Yet another Religious atrocity

Barb Dwyer wrote:You don't have to be religious to be a guest at a wedding, the church welcomes everyone.

Yes, that's my point. People are happy to blame the world's problems on religion, but are happy to attend weddings, christenings etc.

It's called double standards.

scottjames30 wrote:

11:50:598Barb Dwyer wrote:What has a wedding got to do with religion?

I think its got something to do with ST John.

Loved watching him on ITV with Jimmy Greaves.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:I don't give to any charities that associate themselves with religion, if you're going to claim then good, then you must accept the bad I'm afraid. 

maybe forbidding condoms in Africa was a bad idea, but it's ok they built the schools for the kids with Aids to go too.

I'm against religion but IMO it's too black and white to disregard any good done in the name of religion because of the overall negative influence. That just doesn't add up for me, Hitchens loved to bring up the condoms in Africa and rightly so, but there are still good things done (for the wrong motivations) by religious groups.

I don't see the need to generalise and discount all of that.

But they do good for selfish reasons they are doing it for divine reward. And as you know most of the good done historically by religions was to force people into a religion. 

"I'm building you this house in the name of Jesus accept him into your heart and you'll be free"

Sorry I don't think that's good personally but I respect those who do.

Such a load of shit Hipster. Maybe that's true for some but  it's perfectly possible some people are naive enough to be religious but can still do good things in the name of it. Without any selfish motivation of converting non believers.

Having looked up this newspaper Karlys roaring about, they're raising money for Nepal, and not to build Mosques/buy new Korans.

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:I don't give to any charities that associate themselves with religion, if you're going to claim then good, then you must accept the bad I'm afraid. 

maybe forbidding condoms in Africa was a bad idea, but it's ok they built the schools for the kids with Aids to go too.

I'm against religion but IMO it's too black and white to disregard any good done in the name of religion because of the overall negative influence. That just doesn't add up for me, Hitchens loved to bring up the condoms in Africa and rightly so, but there are still good things done (for the wrong motivations) by religious groups.

I don't see the need to generalise and discount all of that.

But they do good for selfish reasons they are doing it for divine reward. And as you know most of the good done historically by religions was to force people into a religion. 

"I'm building you this house in the name of Jesus accept him into your heart and you'll be free"

Sorry I don't think that's good personally but I respect those who do.

Such a load of shit Hipster. Maybe that's true for some but  it's perfectly possible some people are naive enough to be religious but can still do good things in the name of it. Without any selfish motivation of converting non believers.

Having looked up this newspaper Karlys roaring about, they're raising money for Nepal, and not to build Mosques/buy new Korans.

It's possible, but it's certainly not a load of shit. What is motivating them to do good? If it's not religion then why do what they do in the name of it? Whats the need to attach that to the deed.

It's because they "need" to do so to make sure God is listening and give them the reward for it in the "next life"

I think thats about as far from a "load of shit" as it could possibly be.

If you're a charitable person, do charity, why do we have to bring and associate "god" with it?

"Whoever builds a mosque for Allah, then Allah will build for him a similar house in paradise"





Sorry Breadders, it's going in the bin now.

bwfc1874 wrote:

Soul Kitchen wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Soul Kitchen wrote:

karlypants wrote:Just had an Al-Khair Newspaper pushed through the letter box.

We all know what I will be doing with this!

Giving it to 1874, he'll help them out.

What is Al Khair? Website I found was for a charity... assuming there's more to it for this reaction?

Assume away!! You usually do, often down the wrong alley. 
But keep it up.

Typically inane response, how old are you again? It's like talking to a brick wall.

Well don't talk to a brick wall, Simples!!!

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:I don't give to any charities that associate themselves with religion, if you're going to claim then good, then you must accept the bad I'm afraid. 

maybe forbidding condoms in Africa was a bad idea, but it's ok they built the schools for the kids with Aids to go too.

I'm against religion but IMO it's too black and white to disregard any good done in the name of religion because of the overall negative influence. That just doesn't add up for me, Hitchens loved to bring up the condoms in Africa and rightly so, but there are still good things done (for the wrong motivations) by religious groups.

I don't see the need to generalise and discount all of that.

But they do good for selfish reasons they are doing it for divine reward. And as you know most of the good done historically by religions was to force people into a religion. 

"I'm building you this house in the name of Jesus accept him into your heart and you'll be free"

Sorry I don't think that's good personally but I respect those who do.

Such a load of shit Hipster. Maybe that's true for some but  it's perfectly possible some people are naive enough to be religious but can still do good things in the name of it. Without any selfish motivation of converting non believers.

Having looked up this newspaper Karlys roaring about, they're raising money for Nepal, and not to build Mosques/buy new Korans.

You're very naive, I'd have thought you'd be ripe for God bothering?

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:I don't give to any charities that associate themselves with religion, if you're going to claim then good, then you must accept the bad I'm afraid. 

maybe forbidding condoms in Africa was a bad idea, but it's ok they built the schools for the kids with Aids to go too.

I'm against religion but IMO it's too black and white to disregard any good done in the name of religion because of the overall negative influence. That just doesn't add up for me, Hitchens loved to bring up the condoms in Africa and rightly so, but there are still good things done (for the wrong motivations) by religious groups.

I don't see the need to generalise and discount all of that.

But they do good for selfish reasons they are doing it for divine reward. And as you know most of the good done historically by religions was to force people into a religion. 

"I'm building you this house in the name of Jesus accept him into your heart and you'll be free"

Sorry I don't think that's good personally but I respect those who do.

Such a load of shit Hipster. Maybe that's true for some but  it's perfectly possible some people are naive enough to be religious but can still do good things in the name of it. Without any selfish motivation of converting non believers.

Having looked up this newspaper Karlys roaring about, they're raising money for Nepal, and not to build Mosques/buy new Korans.

It's possible, but it's certainly not a load of shit. What is motivating them to do good? If it's not religion then why do what they do in the name of it? Whats the need to attach that to the deed.

It's because they "need" to do so to make sure God is listening and give them the reward for it in the "next life"

I think thats about as far from a "load of shit" as it could possibly be.

If you're a charitable person, do charity, why do we have to bring and associate "god" with it?

Ideal world there wouldn't be any religion at all, but there is and it's not going to disappear overnight.

I just think that there are people out there who cherry pick the good values from their religion and live perfectly decent lives - where every good they do isn't just a result of a selfish desire of getting into heaven.

Those values (help thy neighbour, don't steal etc etc) are actually just a results of our consciences and what became human values, we don't need religion to tell us these things. 

But some believe it's a religious way to live your life, I think that makes them naive but not necessarily selfish people.

Afghanistan have just posted a total of 210 - 5 in an ICC World T20 qualifier against Scotland.

If you're Scottish, does this count as an Islamic Atrocity?

Hipster......?

A 10 year old has just blown herself up in Nigeria, yes a 10 year old.

one more virgin in paradise, although probably not considering it's legal to be married at 8.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33593615

If a bloke gets 70 virgins for martyrdom after suicide bombing, what does the woman get for blowing the students up in Turkey after a similar act?
Perhaps her back doors brasted in by 70 blokes with 14" knobs?

Soul Kitchen wrote:If a bloke gets 70 virgins for martyrdom after suicide bombing, what does the woman get for blowing the students up in Turkey after a similar act?
Perhaps her back doors brasted in by 70 blokes with 14" knobs?

You should have your own editorial spot on the Daily Mail website with clear, insightful opinions like that.

"SK Says! Enlightened thinking for the new Millennium" or something.

So I take it you can't tell me what the incentive is?
Can I also assume you'd never thought it?
Or do you need parental guidance?

I think there are more important issues from this than you making gags about 14" knobs. It's pretty obvious that (if it was IS) whoever did it thought they were fulfilling an Islamic duty - and were severely delusional.

I went for a drink  with a group of Turks I know last night, all of which are of a similar socialist mindset to those that were attacked,  they think the government have been going easy on IS as they share a common enemy in the Kurds, can't say I know enough about it but the reaction now will be interesting.

Lighten up and fasten your bra ffs.
Women's Guild closed today!!!!
Bet they slept well last night after you'd bored the bollox off them.

bwfc1874 wrote:I think there are more important issues from this than you making gags about 14" knobs. It's pretty obvious that (if it was IS) whoever did it thought they were fulfilling an Islamic duty - and were severely delusional.

I went for a drink  with a group of Turks I know last night, all of which are of a similar socialist mindset to those that were attacked,  they think the government have been going easy on IS as they share a common enemy in the Kurds, can't say I know enough about it but the reaction now will be interesting.

There is absolutely no doubt that Erdogan is helping IS. He stops Kurds from crossing the border to help defend Kobane but does nothing to stop foreign loonies joining IS via Turkey.

The Saudis and other wealthy Arab Gulf states provide the money for IS but Erdogan bears responsibilty too.

We have enough problems of our own without mithering about IS. Extreme measures will be required to deal with them but it won't happen.
Sadam Hussein was exactly what kept them in check with his human shredders. In retrospect it's a pity he got too big for his boots.

Everyone should just ignore the issue or IS then?

I'm sure some clever twat will sort it!