firstly, what is the punishment for apostasy in Islam. And secondly, what happens to rape victims in islam.

the prophet is the paragon for muslims the ideal human being to emulate. And part of his MO is marrying a nine year old and playing with her in the shower. Don’t you see what’s wrong with that picture. Muslim pervs to this justify marring 9, 10 year old by citing that instance in the kuran. Now do you understand where these people are drawing their ethos from. Christians consider Jesus a paragon and try to emulate him, but that’s fine his character is pretty much clean. Any collection of people who think Mohammad is some sort of ideal is messed up.

And I don’t speak on behalf of all muslims, just the people who take that entire book as word of god not the fluffy type who pick and choose verses to conform to their rosy morals. People who read that books seriously have to admit that people who die while fighting in the name of islam & allah go to heaven. It does taken too many steps from there to become a suicide bomber.

I think it’s pretty absurd to quote passages out of holy books and use ‘em to pass judgment on a religion. It’s more important to look at how the religion is practiced in general. The eastern religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, etc, are largely individualistic and do not have as large a societal component as do the monotheistic religions of the Middle East. And it’s these latter religions which have mostly influenced law and constitutions throughout the world, even in Asia. There are occasional attempts at merging state and eastern religion (like here in SL), but largely religion remains an individual practice, open to many interpretations, and little religious oppression. The monotheistic religions, however, have been brutally oppressive in the past and — in the case of Islam in the Middle East and parts of Asia — still is.

Of the three original monotheistic religions, Judaisim and Christianity have largely turned the corner and become modern religions which allow its practitioners the freedom to interpret religious texts and be secular. For instance, it’s possible to buy pork in Jerusalem. IMO, Islam largely hasn’t turned this corner, and Muslims are not allowed to interpret or choose which parts of the Koran they wish to accept or reject — though in practice many do, this still makes them feel uncomfortable.

Outdated Roman Catholic laws for instance — such as those forbidding contraception and abortion — remain controversial when included in state laws, even within those nations, and I think until this freedom is given to Muslims — the freedom of dissent — Islam will remain a medieval religion, a flag of convenience for extremists, a tool of oppression for many states such as Saudi Arabia, and an easy whipping dog for anti-Islamic sentiment.

David, i certainly don’t think it’s absurd because many people draw their world view by reading these text. Forget about Islam and the east. Take america, they have all the all the freedom to critically analyze text without oppression, yet you still get absurd statistics like 20% of the people believing that the world 6000 years or that gay marriage should be banned and that abortion should be illegal etc.. Where are these people getting this nonsense from. They’re getting it from the text.

I have no issue with the Muslim who picks up the quran and picks and chooses the rosy bits and throws out the wibble. But that’s not the only type of Muslim than Islam creates, this goes for Christianity, as well although they tend to be less trigger happy. The people who pick and choose passages IMHO do so inspite of the text and not because of the text, they probably believe that god is merciful and kind etc.. and interpret the quran through that lens. But if you were to approach the quran interpreting it as the literal word of god spoken through the last prophet you’re in trouble. Because while there a re nice things in there, there is also a lot of messed up shit. This is why I said anyone who takes the quran too seriously is a nut job. And let’s be frank there are many of these people out there

David, you make good points.

The problem is taking everything written in holy books literally. The Bible and the Quran have beautiful teachings in them, but also quite a few shitty ones – like stoning homosexuals, killing non-believers etc etc. The vast majority of Christians tend to ignore the ugly bits and concentrate on the good which is fine, but there is still a lot of disconnect when they claim that God is all loving and all merciful, because according to the Bible, God is jealous and vengeful and kills people at the drop of a hat. Muslims in general tend to take the Quran way too seriously (more literally than Christians going to enourmous lengths to justify every single thing in it. This is the problem with “revealed religions”; the whole religion is built on an assumption that THE BOOK (whatever it is) is the actual word of THE GOD and is thus inviolable.

Ah Blacker’s back, and seems to be in good form, too…

Dodo, you seem to be challenging me to prove my knowledge of the Islamic faith and the qur’an.

Why?

I thought I was questioning your right to claim that all Muslims who study and live their lives by the teachings of the qur’an are nutjobs, potential suicide bombers and wife beaters, as well as questioning the wisdom of the general religion bashing in which you seem to be engaged, not challenging you to a round of mastermind, specialized subject, on Islam/the qur’an…

Now now Mahinda, let try not to put words in people’s mouth. I never said any Muslim is a suicide bomber. I said some very specific things here. I said people who think martyrdom will get you to heaven are nut jobs and suicide bombers. a literal interpretation of the Quran advocated this type of behavior in spades, and without ambiguity. Hense the comment that anyone who takes the Quran too seriously is a nutjob.

And mahinda for you information. In islam apostasy carries the death sentence, remember rashdi. And rape victim can also be killed for being adulterous. Now that’s screwed up.

I’m quite sure you specifically said anyone who takes the qur’an too seriously was a brainwashed nutjob and a potential suicide bomber.

For your reference

“You know polo as a non-muslim, i am especially concerned with the type of people who take the Kuran too seriously. They are all brainwashed nut jobs, and potential suicide bombers.”

Please note the use of the word “all”

Many of my Muslim friends consider themselves to be good Muslims. They try to live in accordance with the teachings of the qur’an. Needless to say, they take the qur’an very seriously. They are not nutjobs and they have never expressed a desire to blow themselves up in the name of allah.

Your tarring of all Muslims with the Islamic extremist brush is unacceptable.

Your little religion bashing exercises are, in my opinion, unwarranted, counterproductive and unworthy of an intelligent person such as yourself.

Mahinda, I have quite a few muslim friends as well. why don’t you ask your friends if they think dying in the name of allah is a ticket to heaven or not. if they think it is, they’re potential suicide bombers seriously fucked in the head. If they don’t think this is great idea then they are denying some very explicit passages in the quran. Not only that, if they can pick and choose verses from the quran that mean they draw their morals from a different source. Because they are certainly passing value judgments on certain Koranic verses. you can ask them this as well. and i never said all Muslims are potential terrorists.

The religion bashing stays mahinda, I’m not a fan of religion they need to go away. Therefore i will bash

Religion bashing merely creates unnecessary animosity, in my opinion.

Trying to bash away religion will be about as effective as trying to kill an angry leopard with a paper clip.

I once read a very detailed and interesting study on the subject touched upon in the following article

http://articles.cnn.com/2007-04-04/health/neurotheology_1_scans-frontal-lobe-sensory-information?_s=PM:HEALTH

Religion means a lot to some people. To some, their religion is more important than their very lives.

So if you approach a proper bible basher type, or their Islamic (or other) equivalent, and attempt to convince them that their religion is somehow flawed, especially in the way you choose to go about it,that is sure to elicit a response similar to one you would expect if you called their mother a filthy diseased whore.

A lot of Muslims will believe every word written in the qur’an, even the bits that you find so upsetting. But this does not mean that they automatically become nutjobs, potential suicide bombers, and wife beaters.

And who the hell are we to go and tell them that their religion is flawed and their holy book is full of shit? Are they not entitled to practice their religion in peace?

Mahinda, I generally bash religion because i can i have no intention of converting people. And you’re right hardcore fundies cannot be changes they are either ignorant, in which case they need to go to school, or they really really screwed up, in which case they are in need of a lobotomy. But mahinda there are many people who are mildly religious who already have nagging doubts, they can easily be turned.

If you believe every word of the quran you also believe in martyrdom, the murder of apostates and you also think that eve had something to do with adam’s ribs. who are you trying to kid, what do we call people with this set of beliefs.

And i have every right tell them their religion is flawed etc.. 1) because they are flawed. 2) because they do tangible damage to society. And if they get offended, they should learn to live with it. and why is it that people find it ok to criticize politics etc, but talking about religion is a nono. Why is the religious apple cart special. That’s just bullshit.

Dodo & Zombie, you fail to see my point.

“i certainly don’t think it’s absurd because many people draw their world view by reading these text.”

It’s not the reading of the texts, but the interpretation of it, which is my point. You point out that Christians pick and choose what they wish to believe, and that they don’t take the Bible as the literal word of God. That’s incorrect — Christians DO believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. The difference is that the Bible encourages interpretation, and the New Testament actually is an interpretation of the Old Testament, with Jesus revising many things for a new and changed world that had emerged (eg: preaching not just against adultery, but also premarital sex). His teachings were then interpreted further by his disciples and the apostles (eg: Paul’s dream about the raising of the ban on certain meats, like pork, etc). Modern Christianity — especially Protestantism — has been even further interpreted by modern theologians (the debate on gay marriage and ordination, for example).

“I have no issue with the Muslim who picks up the quran and picks and chooses the rosy bits and throws out the wibble”

I’m sure you don’t, but the Muslim world does, and that is because Islam doesn’t allow for interpretation. Which is my point. It’s not the religion that is the problem, but the practice of it today. Christians have had it easy because, as I said, the New Testament basically waived many of the Old Testament laws and decrees, or hinted that the spirit of the law was more important than the letter of it. Nevertheless, the Jews have managed to turn this corner as well, in spite of the fact that they don’t have a New Testament. Perhaps it’s Judaisims’ long exposure to the western world that has done it. Whatever the reason, Islam too needs to find this key, so that Muslims can officially sanction the more liberal viewpoints that many of them practice anyway.

As I said, a lot of the things you accuse Islam of are in fact just excuses used by fundamentalists, oppressive governments, and cultural conservatives to excuse their brutal and unjust behaviour. We see this done by fundamental American Christians, and Israeli Jews, though on a far smaller scale. We see it right here in Sri Lanka, with the government and Buddhist clergy using religion as an excuse for oppression.

Islam can make the needed transition so that the public face of the religion is no longer that of its fundamental extreme. For that, the moderate and secular Muslims must make their voices heard as loudly as the other end of the spectrum.

Christians have had it easy because, as I said, the New Testament basically waived many of the Old Testament laws and decrees, or hinted that the spirit of the law was more important than the letter of it. Nevertheless, the Jews have managed to turn this corner as well, in spite of the fact that they don’t have a New Testament.
Actually, the Jews did a good bit of the turning the corner before the advent of Christianity. For instance, the ‘eye for an eye’ rule was interpreted by the Pharisees as being a requirement that the offender pay monetary compensation to the victim as compensation for the loss caused by the injury (earning capacity, pain, cost of treatment, etc.), much like the modern civil law, well before Christ. You’ll find the discussion in the Talmud, tractate Baba Kamma 83b onwards. And – again before Christ – there’s Hillel’s encapsulation of the entire body of Jewish law in the two sentences: “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the entire law, the rest is commentary.” It could have been Roman influence that sparked this, but it was as likely an indigenous development – this was a couple of centuries before Ulpian, after all.

I’d say most religions evolve towards humanism by reinterpreting old laws, not by abrogating them. Christianity in that sense was an exception, as was Buddhism. Islam’s been pretty close to embarking on this process a number of times (and, indeed, there are sects of Islam that’re pretty far down that road – the Nizari, for example, arguably are). We might speed the process along a bit if we figured out that painting things as a clash of civilisations or telling people to choose whether to be “with us” or “against us” wasn’t likely to help.

Is he just cool as a person or is there something special about his theories?
I should read the book. I’m hovering somewhere around agnostic at the moment, and am curious to know how atheists explain the awesomeness of the universe we know.

What part of the universe you think so awesome?
Well, if you don’t have time to read the book, there is youtube channel.

Everything! from the smallest atom, or even sub-atomic particle, at least the bit I understand. I did read something that Bertrand Russel once wrote, about science showing, that what we see as the absolute precision of nature is merely something like a statistical average, and that was written pre world war 2, I think. But I can’t reconcile myself to the idea that all the complexity or simplicity we see around us has no real purpose. My strict catholic upbringing will surely influence my perceptions to a certain extent however much I try to have an open mind.

I much prefer books to youtube, though if I don’t get hold of it, I’ll probably browse around. Of course it’s much nicer to talk to other people who’ve studied it, as long as they are patient with foolish questions. ; )

I feel earth is pretty. But we are sitting ducks on an object that moves 64800km/h, and that can get hit by any other millions of faster moving objectat any time. It happens to thousands of objects in our telescopic range in evrey second. I know lambs are cute and cuddly. But have you seen the parasite that goes in to it’s eyes and eats the poor thing and till it dies in agony. I know human eye is awesome, but do you know it have an blind spot? Do you think Canon would ever make a camera with a blind spot in it? Well, I can go on about our human body alone on pages. But my point is – yes everything is awesome in the limit that we are capable of feeling awesomeness. But not any bit of for our advantage or for our delight.

About influence, you are not alone. :)

Books are friends. But Youtube is wonderful too :)

When the lamb is sick, does it give up? The lamb still strives to survive. Why? How is that will to live, built in to our genetic make up? Is it purely chemical? Why don’t we all commit hara kiri before the meteorite hits us? Just because we’re here and might as well enjoy it while we can? Are those stupid questions?

I’m only still getting used to youtube, prefer the old fashioned way, or maybe just lazy, I guess.

Well, beauty complexity and simplicity are not properly defined terms. What some people consider beautiful others think is ugly. Same goes for complexity and simplicity. The same goes for order and chaos. well except if you’re an mathematician, we have a proper definition for chaos. You can also define maximal disorder from a thermodynamic sense. But beyond that it’s all subjective.

So when shammi says the universe is she’s actually making a sort of aesthetic statement. So arguing about whether the universe is awesome or not is fairly useless in my opinion. If you find the universe awesome it’s cool, shammi.

Those are great questions. You can see those questions popup repeatedly in those discussions.
Happiness is necessary. (unhappy people don’t get girls)

I think there are two sides to this. “Why we live?” question can have a spiritual or philosophical answer and “how we live?” question can be a scientific answer. I find in religion background, answer to “Why” influence answer to “how” and in science answer to “how” influence answer to “why”. I personally find how question is far more fascinating than why question.

Dobo, we are defiantly not arguing :) But if we did, useless things are what make life beautiful. Art, music, lunu-miris, Lady Gaga.

Mahinda,

Yes. I’m morally superior to child rapists. It’s nothing much. But I am.
// I just thought of asking you what you think of the allegations of human rights abuses against the Tamils during the war…//
I don’t think much about allegations. But abusing humans are wrong.

You are running to an deferent direction in the last para. We can talk about “what we should do about the wife beater” once we are intellectually capable of identifying abusing the woman is wrong.

Lady gaga is a nono in my book

the set up isn’t random at all. Mutations are random( even this is strictly wrong) but which mutations survive are mostly due to natural selection(there are other stuff like drift as well) which isn’t random.

Natural selection as I understand means, whatever characteristic, freak or inherited, that is best suited to surviving in a new or changed environment will survive. But the change in conditions is random, isn’t it? Even if the elements acted according to the laws of physics, there would be several probable outcomes, and the final outcome would be influenced by a million different factors.

When you say mutations are not strictly random is it because even they are caused by some outside stimulation which is the result of a separate chain of events? Haven’t come across the word drift, I think. Must read it up. I waste loads of time these days on meaningless things, so might as well. Thanks for responding Dodo, and sorry for being a pain.

Actually when I said randomness I was referrring to how it all started. Now don’t say that to imagine a beginning is being anthropomorphic, that would make my head spin. : )
After being told all your life that you were special in the eyes of God, you don’t want to go to a place where you’re only as special as a bit of pond scum.

Dodo, I’ve been reading and reading and simply come up with more questions than answers. But the subject is fascinating. Wish you had started your forum so that I could access your RAM instead of doing so much cross reference. Does that sound selfish? It must be a gene.

Well, no seemed particularly interested in the forum so i gave up. What exactly have you been reading?

Oh, and remember the answer is always 42

Yes, it would have been a waste of effort. A pity, because even this topic is rather irrelevant to the post and of no interest to anyone else.

Anyway, before going to the more profound issues I’ve been looking at the theory of evolution. In school we learnt it in relation to survival of a species, and thinking about it in terms of survival of a gene gene is a novel concept to me. I tried youtube, but it was a bit of a drag, because the preliminaries usually took about fifteen minutes of the video before actually getting to the subject. Then I tried googling a few words related to the things that puzzled me, and selecting whatever articles that seemed relevant.

I tried homosexuality and evolution and the results puzzled me further, so I’ve put it aside for the moment.
Now I’m thinking about the earliest forms of life. Assuming that natural selection at this stage would require a considerable amount of diversity, and sexual reproduction being a complex process, was the variety totally based on mutation?
If sexual reproduction happened then, wouldn’t the creation of matching gametes, with alleles dividing equally, require a high level of precision?
Then there is the occurence of division of labour, how it could happen in an early multicellular oragnism, with nothing like a nervous system? Even the workings of a nucleus in a unicellular organism to me seems to require something like what we refer to as a life force.
The stages in the development of a foetus prior to the development of it’s nervous system, where a million things could go wrong seems like a complete wonder.

Are there some sites that you could recommend? And what was that about ’42′???

You are so smug and wicked! I spent a good half hour trying to find out what 42 was. I hope you get abducted by a UFO and tortured by aliens, today.

Shammi, all of evolution happens through mutations. But all of evolution isn’t natural selection. There are neutral theories of evolution as well as concepts like ‘spandrels’. You should read dawkins books on evolution. Especially Climbing Mount Improbable & the blind watchmaker. they’ll answer alot of the type of question you have.

Still around?? The aliens must have been gentle : )
I think I’ll read Dawkins’ books, assuming my A level biology of so long ago can cope with them. Those are the first two aren’t they? I’d only heard of the last one before.

They’re very easy to read. I’ve never taken a biology class in my life.

Dodo, I managed to borrow Mount Improbable from the library and just started on it, where your hero seems rather preoccupied with a fig. I’m expecting him to at least convince me to buy a Rs. 10/- lottery ticket by the time I come to the end. I also hear they’ve discovered a very earthlike planet somewhere. Maybe it’ll help to throw some further light on things.

Funny that you mentioned about the planet. i was talking to an old university friend of mine who’s now at the U of A observatory and he’s saying that we might soon be able to probe into the atmosphere of these planets. That should be able to tell us if these planets have atmospheres capable of sustaining life

Neat! Hopefully I’ll get to see an alien something during my lifetime. Even ghosts have eluded me so far.

Hey Dodo, I’m in the last chapters of Mount Improbable and though the contents so far have been quite riveting, it’s only now the author is getting to some of the questions I had. I wasn’t impressed with his claim that “nobody knows how it happened but, somehow, without violating the laws of chemistry and physics, a molecule arose that just happened to have the properties of self-copying – a replicator.”, but I’ll wait until I get to the end.
And guess what, I even found this very interesting blog that deals specifically with Dawkins, evolution, biology and religion. The blogger seems to have abandoned it recently, so I’m not sure whether I’ll get any replies to the comments I posted there, but at least I can get some information.

I think dawkins has a website that run a forum or something like that. it should give you some answers

No, no, no. This one’s perfect.
I’ve also decided that I don’t want to know too much on the subject. You see, they’ve discovered that the happiest people on earth (out of those studied) based on how acutely some happiness centre in the brain was stimulated, are some isolateed meditating lamas of Tibet and some cloistered nuns who spent the whole time praying. I can believe that you know, because from pictures of the young Dawkins and the recent one, he does seem to look rather tired and drawn. Do you think he could be having second thoughts?
I don’t really want to be as happy as those hermits, but I’ll just attempt to strike a balance between enough cynicism to stop me from feeling guilty if I don’t attend mass on Sunday and enough faith to be able to have someone to pray to when I get in to a wrong train and end up in some unknown railway station.

Oh please spare the wibble. The drool gets stale very quickly.

Tell me the punishment for apostasy and adultery according to the quran in ‘context’

stoning to death was never contemplated by Islam as a punishment for the act of adultery, because the Qur’an does not even contain the word “stoning”. It is an ancient form of capital punishment. There are historical reports of stoning from Ancient Greece

Few Muslim countries, such as Afghanistan, Iran, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia (Few executions happaened but media exaggerated ) claim thay are part of HADITH. But, not. These hadiths are not authentic or true.

I don’t care how they die what is the punishment for apostasy and adultery in islam.

What happens toa person who decides to abandon islam?

” … Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error …” QURAN [2:256]

This is Islam’s unambiguous affirmation of freedom of faith, which also applies to changing of faith.
the issue has been clouded by media due to mixing the issue of apostasy with treason. Now one of the biggest tools of anti-Islam/anti-Muslim propaganda is based on the issue of apostasy, claiming that Islam does not uphold the freedom of faith.

Now let’s not take things out of context here. That surah doesn’t say anything about what happens to people who refuse to convert from islam. And your interpretation is severely contradicting host of other ‘divine’ proclamations in the Quran. I don’t think i need to point them out, do I.

Moreover, the majority of Islamic ‘scholars’ don’t even remotely buy your story. For example the recent fatwa issued by some ‘supremely eminent’ fucked up pieces of shit operating out of some Egyptian university puts it very clearly that apostasy mean death. And this is the same type of bullshit that sent a lynch mob after Salman Rushdee. Let’s face it, the contextualization you seem to support is not majority opinion.

And it’s easy for you to wash your hand and say the hadith, of which there are several, that support the death penalty are illegitimate. Or some grand western conspiracy. But people die because of that and many other people are severely repressed.

These are not my own opinions or statements of out of content, but opinion of Muslim scholars. The problem is you don’t hear these voices in popular media. Fatwa to kill or some other hatred speeches are wrong not Islamic. These Muslims are limited to a specific number. But, media is trying to generalize it. What is happening is, anti-Muslims are seeking out those with the loudest voices who fit their own agenda rather than fitting the agenda around the more significant voices, deliberately suggesting a cynicism where all Muslims have synonymous views.

You speak about the people die or repressed. Who is repressed? Who is dying? by whom? Today media is spreading Islamiophobia. And Muslims all over the world are repressed or killed, falsely identified as dangerous lot to be eliminated. The suspects of 9/11 yet to be proved of guilty, yet, 1.5 billion Muslims across the world have suffered for the past 9 years for the deeds of just 19 lay people with Muslim names.

In Islamic law (sharia), the consensus view is that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder or converted under duress, for example, due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi’a scholars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#Execution

So much for “Let there be no compulsion in religion”

Ah..So… you think Wikipedia is right Quran is wrong…?
This is the problem.. Please read my above comment again. Media includes Internet as well.

The punishment for apostasy from Islam is a controversial topic for Muslims living in the West and for ex-Muslims everywhere. That’s because Islam teaches that apostates are to be killed. We know from historic Islamic documents that during Muhammad’s lifetime, and the lifetimes of the next four “Rightly Guided Caliphs”, tens of thousands of Muslims left the faith of Islam and thousands were killed. On a large scale the Muslims made war on groups that chose to leave Islam and massacres of apostates occurred. On a smaller scale individual apostates were executed. This death sentence is in effect whether or not the apostasy occurred in or out of the Islamic state.

….On the other hand, Muslims living in the West are embarrassed by this death sentence. The West values the freedoms of thought and speech, Islam does not, and these virtues have never blossomed under Islamic rule. Consequently, when asked about the Islamic law for apostates many Western Muslims do their best to cover up Islam’s edict. Motivated by conviction, or shame, they make up various defenses and say whatever they can to put your mind at ease and make Islam more acceptable to a naïve, gullible, and ignorant Western audience. It is not difficult to make the Quran dance and say what you want it to say.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm

Dear mr.Quran, that wiki article is properly referenced, and the sources are all academic literature. So unless you think the entirety of western and non-western academia is engaging in some grand conspiracy against islam, your last two posts are merely silly acts of denial.

Ruki, http://www.answering-islam.org is an anti Islamic Site. Anyway, thanks for posting as readers could see how these sites are misleading the mass.

Dodo, I don’t need to explain why Wikipedia is not reliable. Still,…a quote from the artice:

” a number of scholars argue the punishment is reserved for those who have committed treason against the Muslim community,..”

Did you read the whole article? Read the section “OPPOSITION TO EXECUTION.
- – - – - – - – -
QURAN says (4:137)
“Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again) and (again) reject faith, and go on increasing in unbelief, – Allah will not forgive them nor guide them on the way.”

The atmosphere of this verse is that of free will and freedom of choice to everyone. If Allah wanted he would have said something about the punishment, but Allah takes this to be clearly a private matter between them and Allah.

You will find many verses in the Quran that teach us NO PUNISHMENT for an apostate.

In all the religion you will find extremist and in very small number

The interpretation of those (a very small number) who prohibit women from education, even though Islam clearly allows education for women, and prohibit them also from driving, and oppress men by forcing them to grow beards, even though beards are NOT mandatory in Islam, doesn’t mean much to me or majority of true Muslims. But, as I said before, what is happening is, anti-Muslims are seeking out those with the voices who fit their own agenda rather than fitting the agenda around the more significant voices.

Guys, again and again I’m telling, don’t take the Islam as presented by Media/Internet. Instead, try to understand the real Islam.

Cheers!

I would have thought that was a prelude to disclaiming a creator. You sound like you’ve written a thesis on this stuff.

nah. I know next to nothing about actual biology. This is just random shit i’ve accumulated over the years

Laughed so hard, feel compelled to make confession and serve penance. Where on earth does this stuff come from? I’m guessing it’s one of a series of sculptures, and this is one that depicts Christ in prayer.
The fact is, Christ used words and special effects to such advantage that he still commands a following far greater than any Darwin and Dawkins put together.

It seems you need go little bit deep into this theory. As a starting point read the following post.

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/free-will-and-biology/

“free will” and an “all knowing God” don’t make sense. Just more theistic bullshit.

“Free Will and GOD” make perfect sence,… How?

If there were no free choice for man, the whole concept of man’s religious accountability would be unjust. The oppressive ruler would deserve no blame and the just would merit no praise.

Then Why GOD?

Take the example of electric lamp in your home. You have to switch it on to bright your house. But It derive their light from the power station and it must constantly receive energy from the same source in order to remain alight.

Similarly, our power derives from God and He can withdraw it from us at any moment, but He has assigned the manner in which we make use of that power entirely to our free choice.

Mahinda, the power that keeps us running isn’t god it’s called ‘food’. So unless you worship your carrots, stop this nonsensical wibble.

Lol.. pretty obvious mahinda is a religious nutjob. Yes yes, a magical creature in the sky puffs life into you and then when you get old he/she/it breathes in and then you die.

If you believe in a God and you believe he is all knowing, then you have no free will to act on your own. See if he is all knowing then everything you will do is already known to God, thus leaving you to just act to what he already knows.