You take everyone to task, but you misquote the Original Post. Feuer Frei said how wrong he thought it was, but you repost his link to the article and attribute the quote to him. The discussion has wandered, certainly, but can you show anyone who said that her faith is her real problem?

People are arguing against faith in general, but you specifically accuse them of debunking her faith. And who specifically has said she has no right to resist the Muslims? Anyone?

Who specifically is throwing rocks, and at whom? Again, the discussion has been derailed into yet another "Faith vs Reason" argument, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the OP. Blame us for wandering off-topic all you want, but what you accuse us of has no basis at all except in your own mind.

Although Islam is a violent religion, not all Muslims are violent. I once read a pamphlet from a Muslim that had a very peaceful message on it. And it wasn't 'Become a Muslim and we won't hurt you', it was 'We don't care what religion you are, we'll help you in times of need.'

Not all Muslims believe or do what the Koran teaches. However, that is really our best hope for Islam, how do we get it out of the dark ages like we did Christianity? The only way is secularism and science. Maybe in time. I honestly don't mind the placebo effect religion gives people if it's a good thing.

I have struggle with this for a long time. I have no answers. The best that I can come up with is that God, if there is a God, is an intelligent, creative being with a free will. So are we. Approaching a relationship with this being by any of the man made religions that exist seems to me to be in opposition to those qualities. His and ours. Maybe in the future....

I think there is a difference between a finely tuned universe and the lot of biological beings. We are frail beings in a violent universe.

That would seem like the right thing from our point of view.

I stopped worrying about that a long time ago. You can't please them anyway so why try? I think that I am more tolerant of them than they would be of me. Who's right?

Babbling is my second language.:O:

@SailorSteve - I don't have any issue with the science, and I am not dismissing science in any way. We do not have any proof of what happens to the consciousness after death on this plane - be it cease to exist or go on to happy happy land or whatever else a person may believe. This is the key, because science can not currently answer that question. Thus, any belief of what "may" happen is as valid as the next for the person who chooses to believe it.

@Everyone
The key here is that a woman is to be hanged because of her choice of faith. While I will keep her in my prayers and have every confidence in the power of prayer, I am reminded that my God prefers more than just beseechment. Thus, emails and phone calls to your senators and representatives at the federal level to let them know they should pressure our state department on behalf of religious freedom - is a smart move. Even if you are an atheist. Religious freedom is for everyone, even those that choose to exercise their freedom to not have any.

That's true. She could very possibly be canonized as a Saint if she remains true to her faith.

Clearly not if you want to live in Sudan.

You are correct. No one knows anything about it, one way or the other, at all. Therefore no belief as to what "may" happen is valid, at all. My problem isn't with what people believe, or don't believe. That has nothing to do with anyone else but them. My problem is with people who talk as if their belief is fact, and anyone who doesn't believe as they do is either denying what they consider to be a fact or is just plain wrong. My problem has never been with what people believe, it's with people who claim to know. If you claim to know something to be true, then you should be able to prove it.

If someone really believes in something then they will hardly couch that belief in uncertain terms.

And that is how wars begin. :03:

Provable things are... by definitions... mesuarable. So we are speaking of mesuarable/reproducible, hence finite, things. We have worked out a good system know as science (as in scientific method) for that.

If God is infinite, it hardly would be also mesurable, lol :haha:

Our minds are limited, we are not onniscient (whatever that word means).
If we could comprehend God with our minds... well that wouldn't be God, lol again.

On the other side, if God clearly and unhambiguosly reveals itself to all humans beings (why not to the animals, they too are living, sensibe beings, or not?) I could no longer have a faith because I will be force to aknowledge that as a fact. I could no loger say: "I didn't belive in god existence" or: "I'm an atheist"... That would be nonsense, lol.

Worst of all, God will became a fact/phenomenon a part of what we call universe. How could it be infinite? In which sense? Mmm... is it lying to me about the fact that it is God? Does it... does it actually have an agenda? Heek! You know what? I don't want such a god as my God. lol.

Btw you know what? God or not life still goes on, god or not I still experience suffer and joy, I still can hate or love I still can choose to do horrible things (to myself or/and to others) and make poor excuses to justify myself or try hard to be a man... better, to be a good human being.

That depends. I know what my relationship with the Almighty has taught me. However, personal experience that is "proof" to me can be mere happenstance to you. That doesn't make my knowledge any less valid - to me. But because we are talking a personal belief/view - there is no way that I can expect you to accept my facts, since you didn't "live" them. This is where many so called Christians go wrong - they can not see that what is a personal fact means little to nothing to someone else.

I know what I know.
You know what you know.
Neither of us knows everything.

So I am fine with you accepting things as fact or not based on your own criteria. I don't believe science can prove God, though it can be used to indicate the existence of God. God, being infinite, can not be measured, therefore I don't see God as ever being "provable" to science. That is why any belief in a "higher power" is based on faith. Faith is what makes a belief into fact - though it only does so for the person who believes. To many try to claim personal facts as global facts, and thus browbeat others into their way of religious thinking.

Do I know God exists? Yes. But that is a personal fact - because I can't prove it to anyone. I can relate my reasons for believing it is fact, but unless you have your own reasons to believe, you won't see it as fact. I understand that. Too many who attempt to convert others don't get that. We can share the "good news" - but we aren't supposed to try and force you to believe it. Something Islam should also learn.

Back to the original topic - has anyone contacted their federal level politicians on this?

Ask him, next time you see him, whether he would agree to rewrite the Quran and reform it so that it corresponds with this attitude and has all written passages claiming the opposite being deleted. ;) I predict you will be negativily surprised. Grab him tightly and don't let go, for he will weazel like crazy.

The Quran is the deciding criterion whether or not you can call somebody - correctly - a Muslim. Like you cannot be called Buddhist without following Buddha, or Christian when not folloiwng the teahcking of Christ.

And if all thios were just "menaingless" words, as some claim, then I wonder why so many people in the world so bitterly fight over and for these meaningless word collections, if they mean so little.

If labels like Christian, Muhammeddan, Buddhist should have any meaning, then there must be clear criterions for what these terms mean in qualities, and what not. Arbitrarily attributing to them what in a debate opportunistically just helps to win in an argument, is not helpful. But that is what especially Muslims very often do. Since "Muslim" is no genetical trait anbd nothing about ethnciity or race, only ideology remains to decide what is Muslim and what not. And on the ideology, the Quran is what decides the definition.

You cannot violate basic content of the Quran - and at the same time insist you are "Muslim". You cannot reject the sermon on the mountain or other teachings by the Christ and claim you are Christian nevertheless.

So that Muslim you mention, the one with the pamphlet - either he is a real Muslim, then he must obey the Quran (which means his pamphlet is a lie), or he does not obey the Quran (like that pamphlet is in opposition to demands expressed in the Quran), then he is no Muslim, but a Muslim who claims to be Muslim while in fact he is not. If the latter, only confronting him with this self contradiction can help him to ever see the need to rethink himself.

To many well-meaning idiots in the West want to save Muslims from confronting them with their self-contradictions (like the above). But nothing good is to be gained by easing this pressure, because then indeed they have no motivation whatever to ever change and think about themselves and reform themselves - why should they, if the world adapts to them, instead of them needing to adapt to the world?

Islam has always been spared from this confrontation, or was strong enough to fight down any such attempts, may it be in form of foreign powers, may it be in form of own internal sects. And that is why it still is stuck with its head in the azz of history one and a half millenia deep. 1500 years of stagnation and non-evolution. Congratulations!

:dead:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QAcyh0zJHz...in-circles.jpg

The simple fact is you know nothing. And that you mistake belief with knowledge. And that you want to have belief being lifted to the same level of authority and respectability, as knowledge.

In other words: the corruption of knowledge.

Science, if followed by its real meaning and run in a serious manner, will NEVER claim to have found the ultimate, the final, the utmost "truth". Science knows that it creates artificial orders, thought out by man, in which the objects of its observations get arranged according to man's will, in a way that they make most possible sense to man at the given time, allowing him to make his course-plotting through life and universe easier. These theories change, necessarily, therefore. It's always religions who claim to possess the final, the total, the absolute truth - and never giving any hint or evidence for that claim.

Believing is not knowing. You can avoid that as much as you want, it remains to be true. Usually I would not care at all, if only you would not discredit reason and knowledge by your queer distorting of terms.

Have the evil Muslims offed this lady yet? They might be timid about making her a martyr. It might be counter productive to their convert or die message.:-?

Besides, what will they do after wiping out all the infidels?...
Go back to killing their own of course.:haha: