Danger of Islam!

[Brugmansia]

I think we should be in impartial in every new discussion or individual debate.

It has struck me that this community has formed some groups representing opinions as a political party, with a choosen colour, and operating together in new topics from a platform based on past relations, gained out of past discussions. Which in fact, is not a maidenly reflection of who we are and what our view on every single matter is.

Whether we decide to give in and pick up insights of others is up to ourselve. Trying to press autonomous opinions through has led us more to the discussion of what is justice rather than proceeding with offering each other insights. The more insights we have on the table, the more codes we can choose from to integrate these anonymously within ourselve.

It takes the man out of you to admit that you could better adopt the view of another man if it's more accurate from an objective point of view.

I have absorpted many opinions of people on here, and also rejected lots. But every new discussion or event I'll read unbiased again and may even throw away my own insight if the person (who I strongly disagreed with briefly before in an other thread) has a more accurate insight than mine on a certain matter.

The same as the entheogenic flow, just the now and sensing the now as it is with no influence of events from the past and possible future. Only in that way we'll respresent ourselve as truly our autonomous self. And therefore, we'll have more data available to maintain ourselve as the time goes on.

We all carry interesting .dll's with us, we shouldn't hold these for ourselve and trying to convert ourselve into an .exe which tries to implement itself into the OS.

I think it is clear where everyone stands in this discussion...

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

You all see what I mean now ? If we have to spin all around the pot another time I have no problem with this, patience and perseverance are virtues.

And about the movies ; yes they are zionist movies alright... the people jumping, the beheading... this is no random occurances ! These movies are made purposefully to condition the mind, and hit right under the belt, where the repercussions of said hit will take months even years to manifest.

DO NOT ENGAGE IN THIS MEDIA ! This is my third and last warning. There is a difference between live stuff that happens and is randomly seen on the news and something that happens ON PURPOSE and is premeditated. They even made a movie of the world trade center event, is that any way to honor the victims, has REST IN PEACE no meaning to them anymore ?!

I don't know about you all but I don't live normally since this day ; not at all and I will not until something is done to correct those GROSS manipulations upon the human dream. It was a clear ritual, and we're bickering over the meaningless anchorpoints.

I think also god clarified he meant wanking his wits at the video, knowing how much people would watch it, although I'm certain he's aware of the power of words and imagery, and I cannot condone that ; it could have been said in a more diplomatic way.

I sure understand what you mean CM ; and god knows (isn't that a song?) that I don't agree with him jumping in all threads, especially the more psychonautic subjects according to psychonautic exploration. I notice you have left my thread alone god, but I also think you will have to meditate a bit on where your jurisdiction ends. You have said yourself you do not do psychonautic exploration, not even with cannabis ; so I think your logics and rationale would be best used to deter people who would give bad advice on harmful drugs, which too often I have seen you remain silent too while you focused on trying to convince us there was no atlantis.

If there isn't no mystery to explore, what's a psychonaut supposed to use as a map ? You know as well as me it makes no sense to interfere...

I think there is room for everyone here as I openly expressed that although he is not aware of it, Zezt goal is to split us up, as sure as eggs is eggs.

Namase !

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Thank you Ahuaeynjxs. Regarding the videos, like I said I watched them in 2003, i.e. when the second war on Iraq had just started. The videos were hosted at a site that got a lot of media coverage in Dutch magazines. There was some public philosophical debate about "to watch or not to watch", and I figured I wanted to see it. I've also seen things done by American soldiers. I wouldn't want to see any of those videos now, or expect anyone to go watch them.

Indeed, I've also seen those airplanes crash into the WTC buildings more than enough now.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

There are several members that see this threat as very offensive, including me.

You mean the title especially? Or any posts in particular? I don't think the content of the first post was offensive.

What you may not realise is that you are taking sides yourself. You cannot agree with the ones that disagree with the creation of the threat - obviously and try to adjust to zezt.

Hmmm... I don't think I've taken sides. I'm willing to listen to why anyone would consider the thread as a whole or portions of it as offensive, and yes, I did read and study Islam enough to not change my mind quickly on this matter. Even a book I find (in the morning) and a TV program that starts when I turn on my TV for once (in the evening) simply confirm my views. We've got a problem here.

I think the way zezt communicated has been very fair, and I cannot disagree there is a danger. I don't understand why you seem to project such evil intentions on him. I've come to the same conclusions as he did, and I know I'm not evil. I assume he's a good person too. But as we've seen elsewhere, repeatedly flaming someone never brings out their most charming side.

Zezt said this himself "are you with them?" he asked clearly stating that there are the "he" and the "them".

Yes, because a very peculiar gang vibe had developed in this thread, which I had noticed myself as well. I already responded to the question.

Zezt also did not go into the discussions and the counter-arguments and only felt attacked. I made several posts on-topic which were not answered.

OK

The creation of the threat itself is, as I see it, xenophobic.

I think that can be discussed. Perhaps all of us are just as xenophobic, but in different ways. I've been pretty xenophilic in my life, and I think my islamophobia doesn't stem from propaganda videos at all. The ones I've seen were mostly disappointing compared to what is written about the matter.

The consideration of some people trying to reform islam is interesting and philosophic - is tradition better than progress?

Yes, that is what I'm interested in as well.

But showing zionist movies where people are jumping from the twin towers and then blaming a religion for it is absolutely inappropriate.

A problem with many of the videos is indeed that they come from questionable sources, and they play on your emotions. Hence I mainly use YouTube to watch lectures and music videos, not "truth videos". I made that decision in early 2007, during a trip on 8 dried grams, which was quite an intense experience.

What do questions about beheadings have to do with the critique of a religion?

Well, certain types of beheadings are described in the Quran. And according to the title, this thread is especially about the danger of Islam.

I also remember zezt's 911-threat where he in a mad rush started selling some conspiracy videos for truth in a life-and-death struggle. It very reminds me of this threat.

I'm not sure if I participated in that thread. I didn't know zezt very much before this Danger of Islam thread.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I think we should be in impartial in every new discussion or individual debate.

It has struck me that this community has formed some groups representing opinions as a political party, with a choosen colour, and operating together in new topics from a platform based on past relations, gained out of past discussions. Which in fact, is not a maidenly reflection of who we are and what our view on every single matter is.

Yes.

It takes the man out of you to admit that you could better adopt the view of another man if it's more accurate from an objective point of view.

I guess you could also turn that around: by taking 'the man' out of you, you can better adopt to the views of other men (and women!) who happen to have more objective views on certain matters.

trinad api sunicena, taror iva sahishnuna ~ humble like a blade of grass, tolerant like a tree

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Why is this 'metaphore' (I don't see the metaphore in there, BTW) offensive and posting videos of beheadings and linking them to Islam as a whole instead of one or a few lunatics is not offensive?

I don't think he posted a link to a beheading. He posted a link to a news article. In any case, he's not the only one who linked that news article to Islam. Neither that article nor the way zezt posted it was offensive, unless you can explain what was sick or offensive about it.

I don't think GODs post was 'solely to offend' (as per the forum rules)

I'm not talking about forum rules here. If you think the forum rules are all that matter, you've missed the point of this being a community of likeminded souls.

One more thing that still bothers me in this whole discussion. You are all for free speech and against the sensitivity for criticism in the islamic worldview, but as soon as GOD speaks out with something that offends you for a change, why do you suddenly turn this all around and pretend that his criticism should stop?

Because his is not the voice of constructive criticism, but of wit and derision. His criticisms do not contain any useful information, no alternative for the things he says are nonsense. Just some basic scientific paradigms and politically correct views on religion. Boring, you know? I don't feel challenged by him at all, I know what I'm talking about, I live it, breathe it every day. There are way more enlightened critics on this forum. If GOD wrote meaningful criticisms, your comparison might have been relevant. Also don't forget I'm not just offended personally, I feel bad about new members having to pass the GOD test all the time.

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

Ahem... you mean that airplane, and this missile with a neat hologram over it ?

I've had a unique demonstration of holographic capability one night, when Moby came to make a show in quebec beach, that is a sacred native american place that has been turned into a big scene. We knew this would be a great evening so we planned a trip and went there with a few friends.

The night was all about making the "pawa" like they used to do in the days when finally the white man and the native agreed on mutual grounds, and they linked spiritually under the full moon, 400 years ago. Not like ok we're on our side and you stay on your side... it was a very special group of french and irish men who really tried to understand them so they could live in peace.

Then as the show revealed itself they told us that it had been exactly that (oh they hadn't forwarned us, it was purposefully to be a big surprise) its been 400 years day for day, it was also the full moon, and there was other being invited to the party : The "water people" or marine shapeshifters who lived in the river according to legend. I don't come from quebec so to me this was all a bit eerie, especially that we met some cool people who had shrooms and we shared good cannabis with them in exchange, we were getting real high as they initiated this ritual. It's a very special place, you see the city all around, but yet are very isolated from its noise.

Happily I was very aware of what was going on and lemme tell you, it must have cost a shitload because it was absolutely georgeous... fireworks, dancers, acrobats, firebreathers. The kind of once in a lifetime happening, and it was free...

There must have been almost 100000 people on the site, maybe more. And as the acrobatic show culminated (the water people were supposed to be the acrobats) I realised how fluid they had to be for the performance because it wasn't in what they did, it was like all their bodies combined to shapeshift like water and honestly I wasn't that high on the shrooms yet, I wasn't hallucinating, these people had surnatural talent, or they had "outside" help.

Then I peeked in a certain way above the stage and there was this rotating holographic looking thing, not particularly bright, much what one would expect to be a tetrahedron shaped UFO, about 10 thousand feet in the sky (HUGE thing, I'd say maybe 1km across), and it aligned way above with the tetrahedron the acrobats gave their performance on which was made of silvery aluminum.

The ufo was blue-turquoise and rotating however and noone seemed to see it or look in its direction but me. I even told my friends : "Wtf is that man look" and they totally ignored me because there was fireworks and they didn't want to miss a bit.

The thing hovered there for like 15 seconds, probably adding something subliminal to the fireworks and performance I'm not sure, and then silently swooped away in the traditional ufo fashion, fast disapearing in the horizon. This was my second very clear sighting of such an object, the other was more round and more distant however, definately holographic technology.

We danced to moby, there was a great connection in the crowd and it was all very intense. At one point I was totally in the trance and moby was so interactive, never leaving a plate run on its own and adding all manners of effects and keyboard play... I turned around to see how the people behind were dancing... there was a line of 5 georgeous woman and two young men, I mean it... they were makeuped and all arranged, but they were awe inspiring georgeous (and many people here know how difficult I am). It almost seemed unreal and as if they were trying not to look so great by looking like everyone else on the surface (the guys too looked great).

They were all staring at my ass, I mean it, totally and they didn't seem to care a bit that I caught them, surprising myself. I tried to ask them with my eyes why they wouldn't dance, but they looked somehow like it was a terrible effort just to remain standing there, it was a bit even uncomfortable so I didn't insist. I don't judge people and in their eyes they all looked back at my eyes (the boys too) and kinda telling me : keep dancing man we're enjoying ourselves.

Oh well... I turned back to dance with my friends, we don't take ourselves much seriously but thats how we shake ourselves loose from the rigid life by dancing like this, to an outside observer it might look strange, uh ok... really strange but fluid and non forced.

They remained there for the whole Moby performance ; I was starting to wonder what they were, so silent, so full of presence noone even came to say hi to them exept me. My girl friend even came to me at one point to tell me : they're all looking at your ass I thik they make fun of you (she looked deeply troubled) and to remain stealthy I told her I didn't mind, if they were it was them the worse. But they didn't like to be noticed like that so they went walking towards the beach, I couldn't possibly explain how fluid their hips were when walking, the guys too, it was a bit freaky to see them disapear in the crowd walking towards the beach... but we danced all night long and had lots of fun, happily noone seemed to make much a big deal about it

Then we left peacefully and another peculiar thing happened when we boarded the bus... my friends wanted to take one bus but were kind of uneasy as to which was the right one, and there was people there to direct us. Well we ended up boarding one, and finally my friends even after being directed felt uneasy and remained outside to talk amongst themselves while I sat alone on the bench.

Then one of the bus employees, another georgeous woman, but much shorter this time (the others were like 6 feet), she felt somehow very mature, and very old, I couldn't possibly explain it ! She came in, sat on the bench besides me, and touched my thigh with hers... I can't explain wither how I felt at that moment, many of you know I also am sick from mercury poisoning and it makes my tactile senses very strange and extremely sensitive to water crysalline shapes and changes, I mean without being overly sensitive I know when I feel "good water" and I let it permeate me very easily, or the contrary. Thats the best way I could describe it... I felt her full of good water merging with me, my water taking that vibration and it felt very uniquely healing in a sense. She was warm and gentle with me, and she opened the bus window behind me, a soft humid breeze smelling like algae filled my lungs and I felt very refreshed. She turned and smiled at me with huge eyes, and large pupils, she felt very human, yet something I could not penetrate with my 6th sense, she felt like the sea... so deep you cannot see.

She went as fluid as she came in... never to be seen again.

 

[zezt]

And this is GOD's abusive post in reply:

"zest , did you have a wank when you watched those films and when you posted your posts ?"
_________________
FORUM RULES:
Mutual respect
Mutual respect between all forum users. This means you won't ever start a discussion with someone else while making advantage of someone else's behavior, possible physical or mental handicaps, race or gender. Do not actively react to personal remarks by others and refrain from posting stuff solely to offend people.

Now over to you. What are you going to do about this matter?

How does GOD's quote violate this rule? Because that is not clear to me. Why is it abusive? Because he used the word 'wank'? You need a stronger case for me to take actual action. Besides, GOD asked you personally how his remark was offensive and you never answered that question.

Are you without any sense?

Look, say your dad, uncle, friend, had told you they had seen a video of a man being slaughtered, and the experience had deeply upset them. And then they say how someone said what GOD said. What would you think? How would you feel. Would you patroniize them and make out that they hadn't really been insulted? Would you defend the person that had said that abuse to your dad?

Who are you trying to kid, kiddo?

 

[Brugmansia]

I guess you could also turn that around: by taking 'the man' out of you, you can better adopt to the views of other men (and women!) who happen to have more objective views on certain matters.

That's how I wanted to put it. Thanks.

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

This is not your family Zezt, we're a psychonaut community... why wont you share with us what kind of psychonaut experiences you've had ? Why haven't you read our other posts before to familiarise yourself with how we like to discuss things out here...

We even agree with you in all ways, I mean we agree it's bad to murder someone... you only make yourself look stupider with each reply, you have a particular talent to make people forget about how you play your game... are you waiting for congratulations or what ?

Why do you dodge the most important questions we've asked you ?

I gave god my permission to speak his mind up in these kind of situations, you asked him to explain and he did, it's not like he was harassing you with it, get over it !

Sadly anyone that reads the thread again will see you have broken nearly all rules and not only that, you agreed with a disclaimer you haven't even READ in the first place while subscribing.

You're lucky I'm not a moderator because I would have closed that thread long ago and opened one myself for discussion about Islam but with rational sense and no political bias.

 

[Shroomlady]

I really think this tread should be closed. The theme is offensive, the topic does not belong on a Psychonaut forum, plus the conversation is very off-topic most of the time.....
If I was new in this community it would scare the hell out of me to read this 37 ! pages of rubish.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I really think this tread should be closed. The theme is offensive, the topic does not belong on a Psychonaut forum, plus the conversation is very off-topic most of the time.....

Goodmorning Shroomlady, what do you find offensive about the theme?

It's controversial, for sure, but not offensive. No one spoke of "those moslim dogs" here. It's a serious discussion about the danger of Islam, a religion strongly rooted in a so-called sacred text, the Quran, which happens to stem from a very violent and chaotic period in human history. This discussion is not about the muslims themselves, though it may be useful to give examples of how certain Quranic injunctions and attitudes have encouraged certain (groups of) muslim men to threaten and abuse women, gay people, apostates, atheists and non-muslims, as well democracy and liberty in general. Personally (being a father myself, and well-read in psychology, parenting and the development of self-esteem) I'm also concerned about psychological damage for children raised to believe in an Allah that clearly doesn't exist (at least not as they describe it), to recite prayers instead of playing with toys or learn about the world, and to be spoiled with chauvinistic and sexist concepts. Islam is "dangerous" on many different scales, and that danger is also present in Christianity, though in the present day it doesn't reach those higher scales anymore. Much (though not all) of the danger of Christianity was abandoned with the different reformations.

Likewise the thread hasn't gone that off-topic, I think it's been very dense with relevant discussions over both the Quran and the way many people ignore and deny the fact that there is a problem to begin with. Your suggestion to close the thread is equally relevant, it's very much in line with the way the media avoids discussing these issues.

If I was new in this community it would scare the hell out of me to read this 37 ! pages of rubish.

It's not rubbish when you attentively read through it all, and take your time to think about it. If we have to close all threads that upon a superficial reading appear to be rubbish, it would mean the end of all philosophical discussions on this forum. Discussion of religion (including Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, different types of shamanism, New Age concepts etc.) is very relevant to this psychonaut website. I only object when there is too much focus on the practitioners (for example "those Christian dogs") rather than on what's the cause of the problems (historically & scripturally) and how we may go about solving those problems in the decades ahead of us.

 

[zezt]

great posts CM

Now, I have been conversing with Seth farby. He is really intersting man!! And is pomoter of Mad Pride

He has kept informing me that LSD research was strictly still banned in the U.S, and I wasn't sure--I had assumed that in the recent resurgence of psychedelic therapies, LSD was included so I Googled the question and was reminded of THIS story:

LSD as Therapy? Write about It, Get Barred from US http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/

So whats this got to do with this thread? Well someof us (very few) have been pointing out the oppressive nature of Islam, and this has seemed to imply we are so dogone free. Well read this tale. I t is pathetic..........................!

Of course we ARE free--er than Medieval Islam and its shariah law, yet not free. I am just putting it here to remind us of how still not REALLY free we are. And EVEN to create threads---without much gried--too! hmmm

 

[Forkbender]

Look, say your dad, uncle, friend, had told you they had seen a video of a man being slaughtered, and the experience had deeply upset them. And then they say how someone said what GOD said. What would you think? How would you feel. Would you patroniize them and make out that they hadn't really been insulted? Would you defend the person that had said that abuse to your dad?

Who are you trying to kid, kiddo?

Who's patronizing here?

I don't know about you, but if something deeply moves me and someone makes a remark about it that conflicts with my experience or suggests it was different, I don't really care. My feelings are mine and I don't care what someone I don't personally know (like you and GOD) thinks or says about it.

If you feel insulted by something, should we change everything so you feel comfortable? And the next time? And the next? This isn't your world alone, zezt, it is everybody's and we are bound to get some insults along the way. It is up to you to take things personally or not.

A man came to the buddha to see if what people said was true. He was insulting him and yelling in his face. The buddha just sat there. The next day, he tried again, shouting harder and saying more offensive things. The buddha just sat there with an everlasting smile on his face. The third day he tried again, shouting his lungs out and yelling and screaming and using all the horrible words he could think of. The buddha just sat there. Then at the end of the day he asked the buddha what was up. The buddha said: "If you give a person a gift and he doesn't accept it, to whom does the gift belong?"

Are you without any sense?

Please stop insulting me!!

 

[restin]

You mean the title especially? Or any posts in particular? I don't think the content of the first post was offensive.

Hmmm tricky question. Let me write my thoughts.

If someone writes "Danger of Islam" there are various interpretation for this statement. First of all it is clear that it is trying to, let's say, build up a certain controversy. Now, if one reads "Islam" there are different interpretations of what is meant here, aight? It can consider people consider themselves muslem, an organisation (like the church), a religion, an ideology or a book (Koran). You may realize that the various interpretation may not have a too obvious difference but I think this is crucial. Is the danger coming from the single muslem, the organisation of a group of muslems, their religion resp. way of life, way of looking and interpreting the world, or believing in Allah, a certain system of thought or the book they build their belief on.

I'd like to primarly talk about the book. I do not consider seeing a book as dangerous as xenophobic, no, but I think it is .... strange. Did you read Dorian Gray? You may know that Oscar Wilde was homosexual and the Victorian Age was very, very suppressive towards homosexual. It was seen as immoral. Homosexuality and its thematics is quite strongly talked about in the novel especially the first version. You may know that the publication was followed by a huge process in which Oscar Wilde, but actually primarily the book was called immoral. Oscar Wilde afterwards wrote: "There is no such think as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all." and what may be rather important "It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors."

He may be not fully right in saying so but generally I must say that he was right. There are no immoral books - it is you (the reader) that makes the book moral or immoral. And therefore I want to underline that you should not blame a book for the bad of a man. Guns don't shoot people.

And therefore we are a bit further - please say if and when you disagree. I realize that your argumentation is not fully based on the book but I wanted to consider this point as well. So what may zezt have thought about when he wrote the title and his first post? He keeps talking about the shariah law, which he seems not to understand at all, but this still keeps the question open. Did he mean a) the muslem that lives for the shariah law is dangerous b) The organisation that applies the shariah law is dangerous (remember: the shariah law is only valid for the muslem. It is about how a muslem must live and behave) c) The religion that preaches the shariah law is dangerous d) The ideology that uses the shariah law is dangerous, or rather, a system that is based on the laws of shariah is dangerous.

I hope we all agree that a) is xenophobic/offensive. Not only that, but it is absolutely nonesense. With the same result you may call Jesus dangerous as he lived a specific way of life. And on the other hand - how does my muslem friend threaten me if he wants to live the way he wants to? Well, the whole topic changes when the muslem forces me to live the way he wants to. When he wants to apply his laws. Hm, first of all this would be illegal and, if not dangerous, it is offensive per se. Using force is "bad" anyways, which is still a universal fact that does not apply to the title "Danger of Islam", which specifies the topic. Is it dangerous if he starts preaching to my children? Not dangerous but very offensive but also an universal argument. You may not forget, in the last two examples I agree that there is a certain danger to be considered.

b) zezt often mentioned the gays etc. that are suppressed by group pressure resp. what? Now, there are no blacks and whites as the organisation is influenced by a religion,ideology and book. We therefore cannot extract the organisation part without considering the rest. It is also the question, when the religion stops and the organisation begins. I personally am against religious organisations in general. Nonetheless they should not force their way of thinking onto others. The strength thereof varies a lot depending on the area you look at. Talking about Islam is a rude generalisation. I cannot see a clear reason why Islam should be talked about especially - not being considered as an example but being considered as the example. I hope that you realise that islamist extremist is largely attributed to offensive intervention of the western civilisation into the life of many middle east countries. Supply with guns, forcing war, supporting evil dictatures- yeees imperialism and the 20th century. What would we do if someone came and gave us a gun and money. Believe me, we'd shoot. There are enough historic examples that prove that we would.

c) is rather interesting. Here, I would argue universally - is, and if yes when is, a religion that preaches a way of life dangerous? We may not mix it up with b) or d) as a religion per se does neither force people nor organise them (=group pressure) to live a way of life. I think religions per se are very beautiful and deeply philosophical and spiritual. But not only that, religions give us values to live for. Even if we disagree on the consequence, Christians, Atheists and Muslems all think and know that murder is bad, theft is bad etc. and I see no danger in that. The shariah law, as the ten commandments give us a route how to live. We must absolutely consider the linguistic differences between arab, greek or chinese and the time. Books at this time and earlier were all very bloody, strong in metaphores, I mean reaaaaally bloody and pervert, read some Catullus so in our time and translation it is easy to misread a strong metaphor. I am sorry that a lot of people do.

So how should we read this title? This title draws a huge monster, undefined if individual, religion, book or ideology that threatens "us". This is why I see this title as offensive.

The first post not offensive???? are you kidding??

Holland's Geert Wilder has made a film called Fitna which exposes the real danger of Islamic oppression. Ie., Islam and its Shariah Law wants to spread its barbarity to Europe, and USA, UK etc. It is really brutal, and this is very real. Please see his film. He is very courageous to make it, and now has to have 24 hour security because of the inevitable death threats from Islamicists

read it again!! It says: Islam and the shariah law is barbaric (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) wants to oppress the world (!!!!!!) that the islam is brutal (!!!!!). And he fucking does not know what the shariah law is !!!! CM, you may not have talked about the evil muslems but zezt certainly did !!!!!!!

 

[Forkbender]

I don't think GODs post was 'solely to offend' (as per the forum rules)

I'm not talking about forum rules here. If you think the forum rules are all that matter, you've missed the point of this being a community of likeminded souls.

He was attacked by zezt because of the mutual respect rule, hence my answer in that way. I know what you mean.

Because his is not the voice of constructive criticism, but of wit and derision. His criticisms do not contain any useful information, no alternative for the things he says are nonsense.

I don't think that constructive criticism is helpful if someone is wrong. (I don't mean to say that everyone but GOD is right here). Sometimes people need to see things on their own, build them from the ground up instead of someone else handing out his worldview for you to copy. Constructive criticism is like saying to a designer who designed a car without wheels: "Maybe you should make it red instead of blue." What does the designer learn when you take over and draw the wheels?

Boring, you know? I don't feel challenged by him at all, I know what I'm talking about, I live it, breathe it every day. There are way more enlightened critics on this forum. If GOD wrote meaningful criticisms, your comparison might have been relevant. Also don't forget I'm not just offended personally, I feel bad about new members having to pass the GOD test all the time.

You don't feel challenged, but offended? Maybe you should look at why you feel offended.

Love and truth can never be insulted or offended. Think about it.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Let me write my thoughts.

I appreciate what you have written. I understand words like 'Islam' and 'dangerous' are vague. I've already discussed this myself earlier on in the thread.

but actually primarily the book was called immoral.

As I've already explained, the Quran asserts its own authority till the end of time for being the very word of God himself. That's what makes it, and scriptures like it, dangerous. Normal books may wreak temporary havoc, but they are eventually replaced by better books. The word of God however is irreplaceable.

"It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors."

Art is always in flux, changing as cultures change. Holy books, however, are passed on from generation to generation unchanged.

And therefore I want to underline that you should not blame a book for the bad of a man. Guns don't shoot people.

I've already pointed out in this thread that I'm not blaming anyone or anything, but am trying to get the big picture as to what caused and is currently fueling the problem. I don't see zezt blaming anyone in particular either.

He keeps talking about the shariah law, which he seems not to understand at all, but this still keeps the question open. Did he mean a) the muslem that lives for the shariah law is dangerous b) The organisation that applies the shariah law is dangerous (remember: the shariah law is only valid for the muslem. It is about how a muslem must live and behave) c) The religion that preaches the shariah law is dangerous d) The ideology that uses the shariah law is dangerous, or rather, a system that is based on the laws of shariah is dangerous.

My view on the matter: a) a muslim that lives for the shariah law can be dangerous, because to actually appreciate the shariah law means one must be brainwashed and cruel; b) the shariah law (and hadiths) are valid for the muslim, but apply to their conduct towards nonmuslims too, and some of those injunctions pose a danger to our liberties, such as being free to make jokes and be openly critical of religious dogmas; c) because it's supported by a religion which asserts a divine source it is even more dangerous than other types of law, I've already discussed this; d) an ideology or system that does not reject shariah law is indeed dangerous to our world:

"[T]he Court considers that sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it. [...] It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."
Refah Revisited: Strasbourg's Construction of Islam (PDF)
Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Democracy_and_human_rights

So, though the severity of 'danger' differs, any individual or group supporting Islamic laws may be the agent of that danger.

I hope we all agree that a) is xenophobic/offensive.

It would be, if the sharia wasn't what it was.

how does my muslem friend threaten me if he wants to live the way he wants to?

Direct threats are not always the issue.

Is it dangerous if he starts preaching to my children?

It's dangerous when he starts preaching to his own children.

I cannot see a clear reason why Islam should be talked about especially - not being considered as an example but being considered as the example.

Well, many scholars do that, however. Even Arabic scholars.

I hope that you realise that islamist extremist is largely attributed to offensive intervention of the western civilisation into the life of many middle east countries. Supply with guns, forcing war, supporting evil dictatures- yeees imperialism and the 20th century.

Yes, I acknowledge that.

I think religions per se are very beautiful and deeply philosophical and spiritual.

You mean the songs, the prayers, the incense, the allegories and all that? Yes, that part can be beautiful and spiritual, but also deceptive.

But not only that, religions give us values to live for.

Only insofar as they are free from misconceptions and falsehoods.

The shariah law, as the ten commandments give us a route how to live.

That's a superficial comparison. The sharia provides many more details, and recommends severe punishments, including very cruel corporal punishments.

Books at this time and earlier were all very bloody, strong in metaphores, I mean reaaaaally bloody and pervert,

Yes indeed, I know all about it, but none of those books claims to be based on the unquestionable word of God or his prophet.

So how should we read this title? This title draws a huge monster, undefined if individual, religion, book or ideology that threatens "us". This is why I see this title as offensive.

OK.

The first post not offensive???? are you kidding??

Holland's Geert Wilder has made a film called Fitna which exposes the real danger of Islamic oppression. Ie., Islam and its Shariah Law wants to spread its barbarity to Europe, and USA, UK etc. It is really brutal, and this is very real.

read it again!! It says: Islam and the shariah law is barbaric (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) wants to oppress the world (!!!!!!) that the islam is brutal (!!!!!).

I agree that there is an oppressive ideology coming our way. I also think it's mostly barbarian, though I don't claim it's the only barbarian force in the world today. We can all give examples.

The sharia is brutal. Islam itself might eventually be reformed into something that shuns oppression and brutality, but I haven't seen it happen yet, except in individuals involved with the mystical offshoots of Islam such as the sufis and thoroughly modernized "muslims" (apostates basically).

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I don't think that constructive criticism is helpful if someone is wrong.

Well I do. At least one must be capable of constructive criticism. And I think it would be appreciated on a forum where most of the members are eager to learn something new.

Maybe you should look at why you feel offended.

Maybe I already did?

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I sure understand what you mean CM ; and god knows (isn't that a song?) that I don't agree with him jumping in all threads, especially the more psychonautic subjects according to psychonautic exploration. I notice you have left my thread alone god, but I also think you will have to meditate a bit on where your jurisdiction ends. You have said yourself you do not do psychonautic exploration, not even with cannabis ; so I think your logics and rationale would be best used to deter people who would give bad advice on harmful drugs, which too often I have seen you remain silent too while you focused on trying to convince us there was no atlantis.

You're saying many things here I dared not say directly, or couldn't formulate so well.

 

[Forkbender]

I don't think that constructive criticism is helpful if someone is wrong.

Well I do. At least one must be capable of constructive criticism. And I think it would be appreciated on a forum where most of the members are eager to learn something new.

Okay. What constructive criticism would you have for GOD, then?

[quote:1w4vcmoy]Maybe you should look at why you feel offended.

Maybe I already did?[/quote:1w4vcmoy]
So why are you still offended?