EDL, English defence league.

[Tyson]

One could argue that that is the basic requirement for all religions; although most people choosing to believe in a religion would call it faith.

 

Isn't faith just blind trust of something that may or may not be right.

[penguin]

One could argue that that is the basic requirement for all religions; although most people choosing to believe in a religion would call it faith.

 

it's not the basic requirement for all religions - as a muslim, God (Allah, Elahi) in the quran is challenging your views, he's challenging you to produce works which match his - he's asking you to question what you are being told, to learn and obtain knowledge - islam is less about faith and more about seeing the truth.

[l33wgn]

it's not the basic requirement for all religions - as a muslim, God (Allah, Elahi) in the quran is challenging your views, he's challenging you to produce works which match his - he's asking you to question what you are being told, to learn and obtain knowledge - islam is less about faith and more about seeing the truth.

 

so hes challenging you to be like him... to follow what he does..... religions all about control.

[mawby]

Isn't faith just blind trust of something that may or may not be right.

But if faith is acceptable when applied to believing in a religious text, what's so wrong with people having faith in the media to report facts correctly? And if what the media report about extremists results in people believing that all Muslims are terrorists, why should they be considered as having a lack of basic intelligence?

 

it's not the basic requirement for all religions - as a muslim, God (Allah, Elahi) in the quran is challenging your views, he's challenging you to produce works which match his - he's asking you to question what you are being told, to learn and obtain knowledge - islam is less about faith and more about seeing the truth.

Now I would class what you've just described as having faith, otherwise God could not be challenging you to produce work which matches his.

 

I should point out I'm not trying to belittle anyone beliefs, faiths, justify extremists or make an excuse for people who blindly believe what they are being told. I just think that linking people who follow like sheep with a basic lack of intelligence is a little naughty given, from my own observations over the years, that is really what believing in a religion requires you to do in one way or another.

[Abz]

One could argue that that is the basic requirement for all religions; although most people choosing to believe in a religion would call it faith.

Good point Mawby, but having faith and believing in good is different to believing in hatred and listening to chinese whispers.

 

it's not the basic requirement for all religions - as a muslim, God (Allah, Elahi) in the quran is challenging your views, he's challenging you to produce works which match his - he's asking you to question what you are being told, to learn and obtain knowledge - islam is less about faith and more about seeing the truth.

[l33wgn]

But if faith is acceptable when applied to believing in a religious text, what's so wrong with people having faith in the media to report facts correctly? And if what the media report about extremists results in people believing that all Muslims are terrorists, why should they be considered as having a lack of basic intelligence?

 

Now I would class what you've just described as having faith, otherwise God could not be challenging you to produce work which matches his.

 

I should point out I'm not trying to belittle anyone beliefs, faiths, justify extremists or make an excuse for people who blindly believe what they are being told. I just think that linking people who follow like sheep with a basic lack of intelligence is a little naughty given, from my own observations over the years, that is really what believing in a religion requires you to do in one way or another.

 

 

[Abz]

But if faith is acceptable when applied to believing in a religious text, what's so wrong with people having faith in the media to report facts correctly? And if what the media report about extremists results in people believing that all Muslims are terrorists, why should they be considered as having a lack of basic intelligence?

 

Now I would class what you've just described as having faith, otherwise God could not be challenging you to produce work which matches his.

 

I should point out I'm not trying to belittle anyone beliefs, faiths, justify extremists or make an excuse for people who blindly believe what they are being told. I just think that linking people who follow like sheep with a basic lack of intelligence is a little naughty given, from my own observations over the years, that is really what believing in a religion requires you to do in one way or another.

I should really rephrase this, the following of sheep in this term and on the current subject is when people follow something based on what they have heard. Now staying in line with the thread, the EDL members are believing something which we know is not entirely true. The problem is, these people along with these extremists are acting upon this information which is then leading to violence, tension, people getting hurt.

 

 

Now with people who follow their religion\belief's (and I am including atheist here too) without harming or being harm then there is nothing wrong with them being sheep’s. They are only sheep’s in the sense they all have a 'belief' other than that they have different but all live the same principle. Live life with purpose, bring good, help others, spread knowledge, be kind etc.

 

I hope this clarifies the two.

[Septic]

One could argue that that is the basic requirement for all religions; although most people choosing to believe in a religion would call it faith.

 

I'm sorry; how is "following like sheep" and a "lack of intelligence" a basic requirement for all religions?

 

I should point out I'm not trying to belittle anyone beliefs, faiths, justify extremists or make an excuse for people who blindly believe what they are being told.

 

Really? Then you did the above effortlessly.

[mawby]

Good point Mawby, but having faith and believing in good is different to believing in hatred and listening to chinese whispers.

It is not true that most religious texts have their origins pre-dating written text, and therefore were originally passed down from generation to generation as word of mouth, which one could argue is not too dissimilar to Chinese whispers.

 

I agree with you're trying to say, but unfortunately the distinction between faith-in-good and believing in hatred can easily become muddied for someone if they are subjected to an influence which is able to justify the hatred in some way. Whether that be because of an extremist's interpretation of a religion causing people to blow themselves up in the name of a God, or due to the media constantly reporting on Muslim terrorists instead of just terrorists (who happen to consider themselves as Muslims) resulting in organisations demanding these "people" go back to their own country.

[mawby]

I'm sorry; how is "following like sheep" and a "lack of intelligence" a basic requirement for all religions?

Really? Then you did the above effortlessly.

I took great care to ensure that my post was not expressed as my opinion nor a statement of fact. If you are offended by me pointing out what someone else may believe then this is not the thread for you.

[Septic]

I took great care to ensure that my post was not expressed as my opinion nor a statement of fact. If you are offended by me pointing out what someone else may believe then this is not the thread for you.

 

If your post wasn't an opinion NOR a statement of fact, what exactly was it?

 

I merely asked you a question. My later statement alluded to the fact that you might have belittled someone's faith, belief etc without trying.

 

The question of whether or not I am offended is irrelevant and certainly wouldn't necessarily mean that this thread isn't for me. Please note that I'm not offended by what appears to be your belief (if that is what the above statement was exlcuding; opinion or fact).

[l33wgn]

well we could get really blunt here and point out everyone evolved from the same monkeys...

[Septic]

Who's stopping you?

 

Then some others could point out that if the above is true, all this talk about 'control' and morality is negligible.

[marc_p]

well we could get really blunt here and point out everyone evolved from the same monkeys...

 

There has been a very interesting discovery lately that throws that opinion out the window, although our DNA is closest to a monkey's DNA, there is a strand in ours that would make it impossible for us to have evolved from them

[mawby]

I merely asked you a question. My later statement alluded to the fact that you might have belittled someone's faith, belief etc without trying.

There was no allusion, you stated...

 

Really? Then you did the above effortlessly.

...so notwithstanding someone reading the post over your shoulder and proclaiming "I'm offended by that post!", I think it was fair of me to come to the conclusion that I had offended you.

 

If your post wasn't an opinion NOR a statement of fact, what exactly was it?

I didn't say it wasn't an opinion, I said it wasn't necessarily my opinion. All I wanted to do was put across a view point that someone may have with regards to a particular comment made. I did that, there have been a couple of good posts debating it, that's it.

[Septic]

There was no allusion, you stated...

 

My allusion referred to "the FACT that you might have belittled someone's faith..."

 

...so notwithstanding someone reading the post over your shoulder and proclaiming "I'm offended by that post!", I think it was fair of me to come to the conclusion that I had offended you.

 

Yes it was fair of you to come to that conclusion, I don't dispute that. Again, I reiterate that:

 

The question of whether or not I am offended is irrelevant and certainly wouldn't necessarily mean that this thread isn't for me.

 

I didn't say it wasn't an opinion, I said it wasn't necessarily my opinion. All I wanted to do was put across a view point that someone may have with regards to a particular comment made. I did that, there have been a couple of good posts debating it, that's it.

 

Am I correct in assuming that this is your opinion (even though you do not expressly state so)? In any case, I am more than aware of the vast number of people on this forum that share that view as I have been involved in the posts discussing the issue.

 

[Disclaimer] Excuse the 'tone' of my post if it sounds aggressive or judgemental. That is not my intention.

[Calorus]

There has been a very interesting discovery lately that throws that opinion out the window, although our DNA is closest to a monkey's DNA, there is a strand in ours that would make it impossible for us to have evolved from them

 

In literal terms we didn't evolve from monkeys, however humans did all evolve from the same (now extinct) simians and have only been 'distinct' in any way for a matter of a few tens of thousands of years - a matter of a blink of an eye in comparison to the billion years or so it took us to get there...

[l33wgn]

In literal terms we didn't evolve from monkeys, however humans did all evolve from the same (now extinct) simians and have only been 'distinct' in any way for a matter of a few tens of thousands of years - a matter of a blink of an eye in comparison to the billion years or so it took us to get there...

 

so taking that we all evolved from the same creature there would have been a first of that creature, an evolution of a previous and so on. which means in my opinion although peoples beliefs may have changed in the last 4 -5 thousand years they all stem from one original *idea*

[Calorus]

so taking that we all evolved from the same creature there would have been a first of that creature, an evolution of a previous and so on. which means in my opinion although peoples beliefs may have changed in the last 4 -5 thousand years they all stem from one original *idea*

 

The people who like killing each other over their ideas' (Christians, Jews and Muslims) views all stem from the same specific story!

[dr_jekyll]

i like turtles

[j_jza80]

i like turtles

 

 

[Branners]

so taking that we all evolved from the same creature there would have been a first of that creature, an evolution of a previous and so on. which means in my opinion although peoples beliefs may have changed in the last 4 -5 thousand years they all stem from one original *idea*

 

evolution or mutation? For there to be a unique strain it must have mutated rather than evolved for it to become such a step away from the original blueprint.

 

Thats it for me folks, I thought I should throw some random waffle in to the thread to keep up

[Tyson]

What the hell is everyone on about, this has nothing to do with the original thread. It was a challenging discussion now it has turned into mindless drivel. As Duncan Bannatyne would say "For that reason, I'm out"

[TRD DAN]

i deffinately evolved from a monkey withouht shaddow of a doubt

[j_jza80]

what the hell is everyone on about, this has nothing to do with the original thread. It was mindless drivel that has now it has turned into a challenging discussion. As duncan bannatyne would say "for that reason, i'm out"