Terrorism - how will this all end?
Discussion
rscott said:
AJL308 said:
The pork thing is one of the irrational things I was getting at in my previous post. Why pork? There is no reason for it. I can kind of see the reasoning behind alcohol but not pork. It's irrational. Religion is irrational.
Wikipedia is your friend - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_restrict... - references the quotes from various religious texts which forbid pork.Or for Hindus - https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_cow
del mar said:
AJL308 said:
The pork thing is one of the irrational things I was getting at in my previous post. Why pork? There is no reason for it. I can kind of see the reasoning behind alcohol but not pork. It's irrational. Religion is irrational.
Because a man 1500 years ago who knew nothing about science or health matters said it was dirty ! The fact that we have since demonstrated that it isint can't over ride what was said 1500 years ago !????How any sane person can live their life based on things said when we thought the world was flat is beyond me.
We are constantly being told that everyone has to 'respect' everyone else's religions. Why should I have any respect for something which is clearly irrational?
BigLion said:
Pork is viewed as 'filthy meat'.
Rscott - a direct question :
Do you without any hesitation, wish that all Muslims terrorists who plan to attack civilians, whether in ISIS or otherwise, are the absolute scum of the earth and the world would be a better place if USA drones killed them all ?
I wish there weren't terrorists of any kind, religious or otherwise.Rscott - a direct question :
Do you without any hesitation, wish that all Muslims terrorists who plan to attack civilians, whether in ISIS or otherwise, are the absolute scum of the earth and the world would be a better place if USA drones killed them all ?
No, I wouldn't want US drones to take them out - I'd want it to be a combined force with many countries involved. No one country should be judge and executioner over others. Ideally it'd be a UN led mission involving more than just Western countries.
Leaving it to just the US would only lead to another round of terrorists in the future who set out to get their revenge on the (in their view) evil Western country who attacked them.
There is absolutely no need to be religious in this day and age, it is utterly preposterous.
Long gone are the days of people being told the earth was flat and that the whole world flooded in 40 days and 40 nights.
Recent census and poll results have shown that for the first time, the UK Is now a predominantly 'non believing' country. Religion or belief in a god, is very rapidly decling across the developed world.
I cannot for the life of me understand why Islam is not being ditched at the same rate as Christianity/Catholicism etc. Surely young Muslims have no interest in actually being Muslim? It's not the year 1400 and we aren't in the Middle East.
As far as I'm concerned, the decline of organised religion is a good thing, and the sooner the Muslim community gets up to speed, the better.
Then perhaps we won't have much left to argue about.
Long gone are the days of people being told the earth was flat and that the whole world flooded in 40 days and 40 nights.
Recent census and poll results have shown that for the first time, the UK Is now a predominantly 'non believing' country. Religion or belief in a god, is very rapidly decling across the developed world.
I cannot for the life of me understand why Islam is not being ditched at the same rate as Christianity/Catholicism etc. Surely young Muslims have no interest in actually being Muslim? It's not the year 1400 and we aren't in the Middle East.
As far as I'm concerned, the decline of organised religion is a good thing, and the sooner the Muslim community gets up to speed, the better.
Then perhaps we won't have much left to argue about.
I think the pork thingb is quite straightforward. It's safe now because we can store and cook it easily, and can clean the utensils properly etc. Without the ability to do that pork is dangerous. Of course the people prohibiting pork millenia ago didn't know the micro biology of it, but they pulled a clever trick as presumably the people who shunned pork got sick less often.
How chicken escaped this I have no idea?
How chicken escaped this I have no idea?
NinjaPower said:
There is absolutely no need to be religious in this day and age, it is utterly preposterous.
Long gone are the days of people being told the earth was flat and that the whole world flooded in 40 days and 40 nights.
Recent census and poll results have shown that for the first time, the UK Is now a predominantly 'non believing' country. Religion or belief in a god, is very rapidly decling across the developed world.
I cannot for the life of me understand why Islam is not being ditched at the same rate as Christianity/Catholicism etc. Surely young Muslims have no interest in actually being Muslim? It's not the year 1400 and we aren't in the Middle East.
As far as I'm concerned, the decline of organised religion is a good thing, and the sooner the Muslim community gets up to speed, the better.
Then perhaps we won't have much left to argue about.
I wonder what % of Western Muslims go to mosque because it's the correct thing to do socially and they have to be seen to do the 'right thing' .Long gone are the days of people being told the earth was flat and that the whole world flooded in 40 days and 40 nights.
Recent census and poll results have shown that for the first time, the UK Is now a predominantly 'non believing' country. Religion or belief in a god, is very rapidly decling across the developed world.
I cannot for the life of me understand why Islam is not being ditched at the same rate as Christianity/Catholicism etc. Surely young Muslims have no interest in actually being Muslim? It's not the year 1400 and we aren't in the Middle East.
As far as I'm concerned, the decline of organised religion is a good thing, and the sooner the Muslim community gets up to speed, the better.
Then perhaps we won't have much left to argue about.
Not so dissimilar to many who attended churches even as recently as the 1970s.
AJS- said:
I think the pork thingb is quite straightforward. It's safe now because we can store and cook it easily, and can clean the utensils properly etc. Without the ability to do that pork is dangerous. Of course the people prohibiting pork millenia ago didn't know the micro biology of it, but they pulled a clever trick as presumably the people who shunned pork got sick less often.
How chicken escaped this I have no idea?
Which shows the utter lunacy of religion. And we are supposed to 'respect' people's beliefs in this rubbish.How chicken escaped this I have no idea?
It also shows an advantaghe of religion though. It encouraged people to avoid a dangerous meat centuries before we knew exactly why it was dangerous or communicate this to the population at large.
The problem is sticking to it "religiously" once we know better. Then you start to weigh the food poisoning avoided against the hunger and malnutrition caused by avoiding a perfectly good food source.
The problem is sticking to it "religiously" once we know better. Then you start to weigh the food poisoning avoided against the hunger and malnutrition caused by avoiding a perfectly good food source.
I know NicheMonkey has checked out and I applaud his passion and viewpoint, but would actually like to know his views on this point about blindly following a "rule" which was relevant 1500 years ago, but completely meaningless now (but being used as a religious adherence measure). He/She seems like an intelligent, well educated person who still sticks to this rule. Why ?
Edited by Speed 3 on Monday 25th July 19:24
AJS- said:
It also shows an advantaghe of religion though. It encouraged people to avoid a dangerous meat centuries before we knew exactly why it was dangerous or communicate this to the population at large.
The problem is sticking to it "religiously" once we know better. Then you start to weigh the food poisoning avoided against the hunger and malnutrition caused by avoiding a perfectly good food source.
It is in no way a 'benefit' of religion. The concept that certain things may be hazardous to us does not require religious belief to accept as fact.The problem is sticking to it "religiously" once we know better. Then you start to weigh the food poisoning avoided against the hunger and malnutrition caused by avoiding a perfectly good food source.
An all powerful, all knowing omnipotent deity who wants us all to love him, decides the most effective method of this is
a/ Tell everyone on the planet himself.
b/ Appoint hundreds of thousands of people to tell everyone on the planet within a few days
c/ Chose some illiterate bloke in the arse end of nowhere
a/ Tell everyone on the planet himself.
b/ Appoint hundreds of thousands of people to tell everyone on the planet within a few days
c/ Chose some illiterate bloke in the arse end of nowhere
Accepting that things are harmful without having solid proof does require some faith, though not necessarily an all encompassing religion. It's now relatively easy to get solid proof of most things, but that's a very recent development. I would imagine some sort of susceptibility to religion is an evolutionary mechanism to allow us to accept certain things before we have proof.
Getting a little bit off topic mind you... haha
Getting a little bit off topic mind you... haha
Please accord Muslims with some respect, their religious view iabout pork is based on risks observed centuries ago that a parasite, trichinosis, can be contracted by eating pork, as it was endemic then- still is in some parts of the world. That might not be relevant now but it had a rational basis. Let's have a bit less knee jerk reaction guys. I too am ambivalent about religion btw, but believe we need a code of ethics otherwise the world would be a worse place than it is already- ( steps down from soap box)
longtimeracer said:
Please accord Muslims with some respect, their religious view iabout pork is based on risks observed centuries ago that a parasite, trichinosis, can be contracted by eating pork, as it was endemic then- still is in some parts of the world. That might not be relevant now but it had a rational basis. Let's have a bit less knee jerk reaction guys. I too am ambivalent about religion btw, but believe we need a code of ethics otherwise the world would be a worse place than it is already- ( steps down from soap box)
This is the point though - 'centuries ago'. We live in the 21st Century now, not the 15th.Not to accept that today there is little problem eating pork and storing it for eating, etc, is completely irrational. The fact that it has entrenched its self so deeply into religious ideology, even to the point that Muslims see pigs as 'offensive' to their sensibilities is tin foil hattery, quite frankly.
The fact that people should accord that stance with 'respect' is insulting.
AJL308 said:
This is the point though - 'centuries ago'. We live in the 21st Century now, not the 15th.
Not to accept that today there is little problem eating pork and storing it for eating, etc, is completely irrational. The fact that it has entrenched its self so deeply into religious ideology, even to the point that Muslims see pigs as 'offensive' to their sensibilities is tin foil hattery, quite frankly.
The fact that people should accord that stance with 'respect' is insulting.
+1Not to accept that today there is little problem eating pork and storing it for eating, etc, is completely irrational. The fact that it has entrenched its self so deeply into religious ideology, even to the point that Muslims see pigs as 'offensive' to their sensibilities is tin foil hattery, quite frankly.
The fact that people should accord that stance with 'respect' is insulting.
I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Respect me!
AJL308 said:
longtimeracer said:
Please accord Muslims with some respect, their religious view iabout pork is based on risks observed centuries ago that a parasite, trichinosis, can be contracted by eating pork, as it was endemic then- still is in some parts of the world. That might not be relevant now but it had a rational basis. Let's have a bit less knee jerk reaction guys. I too am ambivalent about religion btw, but believe we need a code of ethics otherwise the world would be a worse place than it is already- ( steps down from soap box)
This is the point though - 'centuries ago'. We live in the 21st Century now, not the 15th.Not to accept that today there is little problem eating pork and storing it for eating, etc, is completely irrational. The fact that it has entrenched its self so deeply into religious ideology, even to the point that Muslims see pigs as 'offensive' to their sensibilities is tin foil hattery, quite frankly.
The fact that people should accord that stance with 'respect' is insulting.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff