Another First World Muslim Joins ISIS

[Old Hippy]

2 million, or... 200 million? Monster-riding cavalry of the apocalypse, to be exact?

Cause they are supposed to begin appearing in that overall region anyway

maybe they have the islamic Chuck Norris?

 

[innonimatu]

Did you edit to put more trollin in?

What? He has a point, even if he makes it in a provocative way. Religion is not necessary for morality, and religious morality as set in many holy books - of which he gives an example - stinks. To the point where followers of those religions today have to pick and choose what they follow.

So it turns out that even if you subscribe to the belief that religions were originally divinely inspired what happens now is that its faithful (apart from the"fundamentalists") are not following any "word of god", but rather sets of prescriptions of behavior created and tweaked by committees of human beings over time.
Some organized religions go around this issue by ascribing to the men who at some point in time make up these committee some kind of divine inspiration (saints,holy men, whatever). A kind of ongoing divine inspiration. But who proclaims them saints or holy men? Other men! So in the end is there any difference between "religious morality" and "secular morality"? Both are the creation of men who happened to be respected by their peers and gathered a following.

 

[El_Machinae]

Apparently, the argument is simply very complex, which is why many educated people are more drawn to secular humanism than religious thought.

It might be more that secular humanism is an easier political philosophy, because it transmits easily and can easily cross religious line. One can easily be ReligionX and think that secular humanism is a fine way to have a society be. And then, for some reason, we port this into our own personal worldview.

 

[Borachio]

Actually, people need something greater than not only the human individual, or even the human community, but something greater than the combined force of mankind.

I see no reason to suppose this is true.

 

[Sanguivorant]

I agree that morality is something implanted into every human. It's human nature as a matter of fact, it is not something that magically appears through religion.

I guess what religion tells people to do is to tap into tat moral side of humanity. At least some of the universal religions.

 

[El_Machinae]

Our morality is kinda neat. It's a set of logic shoehorned into our instincts.

 

[PhroX]

This type of Jihad occurred in Afghanistan against the Soviets and Bosnia against the Serbs. They see the Muslim world in trouble by a foreign aggressor and go to fight them.

In this case it is different, because they are fighting other Muslims. So I don't really know.

This is what really confuses me about the whole thing. While I wouldn't agree with it, I could at least somewhat understand if they were actually defending Muslims from outside attacks. But as you say, they're not. They're going to fight against Muslims.

 

[Kyriakos]

Maybe it's the 4rth Jihad?

 

[Sanguivorant]

This is what really confuses me about the whole thing. While I wouldn't agree with it, I could at least somewhat understand if they were actually defending Muslims from outside attacks. But as you say, they're not. They're going to fight against Muslims.

Exactly, which is why I think of those fighting in ISIS as idiots and hypocrites. Even when we are talking about the Assad Regime, there are Muslims on that side.

This is how they justify themselves:

In Afghanistan, it was a communist government led by a Muslim I think that implemented policies that involved killing off a lot of prisoners, who were mostly religious leaders. Remember, this was a government controlled by Muslims.

The Iran-Iraq war was fought by governments also controlled by Muslims, and the war was kind of initiated by the US.

The Syrian revolution was the same problem. Government controlled by Muslims using violence to eliminate the voice of other Muslims.

So how do we know who is a true Muslim, and who is merely a puppet for someone else?

Their assumption is that if any Muslim is even affiliated with another type of government, then that means they have given up their allegiance to Islam, and not a Muslim.

Basically, what that means is that if they're not fighting with us, they're fighting against us. They assume that Shi'a Muslims or the Muslims part of the Syrian government are hypocrites, which would justify their death.

That is my guess. But yeah, nothing can ever go right when a Muslim fights another Muslim.

As the Messenger said, "Once the sword has been sheathed against a Muslim, it will not be unsheathed until the day of judgement." The first occurrence was in 661 A.D. Go figure.

 

[Old Hippy]

So how do we know who is a true Muslim, and who is merely a puppet for someone else?

my guess is see who's killing people, it 's a good place to start

it's how I tell good atheists from puppets

 

[NovaKart]

Could you give an example of how the Iran Iraq war was kind of initiated by the US?

 

[Sanguivorant]

Well not initiated, but Iraq was definitely receiving support from US.

 

[NovaKart]

But I believe that was a few years after the war started. Relations between Iraq and the US were very bad in 1980.

 

[Sanguivorant]

Oh okay. Sorry for the misinformation.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Could you give an example of how the Iran Iraq war was kind of initiated by the US?

Saddam Hussein was always our puppet.


Link to video.

 

[NovaKart]

The video is full of unsourced information and quotes taken out of context. Questionable dealings with the CIA does not mean the USA caused the war. Support for saddam did not begin until after the war started.

And if he was always an American puppet why did he go to war with Israel? Or have such good relations with the ussr?

 

[classical_hero]

Our morality is kinda neat. It's a set of logic shoehorned into our instincts.

It changes along when our instincts change. There i no logical basis for your morality but what feels right, which is not the best moral guidance in the world. Some of the worst regimes in the world had similar moral basis and look where it led them. If you read interviews with captured Nazi leaders they never once regretted what they did and they thought they were doing their moral duty.

 

[Old Hippy]

It changes along when our instincts change. There i no logical basis for your morality but what feels right, which is not the best moral guidance in the world. Some of the worst regimes in the world had similar moral basis and look where it led them. If you read interviews with captured Nazi leaders they never once regretted what they did and they thought they were doing their moral duty.

and thats different from religious whitch burning in what way?

 

[Sanguivorant]

It's not. Both are worldviews.

 

[Old Hippy]

edit# re next post
thanks Novacart, wrong thread, I blame the world cup