Islamaphobia?

[Onnedheil]

So, as feminists, women, fighting against patriarchy, against rape culture against male violence to women. My question is this.

Are we suddenly now supposed to be supporting a religion that is an actual rape culture, Openly accepted paedophilia, actual supremacy of toxic masculinity an actual patriarchy Which is responsible for female genital mutilation , based on a the word of a paedophile warmonger who propagates a monotheist singular God who is male .

And when Anyone, speaks out about these things We're labelled as a racist and as islamaphobe and told to silence our voice for the religion of peace?

Have I ended up in the twilight zone or something?

Laurief the fact that a spiritualist can be an atheist is disturbing in its own right.

Cote, I hope I could strangle it. Bury it six feet under and never to be discussed. Sadly, it's one of those things that us as humans have got the hunger to know and understand.

And thanks for that example of the caliphs. You hear it being talked a lot about. I assume they were the same as the head of al Qaeda or something.

slug : I knew a Catholic who spluttered I was utterly selfish with no moral code when I said that I was atheist. This was interesting as I try to be thoughtful of others and am law abiding whilst he was an irritatingly selfish drug-addled petty criminal. We were both judging like crazy of course!

the fact that a spiritualist can be an atheist is disturbing in its own right

For me, this statement is a good example of what Buffy was talking about in this thread.

How much harder to act ethically when there's not even heaven to look forward to.

Slug
I had a conversation with a catholic friend where she implied that atheists were selfish and had no morals or principles to guide them, as why does it matter, when you are dead you're dead. I think what you're implying about spiritualism is similar although not as extreme.
I think you can have moral principles and even spiritual beliefs without believing in god(s).**
**
This is not my line of thinking. I think it's all in the definition and understanding of the words such as spiritualism and afterlife and what happens.
Am not looking at it I terms of morals as I always think things like that are all relative and it's part of human emulation or development. Part of learning from history and self regulating.

My whole issue is the fact that they believe in something beyond the human body even though there is no scientific or any kind of proof.

The Buddhist way of thinking for me is not very different to Plato. They may have different names but so much ring alarm bells for me. It's that search for perfection that most people can't get in real life so they assume that something is beyond this world and everybody has to achieve that greatness.

That does not make them atheist.

Spiritualism and belief systems are not the same thing. Am sure you can a belief system without without being spiritual.

The best example is when people describe Americanism as a belief system but nothing spiritual.

The Americanism in this is more about the behaviour of the people, their social value and nothing to with when they die or who created them, or how they came into being.

"Laurief the fact that a spiritualist can be an atheist is disturbing in its own right"

Do you mean "spiritualist"- or was that a typo?

Doesn't spirit, spiritual and spiritualism go hand in hand?

In simple terms.

Spirits= soul or what lives on beyond the body

Spiritual= the ways of the belief system you aline with.

Spiritualism= the process and practise.

Or am I missing something crucial here?

Just to clarify. The spirit thing is not in the context of ghost or evil spirit.

For me, spiritualism specifically means contacting spirits and that sort of thing. So perfectly compatible with atheism. If bonkers. But sadly being an atheist does not protect you from being bonkers!

"conversation with a catholic friend where she implied that atheists were selfish and had no morals or principles to guide them, as why does it matter, when you are dead you're dead"

This sort of thing makes me wonder if it would be a bad thing for the world for the influence of religion to diminish. Clearly there are people who are moral and decent only because they think a deity is watching them. How much more awful would people act towards each other if they realize that it is all just a ludicrous story?

You've bought her story and think there are clearly people who are "moral and decent" only because of a god and if you took that god away from them, they'd be awful/'immoral'/'indecent'?

What are you talking about?

slug - well that's what I was wondering but then I was none the wiser for the "what are you talking about?" response. I'm not very good at this sort of debate. Sorry.

But watched people are good people, look no further than the Internet and how much trolling goes on under the guise of anonymity. Complaints about increased surveillance by the state are met with 'if your not doing anything wrong you won't mind your details being searched through'. Watched people are good people is also the basis why we don't trust people whose faces are covered, that they must be on some nefarious business because their faces are covered and so they are anonymous.
The omniscient omnipresent omnipotent God has now been replaced in modern secular society by the gazillion cctv cameras on the streets, shops and public buildings, experian and other credit reference agencies to dig into your payment history and the all powerful HMRC to make you pay your tax into the welfare state rather than the church tithe. We actually live in a low trust society (see the increased usage of dashcams in cars?) but the heavy surveillance is what we rely on rather than extravagant religious rituals to weed out the insincere and untrustworthy.

I asked what you are talking about because I really have no idea what you were trying to say in that post. You seemed to be accusing me of something but it wasn't even clear what that was.

Cote, sorry you didn't understand the question. If you weren't being sarcastic in the post I was referring to, then I'll try to rephrase. If you were being sarcastic, we'll just leave it at that.

Just forget it. Sigh.

laurie Your question is clear to me. You are questioning the proposition that some people only behave well because of constraints their religion, because a god is watching.

I don't think it's a very tenable proposition. I agree with moonstruck but the heavy surveillance is what we rely on rather than extravagant religious rituals to weed out the insincere and untrustworthy

Bertran For me, spiritualism specifically means contacting spirits and that sort of thing. So perfectly compatible with atheism. If bonkers. But sadly being an atheist does not protect you from being bonkers!*
*
This confuses me even more or makes me question my understanding of atheism.
Also my understanding of spiritualism even though this on its own is a broad subject.

You don't have to answer the following question.

So how do you understand spirits, and what's their purpose to you?
What made you believe in them?
what makes them compatible?

Posted too soon. The reasons why we are good/ why we obey the law range from at one end - simply because the person thinks it's the right thing to do to the other simply to avoid punishment and everything in between, including the concept of "do as you would be done by" without which civilised society crumbles.

Without a belief that doing good is the right thing to do and a fear of punishment society breaks down.

I'm a little sceptical that without a fear of a deity people who otherwise do no harm would ignore all the other societal and legal constructs.