Evidence for God from Science

From yesterday:

ISIS Suicide Bomber Kills 41 at Soccer Game in Iraq

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... -game.html

From today:

In Pakistan, Taliban's attack on Easter targets Christians; 67 people killed

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/27/asia/paki ... dly-blast/

A recurring theme that only the ignorant would deny.

They aren't ignorant. They're Islamophobes, alethephobes, and--given their hyper-PC--little more than self-hating trolls.

Jac3510 wrote:They aren't ignorant. They're Islamophobes, alethephobes, and--given their hyper-PC--little more than self-hating trolls.

Alethephobe. That fits perfectly.

America and the Western world's fault though right?

The issue isn't that 85% Muslims might be non-extreme, but rather that such more peaceful Muslims are made irrelevant by those who will take extreme violence. As B.W. linked to, those who are more peaceful are even killed.

One should look to the specific beliefs of any ideology. If extreme violence is condoned and supported even by the founder themself, then fear aside, it will be even more so that a more peaceful majority will stand by while such violence happens, or perhaps even become activated and participate.

Jac3510 wrote:They aren't ignorant. They're Islamophobes, alethephobes, and--given their hyper-PC--little more than self-hating trolls.

What are you talking about?

Your false equivalence between "terrifying, violent fanatics" in Islam and "terrifying, violent fanatics" in Christianity.

I understood that part. I disagree. The confusing part is the part I quoted.

I see. And what's confusing about it?

You'd think an atheist would never pass over a chance to bash a religion. But progressivism (or whatever you want to call Marxism) trumps all other systems of thought. It cannot be superseded by any other loyalty.

So, progressives and Islamists have a common enemy. The West, namely, Western civilization, which they both believe to be corrupt and in need of a change. But their ideological paths split once the question becomes, "change to what?" But before that day comes, they will sit comfortably together....for now.

Hortator wrote:You'd think an atheist would never pass over a chance to bash a religion. But progressivism (or whatever you want to call Marxism) trumps all other systems of thought. It cannot be superseded by any other loyalty.

So, progressives and Islamists have a common enemy. The West, namely, Western civilization, which they both believe to be corrupt and in need of a change. But their ideological paths split once the question becomes, "change to what?" But before that day comes, they will sit comfortably together....for now.

I don't know that this is a totally accurate analysis. I get the perspective, but I don't think it takes leftism seriously on its own terms. Leftists aren't PC just because they're trying to be nice. I think they're trying to take very seriously the problem of knowledge--how do we know that what we know is true or at least that it is true apart from our perspective? In other words, it's just postmodernism in a political form. I grant that there are historical connections to Marxism, and it's also true that a lot of the goals of the modern progressive are the same as the goal of the classical Marxist. I know that many in academia are self-professing Marxists. Having said all that, I don't think we do anyone any favors by just writing it off as Marxism. It's much more nuanced than that.

So I think the reason the proggies may seem like Islamic apologists (at least insofar as their knee-jerk reaction in the face of Islamic fascism is to point to so-called "Christian fascism") is less about seeing Islam as actually being peaceful or even less about seeing Christianity/Western civilization as "the true enemy" (such that the enemy of my enemy is my friend) as it is the requirement within their own worldview or disallowing absolutist statements. Forget, of course, the fact that such a position is logically self-contradictory. No one accused progressivism of being logically consistent. It's an emotional condition driven, again, by a fear that we cannot and do not know truth (and so my charge of alethephobia). So when a Christian comes along and makes an argument against Islam based on Islamic terrorism, the reaction is fierce precisely because that is a condemnation of an entire worldview--and nothing is more repugnant than such universal statements! Now we get to get into all the buzzwords . . . such absolutism presumes a preference or priority of White Christian America. But, of course, per leftism, there is no such priority or preference. Therefore, such statements actually demonstrate an emotional attachment to White Christian America, and those emotional attachments have to be driven by a fear of non-white, non-Christian America. So people who post articles about an Muslim blowing up Christians are obviously racist xenophobes. It doesn't help, by the way, that such "absolutists" TEND to be (though of course they aren't always) both on the political right as well as Christians. And so the leftist proggie lumps all of those motivations together.

No, it's a rare bird who actually hates all religion, who hates western civilization per se. Contrary to some of my Christian friends, atheists aren't "out to get" Christians, much less do they hate Christians more than Muslims because Christianity is the true religion. There's no conspiracy here. It's just the political outworkings of a particular worldview, and in particular, a worldview around a specific issue--namely, how we can claim to know what we know. They're scared to death of the world, and the only response, then, is to attempt to beat it into submission. And that means they need weapons. And the weapons they use are the ones that they find emotionally appealing, those weapons that speak to their own insecurities. And political correctness is one of the most effective of those. If they can accuse you of being a racist xenophobe, they can either intimidate you into shutting up or else discredit you so that no one listens to your racist xenophobic opinion. They set the rules based on their own fears. The problem is just that we let them. (And to get even more political, that is why the Trump phenomenon is what it is . . . so exhilerating to one side and so repugnant to the other.)

[quote="Jac3510"][/quote]

Woah....you'd expect a debate with Jac to be like, but it's more like

Just in awe of the depth of thought you gave me.

Hortator wrote:

Jac3510 wrote:

Woah....you'd expect a debate with Jac to be like, but it's more like

Just in awe of the depth of thought you gave me.

I'm sorry. If debating with me is like , then I'm clearly not giving you my best efforts. It ought to be more like

I'll try to do better next time.

On a (somewhat) more serious note, I hope some of what I gave you to think about is actually worth thinking about.

fdit:

And just because there are so many smilies in this post, I'll end this way:

Speaking on the alethephobia of the left, this headline that shocked me concerning who the Famous Actress and Activist is...who now reveals truth....

Famous Actress and Activist Says She Was ‘Severely Shaken’ After Realizing Her Left-Wing ‘Comrades Were Naked Bigots’
-
-
-

The problem of the left with such folks who post here demonstrate the ideological notion of moral relativism. Absolute moral standards in the mind of the left do not exist. All morality is relative. Moral absolutes are viewed as the enemy of freedom of expression and the cause of all oppression and bigotry. In other words, they are taught to teach themselves how to deny truth.

Truth does not matter to leftist because following a leftist world view narrative, to them, is the truth because morality is simply relative. The ends justify the means. Therefore the narrative becomes an absolute to them even if the narrative is error.

The narrative of the left is that the West and America is racist, and because of white privilege the world is person-centric phobic against minorities, the poor, those whose lifestyle promote death. That only thru their self imposed re-distributive ways will all find full expression of moral freedom and greatest happiness of kum ba yah. Therefore, according to the narrative of the left (based in part upon scapegoat theory) Christians and conservatives are viewed as backwards white privileged bigots who have caused all the world's woes, have all the money, and are true evil. All others are simply ofended folks seeking what is theirs because it was taken from them - oh boo - hoo pity...

The narrative goes on to define that any one who dares offends another is guilty of the greatest of crimes against humanity as this article points out:Harvard Student Shares Scary State of ‘Speech’ on Some College Campuses.

So the left lives by narratives. The narrative of the left is what defines truth of the moment to achevea political (ie total control) goal. It does not matter in the least that a US diplomat was murdered in Benghazi, the narrative of the no-offending policy is what is important.

An example of this happened when an obscure stupid video was blamed as the cause of Benghazi, not terrorism. it was because the video offended. To the left, it it does not matter if Stevenson was killed as well as the others. That is a simple matter of acceptable collateral damage so the narrative of the left is further legitimatized to destroy all who oppose the narrative for the greater good of humanity to achieve kum ba yah.

Because of this, Islam is not viewed as a hostile religion whose import is actual physical world domination under sharia law but rather a poor offended sect just expressing itself and in need of loving tolerance and entry into western countries to help expunge the intolerance bigots who oppose the narrative of the left.

The narrative of the left now includes that all terrorist attacks world wide means that Obama leftist world view policies prove that his admin's policies are working. Any death caused is merely acceptable collateral damage. Yet, at the same time, the narrative also suggest that because the west bombs and kill terrorist is ISIS controlled areas needs to stop so they will stop trying to take over the world.

In other words, the narrative is that the USA and the West is at fault and guilty of the crime of offending and thus needs to be fundamentally transformed. Fundamental transformation means that the USA and the West must become the polar opposite of greatness they once were - destroyed totally under the pretext that such fundamental transformation equals social justice. So terrorist are spanked a little with fully expectancy that they will learn to comply with the native of the left.

The narrative is all woes are because of white privilege, Islam-phobic, homophobic, conservatives, and Christians because they offend everyone is the cause of all problems in the world. That is new narrative definition of truth the left follows. In order to follow this narrative of truth the absolute truth must die midst the narrative of acceptable collateral damage:ISIS is not not an Existential (Real) Threat...

However, anyone who does not follow the narrative is...

Alethephobia of the left is simply amazing...
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Speaking on the alethephobia of the left, this headline that shocked me concerning who the Famous Actress and Activist is...who now reveals truth....

Famous Actress and Activist Says She Was ‘Severely Shaken’ After Realizing Her Left-Wing ‘Comrades Were Naked Bigots’
-
-
-

Thanks B. W.,

Now I might actually have to like Roseanne.