Now, generally I tend to like people that sue the church, because most of the time they have a good reason for doing so, but I can’t help but side with the church in their fight against this idiot.
A man said he was so consumed by the spirit of God that he fell and hit his head while at a Knoxville church.
Now he wants Lakewind Church to pay $2.5 million for medical bills, lost income, and pain and suffering he said he’s endured from his injuries.
The Sevier County man said he was asking God to have “a real experience” while praying at church.
He said he has fallen from the force of the spirit before but has always been caught by someone.
It looks like the “spirit of God” is to blame, not the church, so I wonder why he’s not suing God. After all did he not go voluntarily into the church seeking to experience exactly what he did? So what is he accusing the church of, doing their job too well? I mean he asked God for a “real experience” himself. What’s more real than falling on your empty nugget and being reminded of just how stupid you’d been acting? Dismissed!
The Pope is in Australia for the World Youth Day and he is supposed to apologize for:
decades of sexual abuse of children by priests.
Apologize? That’s it? This is the equivalent of catching a kid with their hands in the cookie jar and letting them go with an apology. Well, come to think of it most parents will do just that, but you get my drift. Usually a crime is followed by a suitable punishment. If wide spread sexual abuse involved any other institution but a religious one, would we expect such leniency? Of course not, they would be persecuted like you wouldn’t believe, but no, not the Church. The Church has been covering up such abuses for decades and all they have to do is say “sorry” and they’re home free. Am I the only one who is disgusted that even child sexual abuse can be overlooked by the authorities if the Church is involved? Fucking disgusting!
But of course it isn’t. Both Christianity and Islam are violent religions, if you stick to their holy books. One need only read through these books to see that. Take a look here for the violence in the Quran. Here’s a recap of some of my favorites (I am looking at a translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali other translations may vary):
- If you believe only part of the holy book you will be “consigned to the most grievious penalty” 2:85 (Therefore according to the Quran any real muslim must believe every single word in it or perish)
- Kill unbelievers wherever you catch them. 2:191
- A great reward is promised to those who fight in the cause of Allah (presumably by killing any unbelievers they catch) 4:74
- Unbelievers are the friends of Satan, and you must fight them. 4:76
- Don’t be friends with unbelievers. Instead slay them. 4:89
- Cut off the hands of thieves 5:38
I could go on and on. The Bible is not free of such violence and intolerance either. But that’s not the point of this entry. The point is that, at least as far as the two most prominent world religions are concerned, they are not peaceful in nature. Their gods are vengeful ones. They are intolerant bullies. If we are to take the holy books literally these are two bloody violent religions, there’s not doubt about it. The only way you can turn them non-violent is if you agree that not everything in the holy books is true or meant to be interpreted literally, even though I don’t really think that “go kill unbelievers” can be interpreted for anything else besided what is explicitly says.
Therefore, Dalai Lama, you are wrong. It is not “totally wrong, unfair” to say that Islam is a violent religion. It is the reality today. Christianity for the most part has been able to shed or ignore it’s violent passages. Islam has not reached that stage yet. Both holy books incite intolerance and killing, maiming and all kinds of atrocities. It is the believers who decide which parts to follow and which to ignore and as of right now, some of the biggest attrocities are being commited by muslims, fueled by their religious belief.
That is not to say that Muslims inevitably must turn violent. I don’t even think that the majority of Muslims are of the violent type. But that is their personal choice. There is nothing peaceful about the religion itself. Those people are more evolved in my eyes than the violent ones. They’re more humane, more modern. They choose to ignore the violence in their religion. They choose to throw out the nasty and keep the nice. As such they have deliberately changed the religion of Islam into something else. But the religion itself is pretty nasty, just the same as the Christian religion is pretty nasty.
I like to think of modern day Nazis. It is possible for modern day nazis to still believe in the superiority of the Arian race and such, but to be against physial violence against other races. Does that mean that Nazism is/was not violent? Or does it mean that the modern day followers that I am speaking of have transformed a violent thing into a less violent one? In what sense is a philosphy which asks its followers to kill, kill and kill some more not violent?
A philosophy is either violent or it isn’t. One that asks for blood of any oposing views is undeniably violent. Of course it is up to its followers to decide if they should follow the dictates of their philosophy or not. The people are violent or peaceful. They have a choice. The philosophy doesn’t. It is unfair to call muslims violent people. That is indeed not true. It is not unfair to call Islam, or Christianity, a violent religion. It is dishonest to try and be politically correct by calling a rabid dog docile. Don’t you think?
Yesterday I posted a video at my other blog, Video Skepdude which attracted an angry reply, which in turn made it necessary that I post my own reply. Here is the original angry reply by an offended muslim reader
truefaith, on June 29th, 2008 at 12:19 am Said:
you actually are the most stupid man,,you judge the religion by the people, the peaceful is the religion not the people,,you are such a fucking atheist that dont have any faith(same as animal) or even a religious man that has extreme envious in islam..!!!
To which I replied:
Yes I judge things by the actions of it’s representatives. If you had really read my comments carefully, I said that Islam can indeed become a peaceful religion, but it’s not there yet. Take a look at most countries where Islam meddles with the state. How do those countries fare when it come to human rights? How can a religion whose prophet had sex with a 9 year old be peaceful, if it does not condemn such behavior? I belive Turkey is one of the few countries where Islam has advanced in the right direction.
Don’t forget all religions incite violence. The Bible and the Quran are full of violent passages. As such there is no peaceful religion. The only difference is that some religions advance to a point where they know they must ignore certain passages. Unfortunately Islam is not there yet. It may be quite close if there are people like you who think it is not violent, but it is not there yet.So you are wrong when you say that religion is peaceful and people are violent. People are the only ones who are violente OR peaceful. Religion is a source of violence!
Now instead of being mad at me for calling it as I see it, you should be mad at the people that make your faith look so bad. Those are the ones you should fight, not literally, not me. I am sorry but with all the terrorist acts, the beheadings, the bombings, the genital mutilations, the inhumane treatment of women, there is but one conclusion to be reached. Islam is still a middle age religion. It is violent. It is contrary to any human instinct of justice and fairness.
You are correct when you say that I have no faith. I don’t need it. I believe in myself, the human race. I have no need for Sky Daddy, especially not one that condones the raping of little girls, by grown ass men. Those are the men that should be hanged, if you ask me.
And by the way no person on Earth is envious of, or in, Islam. You betray the limits of your own intelligence when you make such a statement.
I would like to hear from people. What do you think? Is there such thing as a peaceful religion? I would appreciate it if you limit your comments to Islam and Christianity. Thanks.
An Australian teenager, wearing a T-shirt with the writing “Jesus is a c**t” , and depicting a nun masturbating, has been charged with offensive behavior under the Summary Offenses Act 2005 for public nuisance. What is it about religion, that makes otherwise democratic societies, such as Australia, censor the most basic human right, freedom of speech? What is it about otherwise democratic societies, that makes them try to legalize morality and political correctness, a very anti-democratic endeavor? I don’t know, I just don’t get it!
Sen-Sgt Arron Ottaway defended charging the teen.
“I’m not religious but that’s just offensive,” Sen-Sgt Ottaway said.
Offensive? A writing on a T-shirt is offensive. So what? Is that reason enough to enact a law about it? What writing in any T-shirt is not offensive to someone? Why the special treatment for religion? Why is it above every other thing? Are Australian police going to do the same for someone wearing a T-shirt proclaiming Jesus as our lord and savior? Probably not, nor should they. Freedom of speech is more important than anyone’s feelings, even my own. Furthermore, and this may come as a surprise to some, NUNS ARE HUMAN AND NOT ABOVE THE “SIN” OF MASTURBATION. The only difference is that they probably feel really, really bad…after feeling really, really good!
Police conducted inquiries at Australia Fair shopping centre, where the teen said he bought the shirt, to find any shops selling it.
Am I the only one who is reminded of Nazi Germany or Communist Russia by such behaviors? Have they nothing else to occupy the police with in Australia, than trying to find out which store is selling which “offensive” T-shirts? This is laughable. This is absolutely ridiculous. I was not aware that Australia was a theocracy!
Gold Coast lawyer Bill Potts told website goldcoast.com.au that the arrest highlighted Australia’s need for a Bill of Rights.
“One of the great problems with our country is that we talk about rights such as privacy and freedom of speech and the like but they are not enshrined or protected in any way as they are in America,” Mr Potts said.
“While there are always limits on freedom of speech, you can’t incite violence or anything like that, it seems to be now more than ever that our rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression should be protected.
“A Bill of Rights which enshrines that protection is long overdue in this country.”
Amen to that!