Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Dee.

What is your POV on theism and vice versa?

Recommended Posts

slimeball supreme

racists is the biggest threat to Sweden[...] uncivilized savages [...] I never vote for a party which has a muslim in it

 

CONGRATULATIONS!

 

You are officially a f*cking stupid uneducated moron! We don't have trophies, but we would just like to tell you simply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Power Colt

 

 

Also that Cyper guy just sounds like a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cyper

 

racists is the biggest threat to Sweden[...] uncivilized savages [...] I never vote for a party which has a muslim in it

 

 

 

Let me clarify my arguments.

 

i). The majority of muslims in Sweden are homophobic. Including every muslim who so far have been sitting in the Swedish parliament.

 

ii). Homophobia is as morally bad as racism.

 

Conclusion: I do not vote for any political party which allow homophobes or racists to be a part of that party.These people are not suitable to be a part off a democratic government's legislature. I do not accept religion as an excuse for intolerance which unfortunately most swedish politicians do - they even let people who believe its justified to beat your wife and that women who do not follow the muslim dresscodes creates anxiety in our society. The only thing that justifies such uncivilized thoughts is 'It's muh religion'.

 

Figuratively speaking, I want to destroy them.

Edited by Cyper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

 

i). The majority of muslims in Sweden are homophobic. Including every muslim who so far have been sitting in the Swedish parliament.

 

[Citation needed]

 

 

I do not accept religion as an excuse for intolerance which unfortunately most swedish politicians do - they even let people who believe its justified to beat your wife and that women who do not follow the muslim dresscodes creates anxiety in our society.

[Citation needed]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cyper

 

 

i). The majority of muslims in Sweden are homophobic. Including every muslim who so far have been sitting in the Swedish parliament.

 

[Citation needed]

 

 

I do not accept religion as an excuse for intolerance which unfortunately most swedish politicians do - they even let people who believe its justified to beat your wife and that women who do not follow the muslim dresscodes creates anxiety in our society.

[Citation needed]

 

 

The majority of all muslims in Sweden do not allow same-sex marriage (homophobia), the majority of muslims do not allow consenting sex between people of the same sex (homophobia), and the majority of muslims do not allow same-sex relationsships (homophobia). No muslim organisation in Sweden that I know of condone homosexuality. You should look up the history of Swedish politician Abdirizak Waberi or, ex, chairman off the Islamic Federation in Sweden. Or Omar Mustafa. Or look up all the scandals regarding all major muslim organisations in Sweden. Many muslim organisations have been invited to take a stance against homophobia - it have never happened - you may ask yourself why.

 

There's been a TV programme (Uppdrag granskning) which infiltrated the communities and asked questions, and by doing that revealed both homophobia and misogyny among the major muslim organisations. This is a good way to do it. I'd pay lot's of cash to any organisation that expose intolerance and expose those responsible and involved on national TV.

 

I got to ask, are you surprised? Do you seriously even doubt that homophobia is prevalent among muslims in particular? This is nothing new. Look into the catholic church, look into jewish organisations. Homophobia is fueled by this poison called religion and the state is condoning it.

 

You, like everyone else here, don't like what I'm saying because I am literally trampling on other peoples religious faith. People become emotional when I speak about religion as if it was nothing special. You don't like when I say that homophobia is as bad as racism, or vice versa, because that puts a lot of muslims and other religious people in bad light. I stand up for humans rights. I try to be consistent. If homophobia is wrong, its wrong regardless if it comes from religion or secular thoughts, or whenever its a part of a culture. I'm not a cultural relativist, you see. Diversity ends where intolerance begin.

Edited by Cyper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoreyDog2014

 

 

 

i).

 

 

[Citation needed]

 

The majority of all muslims in Sweden do not allow same-sex marriage (homophobia), the majority of muslims do not allow consenting sex between people of the same sex (homophobia), and the majority of muslims do not allow same-sex relationsships (homophobia). No muslim organisation in Sweden that I know of condone homosexuality. You should look up the history of Swedish politician Abdirizak Waberi, ex, chairman off the Islamic Federation in Sweden. Or look up all the scandals regarding all major muslim organisations in Sweden. Many muslim organisations have been invited to take a stance against homophobia - it have never happened - you may ask yourself why.

 

There's been a TV programme (Uppdrag granskning) which infiltrated the communities and asked questions, and by doing that revealed both homophobia and misogyny among the major muslim organisations. This is a good way to do it. I'd pay lot's of cash to any organisation that expose intolerance and expose those responsible and involved on national TV.

 

I got to ask, are you surprised? Do you seriously even doubt that homophobia is prevalent among muslims in particular? This is nothing new. Look into the catholic church, look into jewish organisations. Homophobia is fueled by this poison called religion and the state is condoning it.

I can see your point but all Abrahamic religions are inherently homophobic. Look at American right wing christians. Absolute bigots and homophobes. Take Kim Davis as an example.

 

To single out one of the 3 isn't right where all 3 deserve critisicm. I've known more Christian homophobes than Muslim. Oddly never met a Jewish homophobe though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cyper

 

 

 

i).

 

 

[Citation needed]

 

The majority of all muslims in Sweden do not allow same-sex marriage (homophobia), the majority of muslims do not allow consenting sex between people of the same sex (homophobia), and the majority of muslims do not allow same-sex relationsships (homophobia). No muslim organisation in Sweden that I know of condone homosexuality. You should look up the history of Swedish politician Abdirizak Waberi, ex, chairman off the Islamic Federation in Sweden. Or look up all the scandals regarding all major muslim organisations in Sweden. Many muslim organisations have been invited to take a stance against homophobia - it have never happened - you may ask yourself why.

 

There's been a TV programme (Uppdrag granskning) which infiltrated the communities and asked questions, and by doing that revealed both homophobia and misogyny among the major muslim organisations. This is a good way to do it. I'd pay lot's of cash to any organisation that expose intolerance and expose those responsible and involved on national TV.

 

I got to ask, are you surprised? Do you seriously even doubt that homophobia is prevalent among muslims in particular? This is nothing new. Look into the catholic church, look into jewish organisations. Homophobia is fueled by this poison called religion and the state is condoning it.

I can see your point but all Abrahamic religions are inherently homophobic. Look at American right wing christians. Absolute bigots and homophobes. Take Kim Davis as an example.

 

To single out one of the 3 isn't right where all 3 deserve critisicm. I've known more Christian homophobes than Muslim. Oddly never met a Jewish homophobe though...

 

 

Correct.

 

With other words, the abrahamic religions poisons society. In Sweden, at least, there is absolutely no doubt that Islam is the most retarded one, both regarding its view on gender roles, sexuality, and so forth. Most other religions have adapted far more to the secular society. In other parts of the world christianity is equally retarded. Religious people are trying to keep up with modern values but they are as always very slow. I wont be humble nor respectful to those preaching hatred. All religions ought to either adapt to secular values or to be destroyed. Homophobia does not belong in a civilized society. It belongs in the history books. The only way to reach this goal is organized opposion against intolerance that arise out of religion. Human rights preceed any culture, ideology, invidual, or lifestance.

 

It's interesting that so many people seem to get upset and go against me for my stance on this. Because I honestly want good for people, not bad.

Edited by Cyper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Deadite

It's interesting that so many people seem to get upset and go against me for my stance on this. Because I honestly want good for people, not bad.

 

my urge to destroy this filthy religion is stronger than ever.

 

People are going against you because you are battling hate with more hate, you are not gonna get simpathy if you post like this.

Edited by Midnight Hitman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

 

 

The majority of all muslims in Sweden do not allow same-sex marriage (homophobia), the majority of muslims do not allow consenting sex between people of the same sex (homophobia), and the majority of muslims do not allow same-sex relationsships (homophobia). No muslim organisation in Sweden that I know of condone homosexuality.

[Citation needed]

 

You should look up the history of Swedish politician Abdirizak Waberi or, ex, chairman off the Islamic Federation in Sweden. Or Omar Mustafa. Or look up all the scandals regarding all major muslim organisations in Sweden. Many muslim organisations have been invited to take a stance against homophobia - it have never happened - you may ask yourself why.

 

 

Or you could, you know, cite some sources.

 

 

There's been a TV programme (Uppdrag granskning) which infiltrated the communities and asked questions, and by doing that revealed both homophobia and misogyny among the major muslim organisations. This is a good way to do it. I'd pay lot's of cash to any organisation that expose intolerance and expose those responsible and involved on national TV.

Television shows are like, totally 100% objective, always. They like, never have an agenda. Ever.

 

 

I got to ask, are you surprised? Do you seriously even doubt that homophobia is prevalent among muslims in particular?

 

Without a source, yes, I do doubt it's as prevalent as you claim it is.

 

 

 

This is nothing new. Look into the catholic church, look into jewish organisations. Homophobia is fueled by this poison called religion and the state is condoning it.

I've encountered plenty of atheist bigots in my day. Surely all atheist must be bigots, then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cyper

 

It's interesting that so many people seem to get upset and go against me for my stance on this. Because I honestly want good for people, not bad.

 

my urge to destroy this filthy religion is stronger than ever.

 

People are going against you because you are battling hate with more hate, you are not gonna get simpathy if you post like this.

 

 

is it that

 

a) You don't think that homophobia is filth

 

b) That homophobia should not be fought

 

c) Or that my method of fighting intolerance could be improved?

 

Because any religion who profess intolerance is filth and ought to be destroyed in my view.

Edited by Cyper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost Legend

I suppose the only thing is the irony of the use of the word "atheism" which actually derives from religion seeing as most atheists claim wanting nothing to do with religion (but we all know they'll bad-mouth it any chance they get.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Power Colt

 

 

It's interesting that so many people seem to get upset and go against me for my stance on this. Because I honestly want good for people, not bad.

 

my urge to destroy this filthy religion is stronger than ever.

 

People are going against you because you are battling hate with more hate, you are not gonna get simpathy if you post like this.

 

 

is it that

 

a) You don't think that homophobia is filth

 

b) That homophobia should not be fought

 

c) Or that my method of fighting intolerance could be improved?

 

Because any religion who profess intolerance is filth and ought to be destroyed in my view.

 

So if religions are a disease, what's the cure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

Homophobia should be opposed, it should be fought physically and politically, but resorting to another form of bigotry isn't going to help LGBT struggles, especially not when many LGBT people belong to the group you're attacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Power Colt

Homophobia should be opposed, it should be fought physically and politically, but resorting to another form of bigotry isn't going to help LGBT struggles, especially not when many LGBT people belong to the group you're attacking.

It's often just the extremists that are the problem in religions and other social groups.

 

Also hate leads to suffering and sh*t.

Edited by Nutsack McQueen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

I suppose the only thing is the irony of the use of the word "atheism" which actually derives from religion seeing as most atheists claim wanting nothing to do with religion (but we all know they'll bad-mouth it any chance they get.)

Yes, very ironic. Adding an "a" in place of an "ism" or "ist" makes you look especially contradicting, I see.

 

Those asexuals and ageists. Thought they could fool everybody.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost Legend

 

I suppose the only thing is the irony of the use of the word "atheism" which actually derives from religion seeing as most atheists claim wanting nothing to do with religion (but we all know they'll bad-mouth it any chance they get.)

Yes, very ironic. Adding an "a" in place of an "ism" or "ist" makes you look especially contradicting, I see.

 

Those asexuals and ageists. Thought they could fool everybody.

 

"theism" is religion. Adding an "a" doesn't change the fact that the word still comes from religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

 

 

I suppose the only thing is the irony of the use of the word "atheism" which actually derives from religion seeing as most atheists claim wanting nothing to do with religion (but we all know they'll bad-mouth it any chance they get.)

Yes, very ironic. Adding an "a" in place of an "ism" or "ist" makes you look especially contradicting, I see.

 

Those asexuals and ageists. Thought they could fool everybody.

 

"theism" is religion. Adding an "a" doesn't change the fact that the word still comes from religion.

 

Obviously I know it comes from religion. Everyone can see that. The word "atheist" wouldn't exist if theism wasn't around to begin with. That's how it works. You add an "a" to show departure. What kind of point was that supposed to be?

 

How does it create irony? Those are written definitions and adding an "a" in it means you're against it or are parting from it. That wouldn't even make a lick of sense even if you tried.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost Legend

 

 

 

I suppose the only thing is the irony of the use of the word "atheism" which actually derives from religion seeing as most atheists claim wanting nothing to do with religion (but we all know they'll bad-mouth it any chance they get.)

Yes, very ironic. Adding an "a" in place of an "ism" or "ist" makes you look especially contradicting, I see.

 

Those asexuals and ageists. Thought they could fool everybody.

 

"theism" is religion. Adding an "a" doesn't change the fact that the word still comes from religion.

 

So? What kind of point is that? And how does it create irony? Those are written definitions and adding an "a" in it means you're against it or are parting from it. That wouldn't even make a lick of sense even if you tried.

 

They want nothing to do with religion. It is a religious word, whether they are parting away or siding with it from it is irrelevant. It is still a religious word. Get me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

 

They want nothing to do with religion. It is a religious word, whether they are parting away or siding with it from it is irrelevant. It is still a religious word. Get me?

 

You still haven't answered my question for why it's ironic? It looks to me as if you were just trying to throw cheap shots.

 

Also, not all atheists want nothing to do with religion, and not all want anything to do with it. Don't start generalizing this, or it'll turn into a mudslide. You might as well be mentioning the other forms of "isms" and "ists" that I presented.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

New atheism is laughably religious in it's devotion to state and capital. It's a dogma with it's own holy books and prophets. The only difference is that they worship American cruise missiles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

New atheism is laughably religious in it's devotion to state and capital. It's a dogma with it's own holy books and prophets. The only difference is that they worship American cruise missiles.

Yes, because Richard Dawkings is actually a representation of all atheists. And that means anything mainstream and proposed by media attention is actually what goes on behind closed doors. Your post is pretty laughable. Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aqua97

The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations and the universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost Legend

 

 

They want nothing to do with religion. It is a religious word, whether they are parting away or siding with it from it is irrelevant. It is still a religious word. Get me?

 

You still haven't answered my question for why it's ironic? It looks to me as if you were just trying to throw cheap shots.

 

Also, not all atheists want nothing to do with religion, and not all want anything to do with it. Don't start generalizing this, or it'll turn into a mudslide. You might as well be mentioning the other forms of "isms" and "ists" that I presented.

 

You're reading too much into it. It is much more simple. The irony is nothing to do with what you're thinking about. All I am talking about is that no matter how you put it, "athiesm" comes from religion

 

And also, you're not reading enough at the same time. I said "most athiests". Not all athiests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

 

 

 

They want nothing to do with religion. It is a religious word, whether they are parting away or siding with it from it is irrelevant. It is still a religious word. Get me?

 

You still haven't answered my question for why it's ironic? It looks to me as if you were just trying to throw cheap shots.

 

Also, not all atheists want nothing to do with religion, and not all want anything to do with it. Don't start generalizing this, or it'll turn into a mudslide. You might as well be mentioning the other forms of "isms" and "ists" that I presented.

 

You're reading too much into it. It is much more simple. The irony is nothing to do with what you're thinking about. All I am talking about is that no matter how you put it, "athiesm" comes from religion

 

And also, you're not reading enough at the same time. I said "most athiests". Not all athiests.

 

No no no no no. Actually, your original point was that using the word atheist goes against not wanting to do with religion, which it doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

Yes, because Richard Dawkings is actually a representation of all atheist.

 

I didn't say he was. I'm an atheist, and he certainly doesn't represent me, nor my interests.

 

New atheism is neoliberal, pseudo-intellectual garbage. BUY MY BOOKS ABOUT HOW GOD DIDN'T REAL SO I CAN MAKE MORE BOOKS ABOUT HOW GOD DIDN'T REAL.

 

 

And that means anything mainstream and proposed by media attention is actually what goes on behind closed doors. Your post is pretty laughable.

 

Nah, new atheism is what's truly laughable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost Legend

 

 

 

 

They want nothing to do with religion. It is a religious word, whether they are parting away or siding with it from it is irrelevant. It is still a religious word. Get me?

 

You still haven't answered my question for why it's ironic? It looks to me as if you were just trying to throw cheap shots.

 

Also, not all atheists want nothing to do with religion, and not all want anything to do with it. Don't start generalizing this, or it'll turn into a mudslide. You might as well be mentioning the other forms of "isms" and "ists" that I presented.

 

You're reading too much into it. It is much more simple. The irony is nothing to do with what you're thinking about. All I am talking about is that no matter how you put it, "athiesm" comes from religion

 

And also, you're not reading enough at the same time. I said "most athiests". Not all athiests.

 

No no no no no. Actually, your original point was that using the word atheist goes against not wanting to do with religion, which it doesn't.

 

I know that, hence why most athiests bad-mouth it any chance they get as I had written in that original post had you probably read it you would've seen that.

 

Athiests claim to not want anything to do with religion but their whole ideology is based on religion, without religion you wouldn't have atheism. Atheism could only be created because of religion (where the word came from). Without religion, we would have atheism but under a different name or no name at all because religion doesn't exist in this parallel universe. This is the point I am trying to make.

 

If atheists really claim to not want involvement with religion, then they should really change the name. To what, however? Is the real question...

Edited by Lost Legend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.Smaher.

I'm against liberalism and I despise pseudo-intellectuals. Even if I just contradicted myself. But Richard definitely does NOT stand for all atheists. That's total BS. New atheism is a joke.

 

 

Athiests claim to not want anything to do with religion but their whole ideology is based on religion, without religion you wouldn't have atheism. Atheism could only be created because of religion (where the word came from). Without religion, we would have atheism but under a different name or no name at all because religion doesn't exist in this parallel universe. This is the point I am trying to make.

 

If atheists really claim to not want involvement with religion, then they should really change the name. To what, however? Is the real question...

 

Most atheists definitely don't not want anything to do with anything. If anything, they'd go against the fact it exists in the first place.

Edited by .Smaher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CoreyDog2014

New atheism is laughably religious in it's devotion to state and capital. It's a dogma with it's own holy books and prophets. The only difference is that they worship American cruise missiles.

You know what a new Atheist is right? It's basically an Atheist who won't shy away from telling theists what they think. You can't persecute Atheists anymore.

 

Oh, should be interesting, what are these Atheist 'holy' books then?

 

You do know the definition of religion don't you...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

 

You know what a new Atheist is right? It's basically an Atheist who won't shy away from telling theists what they think.

 

 

Nah, it's an atheist with a religious devotion to a lack of religious devotion, and an unshakable allegiance to the state. A new atheist is the kind of person that supports imperialism in the Middle East because Islam is "backwards".

 

 

 

Oh, should be interesting, what are these Atheist 'holy' books then?

 

 

 

410UkKG0LcL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

 

EDIT: It's funny because my best friends are religious, and they both share my views on LGBT folks. One is a Sikh, the other a secular Jew.

Edited by make total destroy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

 

I suppose the only thing is the irony of the use of the word "atheism" which actually derives from religion seeing as most atheists claim wanting nothing to do with religion (but we all know they'll bad-mouth it any chance they get.)

Yes, very ironic. Adding an "a" in place of an "ism" or "ist" makes you look especially contradicting, I see.

 

Those asexuals and ageists. Thought they could fool everybody.

 

"theism" is religion.No, actually it isn't. Theism at its most basic is simply belief in a deity. You can be religious without believing in God (non-theistic religion) and you can hold belief in a deity without being explicitly religious.

 

So next time you want to get pendantic about semantics, at least have the first clue what you're talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.