Deaths, injuries after reports of explosion at Ariana Grande concert at Manchester Arena — Page 8

...

Updated On: 12/19/19 at 01:42 AM

For those who are interested in the topic I highly recommend listening to Sam Harris, neuroscientist and atheist, speak. Would be very interested if many here even know who he is.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QnqFy7jsmhw

UncleCharlie said: "You're doing God's work here, bro. "

Good and bad deeds only come from a god, when a person thinks that a certain religion is their identity. The best work comes from within a human being. Not from a god.

Because then it's a product of wide views, education, love from within, multiple angles, challenging thinking, intelligence and reasoning.

It really is the difference between not slapping another kid in class because the teacher is watching, versus not slapping another kid in class because you feel sorry for him and even though his behaviour is unreasonable, you don't know what he's been through. It is also the difference between not stealing something from a store because god is watching, and not stealing something from a store because you don't want to do that to the store owner because he works hard for it. Character comes from within. And from very wide views on life. Views that go way beyond one religion.

Though this thread has drifted far from the specifics of the Manchester attack, the discussion about religion has been compelling. In my opinion, religion has done far more evil than good over the long-term, and none of the major religions are much better or worse in that regard (again, in the long-term). Personally, I was raised by Catholic Republicans, and I have a brother who is just a year older than me. Now, I am a liberal atheist, and my brother is still a Catholic Republican. He voted for Trump and continues to support him, spewing all the borderline-racist propaganda on social media. Our family tree is similarly populated with varying degrees of liberals and conservatives, even though we all had similar upbringings. So, without totally dismissing the idea of indoctrination, there comes a point where individuals need to be responsible for their own ideas, actions, and votes. And while I see organized religion holding less value every day, we are nowhere near being able to eradicate it, so we need discussions that are more practical.

I largely agree with madbrian and also with qolbinau.

If there's anything crazy about what qolbinau is saying, it's only that the religious majority is likely to be in control of government - and therefore schools, tax policy, benefit distribution, etc. - so that it cannot be implemented in the foreseeable future. But this doesn't make what he's saying any less valuable than a progressive arguing for single-payer healthcare, or a libertarian arguing for an end to drone strikes.

Otherwise, I really, really have trouble seeing what in qolbinau's posts is making people so upset.

Updated On: 5/25/17 at 08:20 AM

kdogg36 said: "Also, while I agree with madbrian that the discussion about religion has been useful, I want reiterate that the best thing most of us can do in response to these attacks is to ignore them as the statistically negligible threats that they are. That's the best way to deny terrorists what they want."

I agree with this, at least with respect to letting it affect my everyday life. I did two things the day after the attach: made a donation to Forever Manchester, and bought concert tickets.

Kdogg36, Ignoring them and the situation and it's cause is kind of naive in my opinion.

"the best thing most of us can do in response to these attacks is to ignore them as the statistically negligible threats that they are".

I'm sorry, but WHAT? How can you brush this aside by saying, there are other causes of death that are statisically higher? I'm not buying this answer.

Keeping our mouths shut to please terrorists is no point either.

But really, is this your solution for the problem?

Updated On: 5/25/17 at 08:47 AM

Pootie2 said: " A number of extremists are converted as young adults as well, so indoctrination from parents is only one possible root. "

I think it's both. The seeds are often planted in the early years by the parents who, in this case, taught him that Allah is almighty.

Lina Ahmed, 21, told MailOnline: ‘They are a Libyan Muslim family and they have been acting strangely. A couple of months ago he [Salman] was chanting the first kalma [Islamic prayer] really loudly in the street. He was chanting in Arabic.

‘He was saying ‘There is only one God and the prophet Mohammed is his messenger’.’

If he thinks that is his identity, and the only truth, it's only a small step to decide or believe what Allah actually thinks about a certain subject later in life. No matter what, as this person believes Allah believes it, it's true.



Some of the people who knew the Manchester suicide bomber, however, apparently described him as "gullible." I'm sure that's a specific character trait ripe for conversion/recruitment, but I don't know if that's a deep personality trait or something bred. I keep thinking about a very naive, gullible Christian coworker I had who was easily misled by another coworker who kept telling her BS for entertainment (and I didn't feel any sympathy for her because she never learned her lesson), and she clung to her religion because she just couldn't make sense of the world outside her house otherwise. But maybe she was just stupid."



Yes, that might not have helped the situation either.

Updated On: 5/25/17 at 08:56 AM

Dave28282 said: "Keeping our mouths shut to please terrorists is not good either."

I'm saying not to live in fear of them, because they are a tiny, tiny threat to the typical person. And that's not a way to please them, it's a way to deny them their power over us.

But really, is this your solution for the problem?"

No, and I hinted at a solution (admittedly only a partial solution) in an earlier post, with regard to the connection between daily bombings of Muslims and their radicalization in Western countries.

But I'm talking about what we do in our individual lives, and madbrian is correct in his interpretation. If you worry more about terrorist attacks than you do about drunk drivers or heart disease, you are playing into terrorists' hands. Their ability to do actual harm is absolutely minuscule compared those threats; we need to deny them their ability to consume our thoughts and fears and thereby control our choices, which is what they want.

Updated On: 5/25/17 at 09:00 AM

Since qolbinau and Dave are so fond of mocking the idea of coming together after an attack like Manchester, and mocking "religion of peace" (a phrase used in this thread only by people mockingly, by the way), and write it off as doing nothing to prevent such attacks...

...what exactly are you proposing as a practical solution? Because "get rid of religion!" is not practical. It is at best a thought experiment to propose getting rid of beliefs that have been entrenched in human society for thousands of years. What is going to stop terrorists in the immediate future, exactly? There are already hundreds of thousands of people who have sworn allegiance to ISIS, who fight for that ideology on the ground in the Middle East and elsewhere (to say nothing of the other extreme believers in other religions). It is literally tearing countries apart and you want everyone to do... what, exactly? What do you think we should be doing with these people who exist in large numbers now, who pose an immediate threat?

Some of the terrorists, the ones carrying out attacks on their home soils, it should be mentioned, are educated individuals, people who have gone to university and hold or were pursuing degrees in science and engineering.

I agree that Western military endeavors and meddling in the Middle East over the last half-century are a major impetus for radicalization- and the arguably the root of this modern radicalization.

The issue with qolbinau's plan is... how do you dislodge existing theocracies? For instance, the Iranian Revolution was popularly supported.

Updated On: 5/25/17 at 10:01 AM

qolbinau said: "For those who are interested in the topic I highly recommend listening to Sam Harris, neuroscientist and atheist, speak. Would be very interested if many here even know who he is.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QnqFy7jsmhw"

Oh brother. I hope you don't fall off your high horse.

We should all just think exactly like you.

Bingo! "We want to do the exact OPPOSITE of indoctrination. We want people to think like us and do things our way because we're obviously smarter and better than they are. We'll present them with OUR 'facts' and either naturally or eventually, they will see things our way. Because the human race is logical and will understand that we offer the superior path. Nobody has ever tried it before! We are the only ones who have ever looked at religion this way. And now it's time for the world to do it our way."

Whether you like it or not, religion has been a fundamental part of humanity since thoughts were strung together into ideas. It's not going away.

Conclusion: Given the fact that some people, even on this board call what you describe (people exposed to a wide education - a wide range of religions (and therefore can start to think about the contradictions between them and likely aiteology of religion), high quality science classes (and therefore can see that the world likely did not derive as described in genesis), reasoning/logic classes, learn to think in a challenging way, challenge your own thoughts from a young age, etc), as "creepy", shows a fear of free thinking.

Something you clearly haven't exercised if that's your conclusion. You just excised a word one person used and applied your own context to it. Which is pretty much the opposite of what you've been preaching. Yes, PREACHING.

Well, that will teach the terrorists.

What did you teach them? Are they taking your identity education (indoctrination) classes?

It's all about identity.

No, it's not all about your favorite buzzword. My identity is going to be someone who is finished with this ridiculous conversation.