cesare
shady's dreams ♥
did I suggest they were?
No, you didn't. But they did.
I don't really have a problem with religionists until they start bombing and/or converting.
did I suggest they were?
No, you didn't. But they did.
I don't really have a problem with religionists until they start bombing and/or converting.
if that's the case, what other words/names do you do that with?It's respectful in my tradition. It's not a superstition.
perhaps if you'd been in jericho when the walls fell.I'm not in Bronze Age Canaan, that's for sure.
(sorry to butt into the lofty conversation)
What, just snap your fingers, say some words and poof, you're a muslim? I hope either a)You really fuckin mean it or b)Are good at keeping secrets.
Could say the same about your so-called libertarianism - which is supposedly libertarian for you, but doesn't tolerate other peoples' freedom of thought, freedom of action, freedom to practice religion, etc.
If you only tolerate people who conform to your idea of libertarian, and judgmentally and aggressively lambast the freedoms which others embrace, then how are you a libertarian?
by 'g-d' i take it you mean yahweh.
if 'g-d' showed any love for you, surely s/he'd allow you to use their bloody name.
if that's the case, what other words/names do you do that with?
m-m? d-d? f----r?
(sorry to butt into the lofty conversation)
What, just snap your fingers, say some words and poof, you're a muslim? I hope either a)You really fuckin mean it or b)Are good at keeping secrets.
Homophobia is shit. Revol didn't say 'homophobia in religion is shit', he said something more along the lines of 'how can you join a religion which promotes homophobia?' giving no thought to Maximillian Pings own liberal interpretation (i.e. Pings itijihad as he's now Muslim). This says to me that Revol is grouping the liberal (enlightened) adherents with the intractable fundamentalists.
All fundamentalists within Abrahamic religions say 'homophobia is wrong'.
Liberal adherents within each of these religions say 'we still love our sons and daughters, regardless of their homosexuality'
The issue the is that Abrahamic religions (I don't know about any of the others but I'd be surprised if they were any better) are deeply patriarchical and homophobic at their core, even if some of their modern adherents aren't particularly sexist or homophobic.Homophobia is shit. Revol didn't say 'homophobia in religion is shit', he said something more along the lines of 'how can you join a religion which promotes homophobia?' giving no thought to Maximillian Pings own liberal interpretation (i.e. Pings itijihad as he's now Muslim). This says to me that Revol is grouping the liberal (enlightened) adherents with the intractable fundamentalists.
All fundamentalists within Abrahamic religions say 'homophobia is wrong'.
Liberal adherents within each of these religions say 'we still love our sons and daughters, regardless of their homosexuality'
Pretty much. The only thing you have to do to be a Muslim is agree that "there is only one God and Mohammed is His prophet." I can't even do that.
My religion is of great comfort to me
<Racking brains>
Where it that quote from?
Scum
I've considered it, since my wife is nominally Muslim, as will be our son, and there are circumstances where my being nominally Christian might pose a problem. I was thinking "since it's all just nominal who gives a toss? None of us practice any religion anyway." But that's probably not the right attitude to go into these things with.
The things people do for pussy, eh?
Bit like pretending to be catholic to get into the good state school then?
except the motivation is love, not one upmanship
if you don't believe in it,then why convert? that's what i can't understand. A belief system is something that's quite personal and stuff. not something that can change with the wind. And only half jumping into it to please someone, is going against the whole thing IMO.