Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedoph...

Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not so bad

There are 3147 comments on the Examiner.com story from Sep 14, 2013, titled Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not so bad. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

"The God of the Qur'an is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#2426 Feb 26, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Whenever you claim that Islam sees woman as equal to men, despite all the evidence to contradict your claim, is one such lie
you still haven't answered my question, do you think that men and women are the same ???
I think its clear for everybody that there are big differences between the 2 genders, what if your husband was exactly like you ?? no difference at all would you still be attracted to him ?? and now what if all men and women were exactly the same ??!!
I think if that happened humans will stop breeding, and within several centuries human beings will be history.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
What a load of bollocks. Honey I do not blame religion for the acts of religious fooktards, I blame the fooktards. Why do you imagine I should blame mythology for the malicious and hateful actions of sick people? The fact that so many of those sick people hide behind religion only means that it’s easy to harm someone and then say “Oh it’s ok, god will forgive me with plastic 72 virgins”
Wow ..!!! you don't blame mythologies you only blame the hateful actions of sick people, after all we do agree on a lot of things.

However al Hur al Ein aren't in plastic, and as I was telling "igor trip" the intention of the fighter is the most important thing, because some people at the time of Mohammed used to fight in battles for reputation and some fought for spoils, and even some fought for tribal issues, and Mohammed (PBUH) made it clear that if your intention was not pure for Allah then your death will go for nothing and even may burn in hell, for instance during a battle back then some companions went to Mohammed and started to compliment a Muslim fighter as he was very brave and fought the enemies Bravely, Mohammed (PBUH) said that this man will burn in hell, one of the companions was curious because it didn't make sense to him that such a fighter will burn in hell and at the same time he believed that everything Mohammed say is the complete truth, so he decided to watch that man and follow him until that man was injured and unfortunately he committed suicide because he couldn't stand the pain, some scholars and other narrators say that this man didn't fight for the sake of Allah in the beginning.

the Authentic hadith from Sahih Bukhari

"The Prophet looked at a man fighting against the pagans and he was one of the most competent persons fighting on behalf of the Muslims. The Prophet said, "Let him who wants to look at a man from the dwellers of the (Hell) Fire, look at this (man)." Another man followed him and kept on following him till he (the fighter) was injured and, seeking to die quickly, he placed the blade tip of his sword between his breasts and leaned over it till it passed through his shoulders (i.e., committed suicide)." The Prophet added, "A person may do deeds that seem to the people as the deeds of the people of Paradise while in fact, he is from the dwellers of the (Hell) Fire: and similarly a person may do deeds that seem to the people as the deeds of the people of the (Hell) Fire while in fact, he is from the dwellers of Paradise. Verily, the (results of) deeds done, depend upon the last actions."
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
That fact that you have been telling me to forget people is a little stupid don’t you think. Rather like telling someone not to breath. I am not a robot that can turn off humanity in favour of what is nothing more than a modified bronze age belief.
You want to continue discussing, arguing whatever then fine but do not think for a moment that you will corral me with lies of non-existent misogyny and impossible utopias by forgetting about who I am
I may not be able to respond to to any comment in the next 2 or 3 days because I am travelling to Lebanon and probably will not have internet access.

Peace

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#2427 Feb 26, 2014
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
When you say maybe he because he wanted Muslims to choose means you are engaging in conjecture. Had he appointed a leader, the muslim community would have been one.
When Mohammed (PBUH) was sick and dying in Aisha's house, he told Abu bakr to be the Imam at the prayers in Al Madina mosque, Sunni scholars say that is a very clear sign that Mohammed wanted Abu Bakr to be the next leader for Muslims, Shia scholars say Ali was supposed to be the caliph not Abu Bakr depending on other signs, but we are sure that Ali himself took (moubaya) for Abu Abkr and was completely pleased with Muslims choice at the Saqifa, some shia scholars responded and said Ali was forced to choose Abu Bakr or at least came late to the Saqifa ( the place they gathered to choose a caliph), in return some other sunni scholars responded and said maybe Ali was late because the death of Mohammed was very hard on his wife Fatima and him of course, so he was busy comforting her.

I think we as ordinary Muslims shouldn't stick our noses in what happened between the companions, because we are pretty sure that those people were taught by the best teacher and leader Mohammed (PBUH).

and Allah said in the Quran

"That is a nation which has passed on. It will have [the consequence of] what it earned, and you will have what you have earned. And you will not be asked about what they used to do. "

So a lot of Muslims in the world believe that we and Shias should put our differences aside and focus on our mutual beliefs instead of fighting each other.

I think its ridiculous to fight over who was supposed to be the caliph, not to mention that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali were very close and such people consider leadership as a big responsibility, you should read Abu bakr's speech when he was announced as the new caliph.

when Mohammed died disbelief and dismay gripped the community of Muslims in Madinah, as you know Mohammed was their leader ,the guide and the bearer of Divine revelation through whom they had been brought from idolatry and barbarism into the way of God, some of them just couldn't realize that he died.

So Abu bakr addressed the people saying
"O people, verily whoever worshipped Muhammad, behold! Muhammad is indeed dead. But whoever worships God, behold! God is Alive and will never die."

And then he concluded with a verse from the Qur'an:
"And Muhammad is but a Messenger. Many Messengers have gone before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?" [Al-Qur'an 3:144]

so he dealt with a very critical situation brilliantly.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#2428 Feb 26, 2014
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
So the bedouin fought for the promised rewards of paradise?
Would he have fought if there was no reward?
It seems to me that the best way to get people to die for you is to tell them they will get virgins in paradise. This has nothing to do with pleasing God but everything to do with personal gain.
As I told you some fought for tribal issues and some fought for reputation, but Mohammed said that your intention should be pure for Allah and if it wasn't then you may burn in hell, but fighting for rewards of Allah is a different case, because obviously death for the sake of Allah is nothing compared to an eternal life in heaven, or in paradise for martyrs.

Paradise is much more than getting virgins, paradise is described in the Quran in details,
you say "This has nothing to do with pleasing God but everything to do with personal gain "
but in order to get what you called personal gain you should at first please God, and if you wanted to please god you should obey him in everything, and if you obeyed god in everything then you'll be a good man and fulfill the purpose of life.
but if you obeyed Al Shaitan, you'll be a very bad man and will not spread any justice and obviously wouldn't fulfill the purpose of life, and in the hereafter you'll probably go to hell, not to mention that Mohammed by revelations brought them from idolatry and barbarism into the way of God, so they only had 2 choices; its whether they stay in barbarism and idolatry or the way of god, I guess it was pretty clear to them that Islam is the true religion.

lets assume that anyone just came up and said there is a god and he promises you to have virgins in heaven if you died for the sake of him, would anybody believe him ??
in order to believe in heaven you should believe in Quran and before you believe in Quran you should believe that Mohammed himself is the prophet.

So they certainly believed Mohammed and everything the Quran says, otherwise it wouldn't make sense,do you think that Arabs were stupid ??
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
Killing for a God whose only evidence is the word of just one man is not rational.
its whether that or killing for Al Uzza , some idols and for reputation or some Tribal issues.
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
I've read the Quran. I'm not in trouble.
is it because of the setting of the sun in a muddy spring issue ?!! or something else ??
Thinking

Yeovil, UK

#2429 Feb 27, 2014
I will read the koran cover to cover once the illiterate mohammed does.
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
So the bedouin fought for the promised rewards of paradise?
Would he have fought if there was no reward?
It seems to me that the best way to get people to die for you is to tell them they will get virgins in paradise. This has nothing to do with pleasing God but everything to do with personal gain.
<quoted text>
Killing for a God whose only evidence is the word of just one man is not rational.
<quoted text>
I've read the Quran. I'm not in trouble.
<quoted text>
It didn't take long for the Caliphs to start living in vast palaces. Though I will admit there were a lot of rebellions against them.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2430 Feb 27, 2014
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
you still haven't answered my question, do you think that men and women are the same ???
I think its clear for everybody that there are big differences between the 2 genders, what if your husband was exactly like you ?? no difference at all would you still be attracted to him ?? and now what if all men and women were exactly the same ??!!
I think if that happened humans will stop breeding, and within several centuries human beings will be history.
<quoted text>
Wow ..!!! you don't blame mythologies you only blame the hateful actions of sick people, after all we do agree on a lot of things.
However al Hur al Ein aren't in plastic, and as I was telling "igor trip" the intention of the fighter is the most important thing, because some people at the time of Mohammed used to fight in battles for reputation and some fought for spoils, and even some fought for tribal issues, and Mohammed (PBUH) made it clear that if your intention was not pure for Allah then your death will go for nothing and even may burn in hell, for instance during a battle back then some companions went to Mohammed and started to compliment a Muslim fighter as he was very brave and fought the enemies Bravely, Mohammed (PBUH) said that this man will burn in hell, one of the companions was curious because it didn't make sense to him that such a fighter will burn in hell and at the same time he believed that everything Mohammed say is the complete truth, so he decided to watch that man and follow him until that man was injured and unfortunately he committed suicide because he couldn't stand the pain, some scholars and other narrators say that this man didn't fight for the sake of Allah in the beginning.
the Authentic hadith from Sahih Bukhari
…
I may not be able to respond to to any comment in the next 2 or 3 days because I am travelling to Lebanon and probably will not have internet access.
Peace
What question? I do not remember you asking such a question and why do you need to ask such a question anyway? Is shows a definite misogynous outlook and I really though you (at least claimed) to be above that. So much for thought. It is fairly obvious that you have a dick and I don’t. So does that make me worth half of you? Most dicks are quite minute when compared to say a pair of breasts. Let’s see you continue humanity by baring a child? Just because women bare the children does not mean there is a difference in ability and worth. Misogyny is an outmoded and rejected concept here in the real world, just because religion is holding you back is no ones problem but your own.

What you don’t seem to understand is that by interpretation you allow your religion to temper your actions in the way that best suites your personality.

The intention of the fighter is to kill, end of story, if you want to believe your god rewards indiscriminate murder with 72 virgins then go fooking kill your own faith and have a ball.

Here is one for you, will these two good muslims be rewarded with 72 newly minted plastic virgins http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26357007

What did Mohammed tell these murderers to do? They certainly believed they were horrifically mutilating the victim after driving a car into him then stabbing him to death for their god.

Have a good trip and don’t forget to reply to this part of my post
Thinking

Magherafelt, UK

#2432 Feb 27, 2014
Although the size gap may close a tad if you put them next to each other.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Most dicks are quite minute when compared to say a pair of breasts.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2433 Feb 27, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Although the size gap may close a tad if you put them next to each other.
<quoted text>
Ahh now, that’s a different thing, but speaking of volume it’s only a tad

As they say, twice nothing is…

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2434 Feb 27, 2014
Ahh the great anonymous judge strikes again
Thinking

Magherafelt, UK

#2435 Feb 27, 2014
Many religitards are scared by women's rights.
ChristineM wrote:
Ahh the great anonymous judge strikes again

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2436 Feb 27, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Many religitards are scared by women's rights.
<quoted text>
And their lefts…

As you say - misogyny is taught in the tanakh, babble and quran, so who am I to argue? Oh that’s right, I am I
Thinking

Magherafelt, UK

#2437 Feb 27, 2014
1 Timothy 2:12
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
And their lefts…
As you say - misogyny is taught in the tanakh, babble and quran, so who am I to argue? Oh that’s right, I am I

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2438 Feb 27, 2014
Thinking wrote:
1 Timothy 2:12
<quoted text>
There are many such examples starting from genesis 2:20-22 and on
Mahmood

Peterborough, Canada

#2439 Feb 27, 2014
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
When Mohammed (PBUH) was sick and dying in Aisha's house, he told Abu bakr to be the Imam at the prayers in Al Madina mosque, Sunni scholars say that is a very clear sign that Mohammed wanted Abu Bakr to be the next leader for Muslims, Shia scholars say Ali was supposed to be the caliph not Abu Bakr depending on other signs, but we are sure that Ali himself took (moubaya) for Abu Abkr and was completely pleased with Muslims choice at the Saqifa, some shia scholars responded and said Ali was forced to choose Abu Bakr or at least came late to the Saqifa ( the place they gathered to choose a caliph), in return some other sunni scholars responded and said maybe Ali was late because the death of Mohammed was very hard on his wife Fatima and him of course, so he was busy comforting her.
I think we as ordinary Muslims shouldn't stick our noses in what happened between the companions, because we are pretty sure that those people were taught by the best teacher and leader Mohammed (PBUH).
and Allah said in the Quran
"That is a nation which has passed on. It will have [the consequence of] what it earned, and you will have what you have earned. And you will not be asked about what they used to do. "
So a lot of Muslims in the world believe that we and Shias should put our differences aside and focus on our mutual beliefs instead of fighting each other.
I think its ridiculous to fight over who was supposed to be the caliph, not to mention that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali were very close and such people consider leadership as a big responsibility, you should read Abu bakr's speech when he was announced as the new caliph.
when Mohammed died disbelief and dismay gripped the community of Muslims in Madinah, as you know Mohammed was their leader ,the guide and the bearer of Divine revelation through whom they had been brought from idolatry and barbarism into the way of God, some of them just couldn't realize that he died.
So Abu bakr addressed the people saying
"O people, verily whoever worshipped Muhammad, behold! Muhammad is indeed dead. But whoever worships God, behold! God is Alive and will never die."
And then he concluded with a verse from the Qur'an:
"And Muhammad is but a Messenger. Many Messengers have gone before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?" [Al-Qur'an 3:144]
so he dealt with a very critical situation brilliantly.
Asking Abu Bakr to lead the prayers is a long shot away from appointing him a leader of the community. Shias claim that in Ghadir Khum, Mohd announced that whoever accept me as a wali, Ali is his wali, this too does not mean that he was nominated a successor no matter what the Shias claim. The simple fact remains that there is no historical records of Mohd announcing a leader for the muslims upon his demise.

If Islamic history is true, Ali Ibn Abi Taleb refused to acknowledge Abu Bakr as the Caliph. He did so under duress when that thug Omar broke into his home, and threatened him with his life. If Islamic history is believable, Mohd's daughter Fatima was deprived of her property left to her by her father in Fadak.
Thinking

Magherafelt, UK

#2440 Feb 27, 2014
Hear about the UK pre nup story today? What's the betting that some islamotard applies for one to further dilute women's rights?
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
There are many such examples starting from genesis 2:20-22 and on
Tommy

London, KY

#2441 Feb 27, 2014
God is certainly good to Sin City (Las a Vegas). God does everything for them, gives them warm weather all year long at the same time freezes the rest of us Americans to death!!!, God gives Sin City immense wealth, I think since God loves Sin City so much, He needs to Marry it!!!. God must approve of Sin now, He certainly does support it!!!. Him and His Stupid Holy need to start being good to those poor Africans starving to death, I guess Him a Sinner Himself, He probably laughs at those poor Africans!!!. If aneything, God spits at those poor Africans, I like to know what they're doing wrong. I d like to know what Sin City is doing right!. God works in mysterious ways, more like Sinful ways!!!.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2442 Feb 28, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Hear about the UK pre nup story today? What's the betting that some islamotard applies for one to further dilute women's rights?
<quoted text>
Not been keeping up with the news for the last couple of weeks other than what they mention on Radio 4 Today prog on the way to work and that is dominated with IRA terrorists getting away with murder so not heard.

Having said that, if you can’t trust your future spouse to be honest then what’s the point of getting married? The god (oops good) old days of “what’s yours is mine and what’s min is my own” were left in the middle ages, or should have been.
Thinking

Magherafelt, UK

#2443 Feb 28, 2014
Oh yes, a catholic war criminal giving out get out of jail free cards to catholic terrorists... I hate that bastard.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Not been keeping up with the news for the last couple of weeks other than what they mention on Radio 4 Today prog on the way to work and that is dominated with IRA terrorists getting away with murder so not heard.
Having said that, if you can’t trust your future spouse to be honest then what’s the point of getting married? The god (oops good) old days of “what’s yours is mine and what’s min is my own” were left in the middle ages, or should have been.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#2444 Feb 28, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Oh yes, a catholic war criminal giving out get out of jail free cards to catholic terrorists... I hate that bastard.
<quoted text>
You are not alone.

On radio 4 this morning was a report from the ‘felons club’(really) a club in Belfast in which you cannot join unless you have spent time in jail during the troubles.

They are fooking proud of indiscriminately killing women and children.

I don’t have much respect for royally but it really sickened me when the queen went over to Ireland and asskissed martin mcguinnness. Oh I know the theory of why she did it and all that but he was personally responsible for the killing of her cousin. To me she lost whatever credibility she had from that moment.

Indiscriminate terrorism it is one of the few things that sickens annoys me. But I may be a little biased – LOL
Mahmood

Brampton, Canada

#2445 Feb 28, 2014
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
followers weren't being prepared to die for their prophet, because apparently that prophet used to fight with them, so they were willing to die for their faith and to spread the message.
such a behavior wouldn't make sense to you, maybe because you don't believe in the creator unlike those muslims who believe in God and his prophet, so it was like they would do the impossible to obey God and his prophet.
you do have a point no one can just give his opinion if there was a direct revelation regarding a specific issue, but there would still be a room for consulting and discussing other issues, as Mohammed made that clear to everybody and you can easily find numerous examples in Quran and Sunnah.
not to mention that the closest companions themselves had different opinions regarding several rules and such differences were clear through the caliphate period of each one of them.
I think there is a wisdom behind some differences in opinions of the early muslims, because in Islam rules at first can be extracted from Quran and Sunnah, and if a new issue came up in our time and wasn't mentioned in Quran or Sunnah, scholars find out what was the closest companions and early Muslims opinions in such an issue, thus that gives flexibility to the religion and make it easier for Muslims to apply Islam and Sharia laws in any place and at any time.
so in short words there are red lines in Islam that no one can cross them even the closest companions of Mohammed and in fact Mohammed himself, other than that there is always a room for differences in opinions.
for instance some sects of Shias crossed one or two of the red lines so that might take their scholars or scientists out of Islam, Some sects of suffis exaggerated their love to Mohammed that even some of them ask Mohammed for forgiveness instead of god ...!!
They have been duped into believing that there is an almighty creator who wants them to fight for him - fighting and dying in the cause of Allah.....what a cruel basta$d. A god who enjoys such slaughter and bloodletting in unworthy of respect. That is why this Abrahamic God is a hoax.

During the early year of the Ummayad dynasty, many Muslims were totally ignorant in regard to ritual and doctrine. The rulers themselves had little enthusiasm for religion, and generally dispised the pious and the ascetic. The result was that there arose a group of pious men who shamelessly fabricated traditions for the good of the community, and traced them back to the authority of the prophet.They opposed the godless Ummayads but dare not say so openly, so they invented further traditions dedicated to praising the Prophets family, hence indirectly giving their allegiance to the party of Ali supporters. The ruling power itself was not idle. If it wished an opinion to be genrally reognized and the opposition of pious circles silenced, it too had to know how to discover a hadith to suit its purpose. They had to do what their opponents did - invent hadiths. Storytellers made a good living inventing and entertaining Hadiths, which the credulous masses lapped up eagerly.

Isnads (chain of transmitters) began to be widely used around the time of the Abbasid revolution (mid 8th century). No existing hadith could be reliably ascribed to Mohammad. The considerable body of legal traditions from the prophet orignated towards the middle of the second muslim century. Traditions were forumulated polemically in order to rebut a contrary doctrine or practice. Islamic law cannot be traced further back than to about a century after Mohammad's death. Islamic law did not directly derive from the Koran but developed out of popular and administrative practice under the Ummayads.
Mahmood

Brampton, Canada

#2446 Feb 28, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
You are not alone.
On radio 4 this morning was a report from the ‘felons club’(really) a club in Belfast in which you cannot join unless you have spent time in jail during the troubles.
They are fooking proud of indiscriminately killing women and children.
I don’t have much respect for royally but it really sickened me when the queen went over to Ireland and asskissed martin mcguinnness. Oh I know the theory of why she did it and all that but he was personally responsible for the killing of her cousin. To me she lost whatever credibility she had from that moment.
Indiscriminate terrorism it is one of the few things that sickens annoys me. But I may be a little biased – LOL
Wasn't Martin McGuiness a British informant? At least that is what I have heard, I'm sure you know more about this than I do.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 8 min Regolith Based Li... 24,861
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 11 min IB DaMann 52,096
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... 20 min Eagle 12 215
Merry Christmas!!! 25 min Eagle 12 31
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 36 min Eagle 12 22,157
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 42 min Eagle 12 11,434
Only 5% will attend church on christmas day 13 hr Eagle 12 20
More from around the web