omaralaoui Posted September 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 i am muslims and i dislike them too, it is cultural and has nothing to do with religion. they constantly come to our car dealership looking for a 2006 and up, with less than 100k miles honda nissan or toyota for 4000$..lol, or better yet, they want to spend around 3000$ but yet ask only for the prices of the best looking (likely the most expensive) cars on the lot and then tell you your asking too much ...or better yet they offer you 6000$ for a 12000$ car...so yeah, disliking them does not make you a racist ,because the majority of them act that way,( including the retarded ayaan hirsi ali )...with that being said, i have met some brilliant somalians, and the majority of them are actually kind, but the way they were brought up is what makes them so repulsive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omaralaoui Posted September 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd237/asiandat/blog/arablounge/arablounge-women1.jpgdroolshe's pretty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omaralaoui Posted September 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 guys like this make matters even worst..how naive do people have to be ?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walid-zafar/ex-muslim-evangelical-exp_b_582225.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 And this thread is the reason why i'm atheist. everyone should read this....Honestly it is a great book.What makes it great? Is it objective and unbiased, or the atheist manifesto? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFM Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 Flying Spaghetti Monster has never inspired terrorist activity. I hold that up as proof for the almighty benevolence of the FSM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 Flying Spaghetti Monster has never inspired terrorist activity. I hold that up as proof for the almighty benevolence of the FSM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 What makes it great? Is it objective and unbiased, or the atheist manifesto?It's more objective and unbiased... It's more an account of one man's opinions how religion is a means of control. In no way do i hold this as the atheists bible if that what you mean. It's just a good read for anyone IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 What makes it great? Is it objective and unbiased, or the atheist manifesto?You ask the same question of the bible? (minus the atheist manifesto part of course) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrillo Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 You ask the same question of the bible? (minus the atheist manifesto part of course) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 You ask the same question of the bible? (minus the atheist manifesto part of course)True. But it wasn't The Bible that was recommended reading. I have been given that recommendation in the past, and did read it, and found it to not to be as advertised, at least IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 It's more objective and unbiased... It's more an account of one man's opinions how religion is a means of control. In no way do i hold this as the atheists bible if that what you mean. It's just a good read for anyone IMO.I appreciate the honest response. While I haven't the opportunity to read it at the moment, I did do some research into it, and found some very stark review of it, and very much all across the board. I agree it will be interesting to read, though I will admit that while I am certainly not atheist, I would entertain hearing one's side of the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 True. But it wasn't The Bible that was recommended reading. I have been given that recommendation in the past, and did read it, and found it to not to be as advertised, at least IMHO.The point was just basically a jab that these types of books usually get criticized/questioned this way while religious texts don't. Why make demands of a book that you haven't of its subject? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 True. While I am going to venture a guess that his text will be as self righteous as the Bible and its proponents are, in being so criticism is fair. I was raised under the Christian faith and while I am not ashamed of that nor do I lament it, as I have grown into adulthood, I, like many, have begun to question aspects of my faith, and the value of following a cultural interpretation of events that are understood to have a holy value. In the same part, I am not of the opinion that science can explain everything and there is not God, becuase clearly science has not yet. Just as those adamant about their religion, those of an entirely emperical perspective have gaps in their story as well. One of the greatest minds in science belongs to Stephen Hawking, who's title is Theoretical Physicist. Theorietical as in pertaining to theory, and theory is unproven. IMHO until theory is replaced with hard evidence, it still is potentially flawed. Just as religion is. So the Newton's Cradle of existence continues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 i'm a fosterite, fo sho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 Dude, that FSM is awesome!! I shall claim allegiance to that!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 True. While I am going to venture a guess that his text will be as self righteous as the Bible and its proponents are, in being so criticism is fair. I was raised under the Christian faith and while I am not ashamed of that nor do I lament it, as I have grown into adulthood, I, like many, have begun to question aspects of my faith, and the value of following a cultural interpretation of events that are understood to have a holy value. In the same part, I am not of the opinion that science can explain everything and there is not God, becuase clearly science has not yet. Just as those adamant about their religion, those of an entirely emperical perspective have gaps in their story as well. One of the greatest minds in science belongs to Stephen Hawking, who's title is Theoretical Physicist. Theorietical as in pertaining to theory, and theory is unproven. IMHO until theory is replaced with hard evidence, it still is potentially flawed. Just as religion is. So the Newton's Cradle of existence continues.You have no idea what a scientific theory really is do you? Again ignorantly science is being held to a standard religion isn't. Science doesn't need to prove there isn't a god, religion needs to prove there is one to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 (edited) You have no idea what a scientific theory really is do you? Again ignorantly science is being held to a standard religion isn't. Science doesn't need to prove there isn't a god, religion needs to prove there is one to begin with.He has a point. The scientific theory has it's "followers" as any other "theory" does. Edited September 22, 2010 by curby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 No, I do. Just not the way you'd like me to have it. And careful of your use of the word ignorant with me. If you would have read my comments and understood them, I am not holding either side of the situation to a higher standard than the other. Personally, I am not interested in whether science can prove their isn't a God anymore than religion can. While science continues to debate and contradict those with faith or belief in a higher being or existence, science itself is rife with accomplised individuals who debate and at times contradict eachother, and quite often based on theory, which, while based primarily on principals of science, are still theory, and therefore not indisputable fact. As vastly different as science and religion are, they are strikingly similar in their arrogance and closed-minded perspective on the other. I have had many arguemnts with those of faith as to the "facts" that they present. In my experience, those devout in faith are often devoid of scientific fact. Yet science has yet to prove the how and why of all things, speaks as if they have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 No, I do. Just not the way you'd like me to have it. And careful of your use of the word ignorant with me. If you would have read my comments and understood them, I am not holding either side of the situation to a higher standard than the other. Personally, I am not interested in whether science can prove their isn't a God anymore than religion can. While science continues to debate and contradict those with faith or belief in a higher being or existence, science itself is rife with accomplised individuals who debate and at times contradict eachother, and quite often based on theory, which, while based primarily on principals of science, are still theory, and therefore not indisputable fact. As vastly different as science and religion are, they are strikingly similar in their arrogance and closed-minded perspective on the other. I have had many arguemnts with those of faith as to the "facts" that they present. In my experience, those devout in faith are often devoid of scientific fact. Yet science has yet to prove the how and why of all things, speaks as if they have. 100% agreeed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 Scientists are always right, like when the world was flat? FAITH - firm belief in something for which there is no proofYou can't really argue that, so you all might as well let this one go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 And Caper comes in here all spweing of common sense and takes away all our fun. Man.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 Scientists are always right, like when the world was flat? FAITH - firm belief in something for which there is no proofYou can't really argue that, so you all might as well let this one go.Except most scientists didn't believe the world was flat and even the ones who did were smart enough to realize evidence suggested otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrillo Posted September 22, 2010 Report Share Posted September 22, 2010 Except most scientists didn't believe the world was flat and even the ones who did were smart enough to realize evidence suggested otherwise.Exactly. Logical proof was submitted, and science changed. Try that with religion.I also like to make the distinction between religion and faith, not the same thing to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AOW Posted September 23, 2010 Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 guys like this make matters even worst..how naive do people have to be ?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walid-zafar/ex-muslim-evangelical-exp_b_582225.htmlas agent "K" so eloquently stated in Men in Black, " A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."Muslims do not own a monopoly on radical lunacy, remember Hitler? or how about those crusades?And Caper comes in here all spweing of common sense and takes away all our fun. Man....He's been pretty much a downer since the proposal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted September 23, 2010 Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 He's been pretty much a downer since the proposali saw your comment in that thread, and now this...you do realize that thread is like 3 years old right? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.