The Religion of Secularism

[justanobserver]

Come to your senses. If you do not much reasons to debate then leave the thread and enjoy some where else.

Your post is reported.

@Fighter488
WTF dude are you insane?

I told Tuahaa to shut up, not you (read the quote), because I don't believe that "religions unite races" and all that crap. We all know what 'uniting races' means (conversion)

 

[Fighter488]

@Fighter488
WTF dude are you insane?

I told Tuahaa to shut up, not you (read the quote), because I don't believe that "religions unite races" and all that crap. We all know what 'uniting races' means (conversion)

OK, I am wrong. Sorry.

I never say that its religion that unites. And I also do not agree to it. Had it been the case then religions would not be asking for a judicial system to support and sustain them.

Differences of opinion will always be there. This is human psychology. What my point is that why religion supporting parties are not given a chance to contest and if they win, to prove thier system and values, to the general public, like any secular party or the secular group is given. Let the public decide what is wrong and what is right. The constitution and judicial system is there to uphold the equality and fairness in all matters, for the populace. Right?

Fighter

 

[kugga]

well, but religion is the cause of division as well, depends on how you see it.

But the number of divisions religion has caused are far less than what secularism did...

 

[justanobserver]

Differences of opinio will lways be there. This is human pschology. What my point is that why religion supporting parties are not given a chance to contest and if they win, to prove thier system and values, to the general public, like any secular party or the secular group is given.

You mean overtly religious parties right?

Hmmm well why do need religion in governance, its the 21st century after all, why should we depend on obscure scriptures written long ago ?

Democracy is a western invention, but being western isn't the reason we should reject it right?

Why not assimilate what the best the West had to offer, and leave out the bad stuff (mass consumption, greed etc)

 

[RamGorur]

Kindly type your defnition in bold with capitalized letter, take a print and keep it a place where you can see it day-in day-out to boost your ego and self belief. It is no more than a feed to the corrupt idea you have about muslims in India and else where.

The part that you highlighted in the conviction that it is my 'corrupt idea' about 'Muslims in India and else where' is actually a quote from the article Abir posted. If you had, just for a second, taken your head out of your rectal orifice, it is a possibility, that you would have been able to see it.

The idea of majority and minority came from west, where their were miniscule populations, and majority and minority concept is put to supress alternate view by a larger group. They projected thier EXCLUSIVE policies as INCLUSIVE and called it DEMOCRATIC and SECULAR (while confronting the egoistic and scientifically wrong church).

You mean those RSS bigots are correct when they say that India should not be secular? Because you see, what is sauce for goose is also the sauce for gander.

The question of 80%, or 51% do not arise at all when you try to take in to account the ACTUAL number rather than ambigous percentages, in eastern populated areas, such as Indo-Pak sub continent !

Quickly make up your mind. Is it majority/minority issue? Or is it number issue? If it is former, your previous arguments are BS. If its later, your current argument is BS. Quick make a choice. Or better still. Don't. That way you will save us some BS.

Once again, the sauce is same for goose and gander.

 

[justanobserver]

But the number of divisions religion has caused are far less than what secularism did...

Secularism has caused (or promotes) divisions?!

How can secularism cause divisions when politics and religion are exclusive (and everyone has equal rights) ?

 

[Ahmad]

But the number of divisions religion has caused are far less than what secularism did...

could you give us an example of secular divisions?

 

[kugga]

You mean overtly religious parties right?

Hmmm well why do need religion in governance, its the 21st century after all, why should we depend on obscure scriptures written long ago ?

Democracy is a western invention, but being western isn't the reason we should reject it right?

Why not assimilate what the best the West had to offer, and leave out the bad stuff (mass consumption, greed etc)

Secularism cannot any other religion... like all other religions it claims to be the best and solution for humanity.... but very intelligently denies other religions... and that's what your post depicts..

 

[Ahmad]

Secularism cannot any other religion... like all other religions it claims to be the best and solution for humanity.... but very intelligently denies other religions... and that's what your post depicts..

it doesnt take our religion from us as long as it is kept personal.

 

[Fighter488]

You mean overtly religious parties right?

Hmmm well why do need religion in governance, its the 21st century after all, why should we depend on obscure scriptures written long ago ?

Democracy is a western invention, but being western isn't the reason we should reject it right?

Why not assimilate what the best the West had to offer, and leave out the bad stuff (mass consumption, greed etc)

Come out of this prejudice of "why should we depend on obscure scriptures written long ago". Do not ASSUME and propagate your assumption as the ONLY truth. Let this prove it (right or wrong) democratically.

And democracy is not a western invention. It was pres.ent in the world outside west, long before. And yes SECULARISM is not the best that west can offer.

Fighter

 

[Fighter488]

The part that you highlighted in the conviction that it is my 'corrupt idea' about 'Muslims in India and else where' is actually a quote from the article Abir posted. If you had, just for a second, taken your head out of your rectal orifice, it is a possibility, that you would have been able to see it.


You mean those RSS bigots are correct when they say that India should not be secular? Because you see, what is sauce for goose is also the sauce for gander.


Quickly make up your mind. Is it majority/minority issue? Or is it number issue? If it is former, your previous arguments are BS. If its later, your current argument is BS. Quick make a choice. Or better still. Don't. That way you will save us some BS.

Once again, the sauce is same for goose and gander.

Insanity has no bounds! Your post is a very apt reminder to this fact.

Live up to it!

Fighter

 

[justanobserver]

like all other religions it claims to be the best and solution for humanity.... but very intelligently denies other religions... and that's what your post depicts

Secularism is NOT atheism !

Atheism denies all religions, Secularism (inclusive one) gives everyone a right to practice their own religion!

Secularism is separation of politics and religion, that's it !

btw atheism (go China!) is anyday better than than having one predominant religion, suppress all of them equally

 

[kugga]

Secularism is NOT atheism !

Atheism denies all religions, Secularism (inclusive one) gives everyone a right to practice their own religion!

Secularism is separation of politics and religion, that's it !

btw atheism (go China!) is anyday better than than having one predominant religion, suppress all of them equally

huh!! Then why don't it accepts Islamic laws or any other religious laws as they are accepted by vast majority of people around the world??

It denies religion when it denies the supremacy of religion's GOD, it denies religion when it denies religious laws... Religion is code of how to lead a life it's personal and it's collective at the same time...

You say that in secularism every person is treated equally without regarding it's religion but that's not always the case with secularism.. It does not allow any thing which even promotes a religion but does not stop any one promoting secularism(like any other religion)

 

[gpit]

But we do it for God's pleasure... ...

Buddy, I have no problem with being religious or not, being this religious or that religious. I respect them all.

I do have some problem to do guess-work on God.

Tell me how could a mere human being can guess this is God’s pleasure and that is not god’s pleasure?

GW Bush (and others) believes sending troops to Af, Iraq is a crusade, obviously to make God please. But people of Iraq, the sons and daughters of Americans are suffering. Are consequent sufferings also serve the pleasure of God? Similar version goes to Muslim extremists who plotted and conducted 911, etc.

Quite often, God’s pleasure on one side of human being can be God’s hatred on the other side of human being.

So, live and let live as human being, and unpretendingly, that’s the basic morality.

 

[gpit]

Asim, please do not try to propose secularism as a prerequisite for equality.

It can be argued that equality can be guaranteed even within a religious state.

My question to all:
should a state abolish religion because the instruments of state fail to ensure equality?

Secondly how do we define equality ? and what conditions should be met to qualify human equality ?

Thirdly, which religions / belief systems if any advocate discrimination and what kind of discrimination?

Good questions. MHO, which may not be perfect, is:

1) Religion should not be abolished, and it cannot be abolished, regardless of the status of a state. But, on higher level, the behaviors should obey state secular laws. For instance, religious killing/burning to death is mostly regarded illegal. Note that state laws are an evolving matter, i.e. is a function of time (so is human’s understanding of religious teachings).

2) Equality is whatever applies to one applies to all on state level, but in general not applies to personal level. Faith in general is not debatable, but Equality guarantees that some aspects (for instance, evolution vs creation) of religion may be debatable for both sides with equal chance, if both sides want to debate, with the speculation that a fruitful result may yield.


3) Every believer/no-believer, AS A HUMAN BEING, has a tendency to discriminate if he/she becomes an extremist and/or a bigot.

A secular law means the law applies to every religion/non-religion on equal footage on high (state for instance) level.