Hundreds of millions of animals throughout the world will have their throats slit today just to make Allah happy.
It is amazing how much evil can be caused by an imaginary God.
03 October 2014
Eid al-Adha
It's Eid al-Adha agian. You know, the day where you're supposed to kill an animal for God in honor of Abraham's willingness to kill his son.
Hundreds of millions of animals throughout the world will have their throats slit today just to make Allah happy.
It is amazing how much evil can be caused by an imaginary God.
Hundreds of millions of animals throughout the world will have their throats slit today just to make Allah happy.
It is amazing how much evil can be caused by an imaginary God.
76 comments:
They're going to eat them afterwards, so it isn't "for nothing". How is killing animals for sustenance an evil?
Great photo. What I like about the Islam people and their religion is they don't try to hide the reality of their religion, even if it involves a ritual killing of animals to help feed their poor or a public beheading to kill its enemy or cutting off the hand of a thief.
It has always bothered me to see how weak Christians are in terms of religious rituals and beliefs. Example: Deut 13:6-10 says Christians are to kill family members for trying to convert one of their own to another faith. We all know how zealous Christians are at trying to convert others to their faith...it happens all the time. Try telling the court system in America that you killed your brother, sister, or parent because they were trying to convert you to another faith and the Bible instructs you so.
At least in some Islam countries, their form of tribal government and court system are in sync with their religious beliefs. Not so in America where there is separation of Church and State leading to complete dysfunctionality of both.
There needs to be much more killing in America for the Bible Says So. Praise Jesus for Family Violence.
Or, the other option is to rid America of all these religions whose Bible based instructions call for killing family members. You can't have Religion saying one thing and Government saying the exact opposite without strife.
Countries whose Religion and Government jive will eventually rule over countries whose Religion and Government are in total conflict.
Whether you are a believer in Allah or not, Islam is on the march because it jives.
Jason,
A God that would tell a father to kill his son, and then reward him for being willing to do so, is an evil God. A God who would ask millions of animals to be ritualistically killed for him in a bloody, public, and painful way is an evil God.
Animals are not just killed for food on Eid al-Adha, though they are eaten afterwards. They are killed and sacrificed to Allah in honor of Abraham's willingness to kill his son. Killing animals for food may be a necessary evil; killing animals for God is simply evil.
Science has proven that consuming animal products is unhealthy to humans, so the mass slaughter of animals for consumption, through religion based events, or through daily meat processing plant activities, is pure evil if you think killing is wrong.
If you are a meat eater, you have to accept that animals will be killed for food. However, the manner of killing may or may not be humane. See the following, which indicates that halal killing *may* permit stunning the animal, while kosher killing does not.
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/X6909E/x6909e09.htm#b5-Religious%20or%20ritual%20slaughter%20%28Halal%20and%20Kosher%29
I am a meat eater (in moderation), but I do not support inhumane killing methods.
@ Rob:
"Science has proven that consuming animal products is unhealthy to humans..."
Where do you find the proof of this rather broadly generalized statement?
Don't get me wrong; I think the kind of ritual slaughter depicted in this thread is disgusting. If the meat I eat were prepared in this way, I would be a complete vegetarian. Actually, with the "factory farms", feed lots with their attendant pollution problems, over-use of antibiotics and other aspects of the meat production industry, I sometimes think going meatless would be a good idea. But please don't make blanket BS statements like the one I quoted.
Steve Weeks
@Rob "Science has proven that consuming animal products is unhealthy to humans"
[citation needed]
Rob: "Science has proven that consuming animal products is unhealthy to humans"
Care to link to the study that shows this?
Look what the Dutch are doing about halal and kosher killing methods:
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/643800-halal-and-kosher-hit-by-dutch-ban
Steve Weeks
Stephen - Read the over 250 scientific studies done on the Seventh Day Adventists and make your own conclusion. Read the book "The China Study." Read up on how doctors are reversing heart disease and diabetes with plant based diets. The college book Dietitian's Guide to Vegetarian Diets (ISBN 0-7637-3241-9 which has 587 pages and 2869 references) states, and I quote, "Vegetarians have an overall cancer rate that is lower than that of the general population." Recent studies on a population of Africans was done to find out why they suffer no colon cancer. Researchers though it was high fiber diet but concluded it was the "Lack of Animal Products," that made them healthier. I have plenty of proof. How much time to you have to read it all? The more animal products you consume, the more likely it is you will suffer ill effects.
@Stephen: "If you are a meat eater, you have to accept that animals will be killed for food."
I don't have to accept anything. Not all meat eaters "Have To Accept" that animals will be killed for food. That is your blanket statement. Please don't make BS blanket statements like the one I quoted above. An animal does not have to be killed to provide meat for a meat eater. A leg from a turkey could be amputated without "killing" the animal. An animal that died from natural causes could be used as food meaning it was not killed for food.
" Not all meat eaters "Have To Accept" that animals will be killed for food. "
Yes they do.
Until we can clone and 'grow' meat on 'animals' without a nervous system - not THAT far away, incidentally - WE DO.
" Not all meat eaters "Have To Accept" that animals will be killed for food. "
Yes they do.
Until we can clone and 'grow' meat on 'animals' without a nervous system - not THAT far away, incidentally - WE DO.
@ Rob...
I don't have to accept anything. Not all meat eaters "Have To Accept" that animals will be killed for food. That is your blanket statement. Please don't make BS blanket statements like the one I quoted above. An animal does not have to be killed to provide meat for a meat eater. A leg from a turkey could be amputated without "killing" the animal. An animal that died from natural causes could be used as food meaning it was not killed for food.
I get it... you're using the style of my comment to seem to argue with me. Clever.
Your idea for turkey conservation is a good one, but Thanksgiving is coming up; how will you amputate the turkey breasts we all like to eat? Legs alone won't do. Do you really want to eat animals that died of natural causes? I'll bet you eat road kill: 1) not killed for food, and 2) fresh!
But this thread is supposed to be about needless suffering in the preparation of animal products for human consumption, not whether those products are haram or otherwise not good for us. I wonder how the turkeys would feel about their legs being amputated. <_<
Steve Weeks
ALMOST A MUSLIMAH.
Hold that thought!
THE AMERICAN HOLOCAUST
What is the total number of legal abortions since 1973?
Since the legalization of abortion in 1973, there have been approximately 50 million abortions performed in the United States.
Source: Guttmacher Institute, 2011, August. Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States.
How many abortions are performed in the United States each year?
According to the Guttmacher Institute, there were 1.21 million abortions performed in the United States in 2008, the most recent year for which data is available. This amounts to 3,322 abortions per day.
Source: Jones, Rachel K. and Kathryn Kooistra. "Abortion Incidence and Access to Services in the United States, 2008." Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 43, no. 1 (2011, March): 41-50
NOW THAT'S DISGUSTING!
@Blogger Leonardo de la Paor...
Hey, Leo,
We're not talking about abortion here. LOTS of things are disgusting, but if you want to talk about abortion, how about the fact that most conceptions end in spontaneous abortions? That makes god the biggest abortionist in the world. If you don't hold god responsible for those, how many pregnant women do you think were killed in the Flood? Now, *THAT* is disgusting!
Steve Weeks
I attended an Eid al-Adha sacrifice as a non-Muslim many years ago, held at a farm in rural America. So a couple of points:
1) The meat is used as food, much of it donated to the poor. So it's not useless killing and there are good intentions surrounding it.
2) While the style of killing (slicing the throat from edge to edge) may have been more humane than other methods used in the seventh century, today's methods are far more humane and cause brain death nearly instantly. The people doing the killing tried to minimize each animal's suffering (by petting it, for example) but like most participants were not trained butchers. The animals shook violently as they died and were in obvious pain, and some took a few seconds longer to die than my comfort levels could take.
Today is Thanksgiving in the US of A.
Turkeys have been slaughtered by the millions for this day of thanks. Sorry, I don't have pictures.
But we will enjoy our Turkey -- once the blood and guts are cleaned and she is made presentable for the alter we call the "family table".
I don't see a problem here. In the evolutionary struggle between organisms, I root for the vegetable kingdom anyway.
Pun Intended
Animals are not humans, so please do not make any similitude of the ritual of cutting the neck of animals with cutting the neck of humans.
Anyway, if there is any sincerity in any of us, Islamic slaughter of animals have been scientifically proven to kill animals in the quickest and painless way as possible while ensuring the meat isn't polluted with blood. As we all know, blood are for vampires, not for human consumption.
But Muslims must consider the place of slaughter in order to avoid such bloody and messy picture being used to vilify Islam.
Thank you for reading.
Blogger srizals said...
"Animals are not humans, so please do not make any similitude of the ritual of cutting the neck of animals with cutting the neck of humans."
Actually, some animals *are* human, because all humans are animals. There's a syllogism in there somewhere.
We generally don't go around killing humans, but I think there is a great deal of similarity between killing human animals and non-human animals by slitting hteir throats. One similarity is that the dying animal has a (hopefully) few seconds of consciousness during which it feels pain and, if sentient, probably suffers. If an animal, other than human, is to be killed in this way for food, there is no good reason why it can't be stunned first. We don't kill humans this way anymore, except for the occasional psychopath or religious extremist (same thing).
Eid mubarak! ;-)
Steve Weeks
A couple of things
1.) Islaam has a bunch of stuff on treating animals kindly.
For instance, a woman will be sent to Hell because she starved a cat and tied it up so it couldn't even hunt its own food.
Another women, a prostitute, will be forgiven for her sins because she gave a thirsty dog some water.
These are both related in authentic hadeeth.
2.) We cannot kill animals without a purpose/good reason (allowable in Islaam). And here, the purpose is to eventually eat them. Yes, there is a lot of other significance behind 'Eid al-Adha (such as being willing to obey God no matter what because we don't know what God knows), but we don't just kill animals for no reason.
3.)
The Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said,
“Allaah has decreed kindness (or proficiency) in all things. So when you kill, kill well, and when you slaughter, slaughter well. Let one of you sharpen his blade and spare suffering to the animal he slaughters.” [Saheeh Muslim]
4.) I read that stunning animals is more painful to them than being slaughtered with a sharp knife at the neck. I would be interested to see even more studies done.
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=articles&id=161841
International - kill - a - harmless - animal day.
Gosh! What kind of demented "tradition" is that.
I Hate Muslims. They are so savage-like.
I'm a devout Hindu, so I believe in a Supreme Being, and what I believe in, or at least what is taught, is that He is pleased by compassion to ALL living entities; no exceptions made. How could anyone be pleased by the massacre of innocent sentient beings?
Hinduism may be eccentric, and seem odd to many, but at least I doesn't promote the killing of any creature, whether for sacrifice or for food. And if so called Hindus do such things you can know for sure that they have misinterpreted their own scriptures.
True Hinduism, pure Hinduism establishes vegetarianism as compulsory, and ultimately promotes: "Simple living & High thinking.
For eating flesh if you kill, then it is a sin
Non-vegetarian food by it self is not a sin since the analysis of it shows that its contents are the same as exist in vegetarian food. The sin comes by killing a co-living being, which does not harm you at all. If you stop taking non-vegetarian food, killing of living beings is proportionally controlled. Do not say that you are not getting sin since you have not killed the living being directly.
Killing is the highest sin, which gives highest pain to the living being. In the next birth, the killed living being will be born as human being, you will be born as the living being and you will be killed similarly by the human being so that your soul will realize the pain and get reformed.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace
Woe to the Hunters!
6. As Jesus went with some of His disciples, He met a man who trained dogs to hunt other animals. And He said to the man, “Why do you do this?” And the man answered, “Because I live from this. What sort of use have these animals? These animals are weak, but the dogs are strong.” And Jesus said to him, “You lack wisdom and love. Behold, every creature that God has created has its meaning and purpose. And who can say what good there is in it or what use it is to you or to mankind?
7. And for your living, behold the fields, how they grow and are fertile, and the fruit-bearing trees and the herbs. What more do you want than what the honest work of your hands will give you? Woe to the strong who misuse their strength. Woe to the crafty who hurt the creatures of God! Woe to the hunters! For they themselves shall be hunted.”
8. And the man was very astonished and stopped training the dogs to hunt; and he taught them to save life, not to destroy it. And he embraced the teachings of Jesus and became His disciple. (Chap. 14)
Frees the Animals
1. And it happened one day, after Jesus had finished His speaking, that, in a place near Tiberias where there are seven wells, a young man brought Him live rabbits and doves, that He might consume them with His disciples.
2. And Jesus looked at the young man lovingly and said to him, “You have a good heart and God will enlighten you; but do you not know that in the beginning God gave man the fruits of the earth for food and by this did not make him lower than the apes, or the oxen, or the horse or the sheep, that he may kill his fellow creatures and consume their flesh and blood?
3. You believe that Moses rightfully commanded such creatures to be offered in sacrifice and consumed and so you do this in the temple; but see, One greater than Moses is here and He comes to abolish the blood sacrifices of the law and the orgies and to restore the pure offering and the bloodless sacrifice as it was in the beginning, namely, the grains and the fruits of the earth.
5. Therefore, let the creatures go free, that they may rejoice in God and bring no guilt to man.” And the young man set them free and Jesus tore apart their cages and their fetters.
6. But see, they were afraid to be taken captive once more and did not want to leave Him. But He spoke to them and sent them away and they obeyed His words and departed full of joy. (Chap. 28)
Non-veg
You are killing the innocent birds and animals to eat their flesh for proteins. Buddha started the revolution by opposing the killing of animals and He is the embodiment of love and kindness to animals and birds. He left the home on seeing a bird wounded by arrow. Jesus is seen with love on a lamb in His hands and this indicates the love on animals.
Once, a devotee asked Mohammed for the way to please the God. The first thing mentioned by Mohammed (Sallam) to please God was not to kill any innocent living being like bird and animal. He told that if you kill one living being it is equal to killing the entire humanity. You cannot justify the killing of animals for the purpose of eating protein-flesh because God, the capable administrator who created this humanity, already served the purpose by creating protein rich oils.
Hence, your killing of animals is without cause and is not acceptable to the concept of Mohammed. In Hindu Manusmruti, lot of stress was given to avoid the non-vegetarian food. It imposes restrictions on place and time in killing the animals and finally recommends complete restriction called as the Mahavratam. It says that the greatest justice is not to kill any living being (Ahimsaa paramodharmah…). The Veda says to kill the animal nature present in yourself but not the actual animal in yajna (Manyuh pashuh…). The tsunami in the sea and the quakes in the earth are only the anger of God in killing the life in water and the life on the land respectively. Even the modern medical education recommends the natural proteins in vegetables to be better for health than the synthesized proteins in the animal flesh. Science is the principle of nature, which indicates the will of God because nature is creation of God only.
The highest justice (Dharma) is non-violence (Ahimsa). God has given life to all living beings. What right do you have to kill and eat other beings? Now you may kill a living being or even a human being if he disturbs the peace and justice of human society. The Lord Himself killed evil people since they harmed society. However killing a living being, which does not harm you in any way, is the highest sin. God has given sufficient vegetarian food to feed everyone. Infact science proves today that non-vegetarian food is not even good for health.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Plants are living things too and as other living things they die. Without pain, nothing dies. If you really want to respect every living things, eat mud and soil. Even then you're going to kill accidentally of course millions and billions of living bacteria. Cheers.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-plants-think-daniel-chamovitz
@srizals:
"Without pain, nothing dies."
Not sure what you mean here. Certainly it is possible to have death without pain; that's the basis of the principle behind euthanasia. And the absence of pain does not imply the absence of death, or animals without nervous systems would be immortal.
I hope we can agree that, since the consumption of meat by humans is part of our heritage and is not likely to be (completely) eliminated anytime soon, animals being used for food should be killed as humanely as possible, and preferably without pain.
Steve Weeks
@Stephen, living organism don't just die out of fun or because it is in the total state of calmness or bliss. It's the inability of withstanding the degree of pain that a body can endure as a result of extreme deprivement of its basic needs to survive or function resulted from physical or cell destruction or malfunction. Without air, we die. The degree of pain can only be countered with the degree of patient and endurance that we humans have, for some, especially the animals, it is a matter of time. So we all have a way of making the process of death to be as quickly as possible to lessen the pain, not by eliminating it totally since it is impossible, but by making the brain subconscious if not totally unconscious when the ultimate pain is felt which resulted death. In the case relevant to animal slaughter for human consumption, without oxygen and blood needed for the brain to function properly, the pain would be lessen most likely. And that's why islamic animal slaughter ritual is as such, what more in avoiding the blood being clot in the meat without proper drainage. If you're sincere enough, perhaps you can google for the most humane slaughter an animal can get. You'll be surprised.
All that has to happen is for the animal to be stunned before its throat is cut, or whatever is done to kill it. Some religious traditions do not allow this. Kosher preparation is one such, if I'm not mistaken. Halal preparation *may* permit the animal to be stunned, so it would be more humane in my book if it is done.
Steve Weeks
Stephen, stunning an animal before cutting its throat to kill it is like a double jeopardy to me. First, an animal has to experience the intense pain of electricity running through its body and brain and made its nerves totally aware of its surrounding and condition it's facing. In my opinion, it only heightens its senses and stress it out more likely. Only by severing its blood and oxygen supply to the brain while cutting its throat in a fast, practical and sure way, without severing its head, it is saved from unnecessary suffering and a quick, sudden death. Anyway, I think that's the way people used to kill hardcore criminals in the USA. I don't think we should treat our food to be like criminals by electrifying them. Why don't you see for yourself. Stunning is not perfect Stephen. The animal has to suffer twice in a prolonged agony and made it even more aware of the danger its facing. Make it quick and clean. It would suffer much lesser, as science has proved it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V2T9I0QrL8
http://www.mustaqim.co.uk/halalstudy.htm
An excerpt from above website,
"
1. Slaughter after captive bolt stunning
A. Calves
After captive bolt stunning most severe general disturbances (waves of 1-2 Hz) occurred in the EEG, which almost with certainty eliminates a sense of pain.
B. Sheep
Similar disturbances were also seen in sheep, but besides the somewhat higher frequency there are still clearly superimposed waves. For one animal waves could be recorded after pain stimuli until after the 200th second. Apparent cramps were registered for all sheep with the exception of one animal.
2. Slaughter in the form of ritual cut
A. Calves
After the bloodletting cut loss of reaction (loss of consciousness) occurred with high probability within 10 seconds. A clear reaction to the cut could not be detected in any animal. For 7 animals a zero EEG was recorded no later than after 23 seconds. Cramps occurred in the animals regularly only after the brain currents had stopped.
B. Sheep
After the bloodletting cut loss of reaction (loss of consciousness) occurred after 10 seconds the latest. A clear reaction to the cut could not be detected in any animal. The zero line was recorded no later than 14 seconds after the cut. Cramps only occurred after the zero line had been detected and were much shorter than after captive bolt stunning."
We must decide, either we stop consuming animals and risked our livelihood and health or keep on consuming animals and killing them as humanely as possible. Not all condition in the world is the same. Some regions don't even have electricity to electrocute their living stocks. Halal slaughter is the most efficient and practical way, regardless of economic or geography factors.
Captive-bolt stunning seems to be effective if it is properly performed:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16031846
Even if cutting the animal's throat is considered acceptably humane, a slaughter-fest like the one in the posted image is disgusting, and probably quite stressful for the animals.
Steve Weeks
That probability must be verified through factual science research. Think of the tens of millions human beings, many are impoverished in poverty, many can only consume meat during this festival where the wealthy or more able society members sacrifice their money to buy expensive cows just to feed almost total strangers in their community.
I never heard of such yearly massive feast for the poor being carried out by any other community or religion for their own less fortunate community members. This sacrifice is only being done by Muslims. A cow cost around 2k to 4k of real hard earned money. Some of course would share it with six others, but you can still guess the number.
Would you spend so much money for total strangers? That is the spirit of sacrifice that is embodied in this spirit of sacrifice. And the Prophet Ibrahim a.s. had made it crystal clear as a benchmark for humanity.
The willingness to sacrifice his most beloved one to attain God's mercy and favour. It was just a test as this sacrifice of money is. He never did kill his son. No man can profess human sacrifice as the act of religion. Some did and do you know. As history has revealed to us.
There are plenty of religious and secular (yes, even atheist) organizations that provide food for the poor on a year-around basis. A once-a-year meat-fest isn't going to do much for anyone's nutritional status.
Don't even suggest that Abraham's near-sacrifice of his son was anything but madness. Imagine the emotional trauma inflicted on Isaac during the events leading up to the (supposed) cancellation of the order to kill him. Do you think any sane person would expect him to say "Oh, it's OK, dad... I know you were just following orders"? The child would be emotionally scarred for life.
Abraham's imaginary boss wasn't so kind to Jephthah (Judges 11:30-39). If he were real, he'd be a real dick.
Steve Weeks
I'm not talking about regular events of daily or monthly charities or sacrifices done by Muslims, Stephen. We are talking about massive, worldwide sacrifice of animals to feed the poor and the community for four days, not just one day of Eid, Stephen. And the Muslims have been doing it since the days of Prophet Abraham's triumph in his ultimate test, to sacrifice his first beloved son, Ishmael, not Isaac, Stephen. It was God that gave him, his son, remember?
And it is continued by Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. about 1,400 years ago till this very day, and most likely to the end of time, sacrificing cows, goats and sheep as Abraham a.s. himself did, remember? He did not sacrifice his son, so don't miss the point.
Could you name me any similar events done by any community that has been doing it as a global event, in such magnitude and time since 1,400 years ago, consistently till today? Without corporate tax exemption?
Stephen, no sane man would like to be under the likes of Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot and Chin Peng. Those who survived them are lucky just to escape emotionally traumatised. As for Ishmael, he was not an average teenager that is easily traumatised like our kids of the age of fast food and tablet games.
He lived in the days of the Assyrian, conquering godly kings, swords and gladiators. I don't think we can compare apples with oranges, Stephen.
And you're still guessing, Stephen. You're trying to assume his emotional state without any knowledge or facts. As we Muslims do know about what he said in the Koran when his father asked him about the decree,
"And [then] he said, "Indeed, I will go to [where I am ordered by] my Lord; He will guide me. (99) My Lord, grant me [a child] from among the righteous." (100) So We gave him good tidings of a forbearing boy. (101) And when he reached with him [the age of] exertion, he said, "O my son, indeed I have seen in a dream that I [must] sacrifice you, so see what you think." He said, "O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, of the steadfast." (102)
http://tanzil.net/#trans/en.sahih/37:102
"And when they had both submitted and he put him down upon his forehead, (103) We called to him, "O Abraham, (104) You have fulfilled the vision." Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. (105) Indeed, this was the clear trial. (106) And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice, (107) And We left for him [favorable mention] among later generations: (108) "Peace upon Abraham." (109) Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. (110) Indeed, he was of Our believing servants."
http://tanzil.net/#trans/en.sahih/37:103
Now, where is your basis of comparison in saying about what Ishmael had felt himself when you yourself, were not there?
The Bible is corrupted, that's why Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. was sent to the humankind. Everyone knows it, one of them would be this man. So why would anyone believe such an act did happened. The beastly man?
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/
What we got here is a whole lot of missing evidence.
"God gave (fill in the blank) his son(s)" (I was wrong about the name; point taken)
Evidence? I have 2 children, and I know exactly where they came from.
OK... it's 4 days, not one. Don't make me laugh. If a poor person doesn't get food on a regular basis, four days of meat-fest won't make much difference. I grant you that one of the principles of Islam is to care for the needy, which is a good thing. It's good that it's a long-standing tradition. But taking care of the less-fortunate is not the sole province of Islam. You can find it in thos eof other religions, or even those (like me) with no religion. This is because compassion is an *evolved* characteristic of humans. Even some "lower" animals have this characteristic. There is evidence for this.
How about evidence that Ishmael was not an "average" teenager? Were you there? You seem to think this is important. Your book is not "evidence", any more than the bible is evidence for a talking snake, or the book of mormon is evidence for golden plates. These are all man-made, based largely either on primitive science (excusable) or delusional thinking (dismissable).
As for my basis in speculating what Ishmael thought as he was prepared for sacrifice (not knowing it was not actually going to be consummated), we know lots about how people feel and respond in stressful situations. There are whole branches of science that deal with this. So, no, I wasn't there.
You weren't there when your great-grandparents had sex, but you are pretty convincing evidence that they did!
BTW, do you believe Muhammad flew up to heaven on a winged horse?
Steve Weeks
The existence of necessary killing in general is one of the many things that convinces me that this universe was NOT designed by a civilized intelligence. A universe full of necessary killing and consumption of one life form by another could only have come about through an unintelligent process. OR the creator is one sick weirdo.
Oh, and whether or not the killed animals were eaten for survival afterward, whatever took place that resulted in that picture with dead animals all over the ground and blood everywhere is sick and deranged. Killing things to survive is a lot different than killing things for a religious ritual, no matter what is done with the resulting killed. These religions of death need to go away.
"How about evidence that Ishmael was not an "average" teenager?", said Stephen,
Well, here it is,
My Lord, grant me [a child] from among the righteous." (100) So We gave him good tidings of a forbearing boy. (101) And when he reached with him [the age of] exertion, he said, "O my son, indeed I have seen in a dream that I [must] sacrifice you, so see what you think." He said, "O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, of the steadfast." (102)
I was not there, but I don't think any average teenager would say like what he said when he was told that he would be sacrificed by his own father.
Stephen, when you've found a book, that was written 1,400 years ago, telling the human race that there were seven layers of earth, the stages of embryo development, that the earth was dead before it was brought to life by iron and water, ants do talk and an abundance of truth only to be proven later on 1,400 years later after such revelations, you'll know that no matter how illogical our limited mind think of it, it must be the truth because all this while a lot of things that were written before in that book were proven to be the truth in this millenia. I mean can you imagine things like this, where were our great, great grandpas, Stephen? Were we there? How did we come to be? Any logical explanation?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPL4cAw8hv0
Yeah, I've heard that story about how advanced the Quran is. Christian apologists do the same thing with the bible. Lots of creative interpretation there... it's easy in hindsight.
How did we get here? Evolutionary theory is the only plausible explanation. I don't expect you to agree, but a great majority of scientists do.
Non-belief ("atheism", "unbelief", etc.) is not a religion any more than not collecting stamps is a hobby. And there's no more "death" involved than your average religion. When was the last time anyone was killed in the name of atheism? Please don't go to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot; those were political ideologies. Hitler was a catholic and Stain was seminary-trained.
I haven't aborted any babies, but three of the babies my wife and I conceived were spontaneously aborted. If your god had anything to do with that, he's lower than a dog turd. The two we raised are successful, charitable, happy... and non-believers. Go figure. :-)
Same-sex relationships or marriage has no influence on me or my marriage (over 30 years to the same woman). I don't mind other people being happy, and what consenting adults do behind closed doors is no one's business. If your imaginary peeping Tom doesn't like it, let him do something about it himself.
By the way (and this applies to any and all gods), nothing says "my god is a powerless non-entity" like religious people feeling it necessary to punish others for their imaginary "sins". Anyone stoned, crucified, burned or beheaded for whatever "crime" is a testament to god's impotence.
You never answered my question about the flying horse. This same advanced-science book of yours has the story in Surah 17:1. Is it true?
Steve Weeks
Theory of Evolution? It's a theory of man trying to make sense of his existence. Have you seen with your eyes, anything evolving around you? I mean any monkeys you know that turned into a man? Why did the orang utans stop evolving? Or at least, something popping out of nowhere? Like we did after the dead earth? Can you answer it yourself, honestly, without relying on a theory?
The Science of man only discovered about the layers of earth just recently, to name a few. The Science of man created the atomic destruction upon mankind and still looms in the horizon. Why are you so obsessed with Science that is only a knowledge that cannot explain why we're going to die being nothing like an ant after so much knowledge and achievement we've made? Aren't we much better than the ants and the pigs to be just as dead as them when the time come?
Everything in the Koran is the truth. I did answer it, you're just not willing to accept. If a 1,400 year old book consist so much truth that were only verified with all the advancement we had only recently in this couple of centuries, how can it contain any falsity? Of course I can't prove it, just as much you can't prove evolution, which is only a "theory" remember? The difference is, the abundance of truth that made the Koran reliable. Science is still evolving with our progress, an evolution of thinking that I can see and measure for sure. What's the truth of the Bible are you talking about, care to share? Is it related with embryology?
"He makes you in the wombs of your mothers in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness." (Quran 36:6)
"The three veils of darkness" may refer to: (1) the anterior abdominal wall; (2) the uterine wall; and (3) the amniochorionic membrane (Fig. 1). Although there are other interpretations of this statement, the one presented here seems the most logical from an embryological point of view.
http://www.quranandscience.com/human/135-dr-keith-moore-confirms-embryology-in-quran.html
How do you explain it, Stephen? A lucky 1,400 year old guess?
Why are you blaming God for bad things that happen to you? Are you sure you don't have anything to do with it? Cause and effect, remember? Things don't just happen like that. What we eat, drink, do and do not do, our thoughts and emotional health all depend on us. God permits all things to happen on this earth, good or bad, it's true, as a test for all of us, but it doesn't mean He bless it or done it. It's up to us. What we give, we get back, except if there's divine intervention, of course. If we failed to take a good care of ourselves, why are we blaming Him? Could you please explain how did God aborted your babies? Did you see Him doing it? What are the Scientific explanation given by your doctors? God did it?
What about the good things that happened to you? Do you still blame them on Him? We were given all that we need to survive, prosper and be in control in lots of things. Some bad things happen as do some good things. The culprit is us.
Stephen, you seemed to resent comeuppance towards criminals, what do you think we should do to prevent crimes and setting up examples for those criminal minds? Are these imaginary sins too?
http://listverse.com/2010/06/05/10-people-who-give-atheism-a-bad-name/
Wow... I must have touched a nerve there.
You obviously don't, or won't, or can't understand evolution, so we're done with that discussion.
And, no, I don't blame god for anything bad that happens to me because there is no god. There is a certain amount of randomness in life, and I accept it.
Remember George Carlin's 11th Commandment... "Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself".
Enjoy your life, my friend; it's the only one you have.
Flying horse... Hee hee! :-D
Steve Weeks
Well, as they say, if an atheist has the power he'll kill you, if he doesn't, he'll insult you when you got him cornered. Flying horse? Hehe... Bye Stephen, hope you'll evolve before death reaches you. Be good.
Last but not least, there was no you before your mother and father met, where were you then? Perhaps a theory in the making?
See pictures 6, 12, 15, 16, 24, 27, and 32 from TheAtlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/10/eid-al-adha-2013/100608/
Thanks, Nathan. That's the way the guy in the sky likes 'em... bloody. Well, actually that's how the celebrants *think* he likes them, because that's the only way they knew how to slaughter back in the day when some clever guy made up the idea.
Steve Weeks
Thanks Nathan, it's beautiful. Muslims all over the world, different colours, same faith and all those food for all the human beings. And not a single human lives and limbs being harmed. Feeling blessed. Nice link man. :)
http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/abortionimages/
Sorry guys, but you really have to see this. The beastman, unrepenting and being so civilised as a beastman could be. Compare them with what Nathan has shared with us. Can you differentiate the beast from the man?
Holy Horus: The Jesus Origin Exposed; The Real Truth About Religion and Its Origins, and Annuit Coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum
On a separate note, for Stephen Hawking’s ‘conventional afterlife is a fairy tale’ followers, I remind them of the First Law of Thermodynamics – Energy Can Not Be Created Nor Destroyed, Merely Transformed. And submit that life or a ’soul’ is essentially energy and must conform to the Laws of Energy, at least on a scientific basis. Circumstantial and coincidental evidence of energy ‘surviving’, transferring, making itself known to some, seems to support the scientific evidence. http://edwardmd.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/the-real-truth-about-religion-and-its-origins/
@ Edward19:
That reminds me of the question as to whether Hell is exothermic or endothermic:
http://astro.berkeley.edu/~gmarcy/thermal/tpteacher/jokes/hell.html
But, seriously, what is the evidence that souls exist and represent a form of energy? Any citation of a peer-reviewed scientific journal is acceptable. ;-)
Steve Weeks
http://itsnobody.wordpress.com/2012/09/07/what-is-a-reliable-scientific-experiment/
Absolutism vs Human's error
"Even at the best journals, the process is only as good as the editors and reviewers, who are people who make mistakes.
A busy reviewer may give a cursory read through a paper that superficially looks good, but miss subtle mistakes. Or they may not take the time to chase down every reference, or check all the statistics.
The process generally works, and is certainly better than having no quality control filter, but it is also no guarantee of correctness, or even the avoidance of mistakes.
Peer-reviewers also have biases. They may be prejudiced against studies that contradict their own research or their preferred beliefs. They may therefore bias the published studies in their favored direction, and may be loath to give a pass to a submission that would directly contradict something they have published. For this reasons editors often allow authors to request or recommend reviewers, or to request that certain people not be asked to be reviewers. Each journal has their own policy. Sometimes an editor will specifically use a reviewer that the authors request not be used, thinking they may be trying to avoid legitimate criticism.
The process can be quite messy, and full of politics."
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-importance-and-limitations-of-peer-review/
Peer reviewed research? Important to knowledge growth, yes, but to base your conscience and risk your faith and fate, here and in the afterlife. Well, the risk is yours. What do you have to lose? Hmm, what should I do and think next, hmm, let's refer to a peer reviewed scientific journal! Voila! Whatever happened to intuition? Any peer reviewed journal research about the non existent of God out there? Hello?
A flying horse or a Buraq?
"What we normally think of as 'life' is based on chains of carbon atoms, with a few other atoms, such as nitrogen or phosphorous. One can speculate that one might have life with some other chemical basis, such as silicon, but carbon seems the most favourable case, because it has the richest chemistry."
http://www.hawking.org.uk/life-in-the-universe.html
"Reaching out to the stars with our messages of curiosity and peace may only make it easier for an advanced alien mining operation to stake a claim on Earth. First contact would be a much better proposition if we can wait until we are on more equal terms."
Hawking compares making contact with alien species with Native Americans' first contact with Christopher Columbus - which didn't turn out brilliantly for the Native Americans.
"I imagine they might exist in massive ships... having used up all the resources from the planet below," Professor Hawking says.
Read more at http://www.tgdaily.com/space-features/49508-beware-alien-invaders-says-stephen-hawking#Ihfjb0lpr5ZRg34P.99
Is Buraq a horse that flies? Hello, Dwindlers? Anyone home? Echo, echo..
"Well, the risk is yours. What do you have to lose?"
From my perspective, any time I waste praying to or worshiping a non-existent being is lost. I've got better things to do.
"Any peer reviewed journal research about the non existent (sic) of God out there?"
As we all know, it is impossible to prove a "negative". There is no more proof of the non-existence of god than there is of the non-existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Pesto be upon him).
Steve Weeks
Ahh, the limitation of the human beings, "it is impossible to prove a "negative"". Well, let me give you a broader peer and non peer reviewed of written and unwritten journal, acknowledged by a majority of the human beings, since the dawn of man, by the scientists, philosophers, scholars, thinkers, the layman etc.
That is, every great or not so great masterpiece is a creation and has a creator. Your chair, the one you're sitting on, does not exist by itself. It is created. That's a simple chair, With no neurons and living cells, complex mixture of the right combination of chemistry and fragile inter-related, like clock work working system. Then, you would say, a chair is not a living thing. Well, a puny man is not the God either. What is so great in creating a chair compared to the universe or a fly for that matter. That is why God is God and a man is just a man, dependent and limited.
Most theists' problems are they can't decide and believe that the Supreme being that created all this cannot be a part of this worldly or universally creation itself. The Creator cannot be a part or resemble the creations. And thus, we have Christianity that believes Jesus, a man, was the son of god or a god born in a human flesh, the Buddhist that worship Buddha, also a man and the Hindus that worship almost everything. You may say why is the confusion, since we, the Theists, all have decided that there is God, the creator of this universe. The answer is they choose to believe in their corrupted holy books. Some choose to continue to believe even though they knew corruption has been done. Some don't even bother to know or learn about their holy books. For example, the Hindus, most or some, don't even know that their God is one and unseen. For some reason, pride maybe, they have refused to acknowledge their scriptures were without proof and were corrupted since there are no system guarding their authenticity, thousand of years ago until now. The confusion and the conflict in their belief system is the manifestation of their erroneous ways in their search for the One God, the God, which is Allah.
Well, so much for the "perfect" unbelief scientific system, Stephen. Oh well, how about the aliens? Any peer reviewed scientific journal to help us think, do and decide too? Well, Pesto be upon you too, Stephen. :)
Anyway, did you know that your science originated from Islamic civilisation, Stephen? Peer reviewed journal was done and inspired by a great Muslim scientist. Do you know him? Or did you think atheists created it?
"The first, and possibly greatest Islamic scholar, was Ibn al-Haytham, best known for his wonderful work on light and vision, called 'The Book of Optics.' He developed a scientific method very similar to our own:
State an explicit problem, based upon observation and experimentation.
Test or criticize a hypothesis through experimentation.
Interpret the data and come to a conclusion, ideally using mathematics.
Publish the findings
Ibn al-Haytham, brilliantly, understood that controlled and systematic experimentation and measurement were essential to discovering new knowledge, built upon existing knowledge.
His other additions were the idea that science is a quest for ultimate truth and that one of the only ways to reach that goal was through skepticism and questioning everything.
Other Muslim scholars further contributed to this scientific method, refining it and preserving it. Al-Biruni understood that measuring instruments and human observers were prone to error and bias, so proposed that experiments needed replication, many times, before a 'common sense' average was possible.
Al-Rahwi (851 - 934) was the first scholar to use a recognizable peer review process.
In his book, Ethics of the Physician, he developed peer review process to ensure that physicians documented their procedures and lay them open for scrutiny. Other physicians would review the processes and make a decision in cases of suspected malpractice.
Abu Jābir, known as Geber (721 - 815), an Islamic scientist often referred to as the father of chemistry, was the first scholar to introduce controlled experiments, and dragged alchemy away from the world of superstition into one of empirical measurement.
Ibn Sina (Avicenna), one of the titans in the history of science, proposed that there were two ways of arriving at the first principles of science, through induction and experimentation. Only through these methods could the first principles needed for deduction be discovered
Other Islamic scholars contributed the idea of consensus in science as a means of filtering out fringe science and allowing open reviews. These contributions to the scientific method, and to the tools required to follow them, made this into an Islamic Golden Age of science.
However, with the decline in the Islamic Houses of Knowledge, the history of the scientific method passed into Europe and the Renaissance."
Read more: History of the Scientific Method - How Science Became Important
http://explorable.com/history-of-the-scientific-method
What were the atheists doing at that time, Stephen? Thinking? Creating the Gulags or the Killing Fields?
How about numbers and algebra? Did the peer reviewed atheists created them? Anyway what have the atheists contribute to mankind actually? Beside mockery, oppression, genocide, abortion, assisted suicide and risky lifestyle? The atomic bomb or the abundance of unproven theories to help us out in our daily lives maybe?
"You never did answer about the flying horse" said Stephen. Has he answered any of mine?
Can an abundance of truth of 1,400 years ago proven in our advancement today has any falsity in it? Answer them in sequence order O Scientific Atheist. Or has your brain turned into spaghetti?
"...erroneous ways in their search for the One God, the God, which is Allah."
Here's an excellent essay by H.L. Mencken:
http://nowscape.com/atheism/dead_gods.htm
It's worth a read on its own merits, but I mention it here because it includes a long list of "other" gods that have been worshipped at various times and places.
Think about why you reject these gods, and you will possibly (though probably not) come to an understanding of why I reject yours.
Cheers,
Steve Weeks
Thank you for the link, but you still have not answered my questions. Perhaps it is true what they say about atheists. They can't think for themselves.
As for your rejection, I don't have any problem with that, it's your faith and fate, not mine. If you know the size of the universe, well, your unbelief matters not to the God who has no partners. My concern is those who may follow your ways if I haven't said anything in here.
Stephen, atheism offers nothing but short meaningless happiness and self indulgence. It lacks justice, endurance, responsibility and discipline. Everyone dies and that's that. The criminals die as their victims do. Man dies as dogs do. That is why it turned violent the minute it gained political powers.
"atheism offers nothing but short meaningless happiness and self indulgence. It lacks justice, endurance, responsibility and discipline."
No, it just means "not believing in (any) god". What you or others claim it means is irrelevant.
Steve Weeks
Well, good luck to you Stephen, since you don't want to waste your time worshipping God and instead, busy yourself making fun of theists in here. I guess I better let you have fun atheistically as you know how, since it's the only way you can find gratification in.
But let say, that you are right, then I don't have anything to lose. But what if I'm right?
Worshipping God is beneficial to the human beings. For example, only Muslims fast two days in a week, voluntarily on Mondays and Thursdays. The modern days of today, find 5:2 fasting principle is the best way to stay healthy, without having to spend much money or wasting time waiting for a peer reviewed scientific journal that would not be able to keep up with all aspects of life.
"I went into it quite skeptical because I’ve looked at diets over the years and I’ve always assumed they’re rubbish. Really seriously rubbish," Mosley went on. "But the people who study in this area are really top scientists -- world-class scientists who are hugely reputable in their areas. And they were all coming at it from their areas of expertise: cancer, dementia, diabetes -- they were approaching it from different angles, but coming to the same conclusion. I found that very convincing."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/29/michael-mosley-the-fast-diet-intermittent-fasting-uk-pbs_n_2977893.html
"Fasting can help protect against brain diseases, scientists say
Claim that giving up almost all food for one or two days a week can counteract impact of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's"
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/feb/18/fasting-protect-brain-diseases-scientists
Abu Hurairah Radiyallahu ta’ala ‘anhu reported: The Messenger of Allah sallalahu ‘alahi wasallam said, “Deeds of people are presented (to Allah) on Mondays and Thursdays. So I like that my actions be presented while I am fasting.”
(Tirmidhi)
See, we Muslims are not wasting any time or anything at all by worshipping God. All that we do benefit us, not God. For He has no needs of us or this world. He is the owner of everything. Another example, we Muslims abstain from free sex and that save us from sexual malice and sufferings. Mothers don't end up killing their own unborn, repeatedly. But hey, cutting animals' throats is disgusting right?
And as for this posting,
http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2012/01/islam-its-mostly-about-going-to.html
the answer is this,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2476507/How-washing-hands-makes-HAPPIER-Cleaning-boosts-confidence-washes-away-feelings-failure.html?ico=health^headlines
A new study has found that the ritual of cleaning makes us more optimistic after failure.
Dr Kai Kaspar, from the University of Cologne, examined how physical cleansing affects us after a bad event.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2476507/How-washing-hands-makes-HAPPIER-Cleaning-boosts-confidence-washes-away-feelings-failure.html#ixzz2iumKGUf6
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The earth was not as lively as it is now as we know it. 1,400 years ago, it was told in the Koran to the human race. Only now, it is making sense.
"Know that Allah gives life to the earth after its lifelessness. We have made clear to you the signs; perhaps you will understand. (17)"
http://tanzil.net/#trans/en.sahih/57:17
And watch this documentary. And you'll be surprised how dead was the earth then compared to the now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xsn3wpVAcjk
Thanks for the article and your efforts. For more on government fascist gods: Holy Horus: The Jesus Origin Exposed; The Real Truth About Religion and Its Origins, and Annuit Coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum http://edwardmd.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/the-real-truth-about-religion-and-its-origins/
“Manly P. Hall, a 33rd Degree Freemason and prolific author, described in his pamphlet “Masonic Orders of Fraternity” an “Invisible Empire” that has been silently working for centuries towards social change. It periodically became visible throughout History, through different organizations who bore different names. According to him, these groups have a great yet silent impact on society, even transforming the educational system to form future generations.” http://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-knowledge/the-order-of-the-illuminati/
“Mohammad never assigned himself a status more than a common man and a messenger of God. People had faith in him when he was surrounded by poverty and adversity and trusted him while he was the ruler of a great Empire. He was a man of spotless
character who always had confidence in himself and in God's help. No aspect of his life remained hidden nor was his death
a mysterious event.”
― M.H. Hyndman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bO363h0qh8#t=255
Yeah, srizals. Muhammad (pb&jbup) was the most modest man who ever lived, as these quotes from the Ash-Shifa clearly show.
"The Prophet … addressed the people, saying, 'O gathering of believers! Allah … has preferred me greatly over you, and He has preferred my wives greatly over yours.'" pp.102-3
"The Prophet … spoke of his honored position saying, 'I am the most honored of the children of Adam with my Lord, and this is no boast.'" p.96
"The Prophet … said, 'I am the noblest of the children of Adam before my Lord, and this is no boast.'" p.121
"All the prophets from the time of Adam will come under my banner, and I will be the first for whom the earth splits open, and this is no boast." p.121
He stated the fact, and emphasised "this is no boast". Can't you understand the simplest of language?
Now let see, why is the difference shall we, in order to understand the context,
Mālik ibn Dinār radi Allahu ‘anhu (may Allah bless Him) said: “The Prophet ﷺ never got full from bread or meat unless he was eating with people.”2
Al-Nuʿmān ibn Bashīr (ra) said: “Do you not have all the food and drink that you want? Verily I saw your prophet ﷺ and he could not even find enough low-quality dates to fill his stomach.”
ʿĀʾisha (ra) said: “Verily, we, the family of Muḥammad ﷺ, would go an entire month without lighting a fire. It was only dates and water.”
Anas (ra) said: “The Prophet ﷺ never had bread and meat together for lunch and dinner, unless he was eating with people.”
Anas (ra) said: “One time the Prophet ﷺ was brought dates and I saw him eating them while leaning on something because of the severity of his hunger.”3
http://www.suhaibwebb.com/personaldvlpt/character/the-prophet-and-food/
Now tell me, do you know of anyone that could do this while he has all the influence and power on his community and no enemies overpowering him? And I have not yet started with his other aspect of life.
Yeah srizals. And "when the Prophet ... relieved himself ... the earth would split open and swallow his discharge and there remained a fragrant aroma." Ash-shifa, p.47
Well, if you're hungry and fasting most of the time for your entire life, living purely on water and a few dates regularly, day and night, days and nights, perhaps you can shit like that too, Steve. But I bet, you stink. ;)
Steve, I got a chuckle out of the story of the lady who drank the prophet's urine and found it tasty and refreshing. It's a good thing the earth swallowed up his poop or no doubt people would eat them like candy bars.
And Lady Ayesha claimed she never saw the old boy's private parts. It *is* possible to perform fellatio in total darkness.
STeve Weeks
Post a Comment