Islamic Union under investigation in NRW

@Timmeh: Wars have happened, and will continue to happen because of natural human instincts. Even if you do not believe in God,

On the other hand, religions have developed among men as a way of adding supernatural authority to ethics, and to bring meaning to a meaningless world. Most people are not comfortable with a meaningless world.

Religions also help men to broaden their understanding of humankind.

Instead of perceiving the world as my family against all others, a religion is a community of thought that transcends national and social boundaries.

People rarely kill each other but it's a damned sight easier to do if you have been convinced you are doing Gods work. Same if you have been convinced that the outgroup is of lesser morality or worth than you like dictatorships do.

@Timmeh:

Good. Thats the first step.
Atheism is not a religion in any sort of way.
It it the rejection of the beliefs and culture of the world's religions that have evolved over thousands of years.
Therefore you cannot compare Atheism and Religion as apples to apples.
-
Ok next step
Now let's compare them on the level of "belief".
That inherently is what a person believes to be true.
Sometimes the person believes that to be right, other people must me wrong.
Thats called "intolerance", not religion. It's inside a person. We can allow allow others the right to believe and live the way they want or not. That's our choice based on our belief.

-
To say that religion therefore causes intolerance which then supports atrocities is a non-causal link.
Somewhere in that argument is the person who makes a desicison whether to kill the person with a pick-axe or not. Thats a big part.

To say that religion does not sometimes make people stop and think about what they are would be un-true.
That is because most religions have some sort of judgement clause where you will pay for your sins.
Unfortunately many individuals compeltely rationalise their descisions, however terrible.
Here's the crux: this individual is making the desicison based upon his/her environment and situation.

Here is a question: what would stop an atheist from killing someone if they felt no guilt and could get away with it? Just their innate sense of right or wrong?

Or if you are a "threat"

Therefore you cannot compare Atheism and Religion as apples to apples.

Now let's compare them on the level of "belief".
That inherently is what a person believes to be true.
Sometimes the person believes that to be right, other people must me wrong.
Thats called "intolerance"

To say that religion therefore causes intolerance which then supports atrocities is a non-causal link.

Somewhere in that argument is the person who makes a desicison whether to kill the person with a pick-axe or not. Thats a big part.

Here's the crux: this individual is making the desicison based upon his/her environment and situation.

Here is a question: what would stop an atheist from killing someone if they felt no guilt and could get away with it? Just their innate sense of right or wrong?

Yes you can. One believes in the supernatural and/or a creator. One doesn't. One's belief system is based upon logic and rationality, the other's is based on faith. They're opposed, but directly comparable.

There is no real difference between Hitler and Osama Bin Ladin.

As I keep on pushing here.

In both the cases of a totalitarian system and a religious system people devolve their responsibilities to the leader and perform what they ask. The problem is that the 'bad' religious leaders know this and manipulate it. There is no real difference between Hitler and Osama Bin Ladin.

Exactly.

This is about atrocities in the name of religion and atrocities in the name of atheism.

It's the wrong argument. Religion is not the root of the problem... They kill in the name of dictatorships. They kill because somebody tells them.

Take God out of organised religion and just look at them as dictatorships and then you can see what the problem is.

I second that Pas. He's really not getting it.

Timmeh. You cannot name the argument, which I disagree with comparing anyways and then try and ask why people have no answers.
It obviously only makes sense to you to compare it like that!!

It is and it isn't.

They occur because God is such a powerful thing in the minds of many people. The leaders of religious groups then manipulate this because they are seen as more in touch with God. People then devolve their rational thinking to the leader and do as they say.

Is God the problem or the abuse of psychology by the leadership?

Dude I'm totally getting it. What I'm not totally getting is your inability to address any points I bring up to you.

The other thing I'm not getting is your use of English.

We're all on the same page

So how do we go about banning organised religions but allowing people to believe in their own personal God if they see fit.

Religion vs Atheism...cannot compare...UGGG I am caveman .

Results of regimes that use either as part of their policy you can compare.

When you do compare them, you find the psych is the same because often the results are the same.

Why? Explain how these two cannot be compared.

uh huh.

But you can't compare them, oder?

I'd say we need to stop defending 'religious freedom' and start promoting true 'individual freedom'.

There's too much self interest in the power structures of the world for this to happen for a long time though.

I'd say we need to stop defending 'religious freedom' and start promoting true 'individual freedom'.

Not at all, it was just that the image was more poetic than the usual here in the discussion,
and I agree with you totally on the issue of media manipulation, my concern is that this has gotten out of hand and the state is now focusing on Muslim groups because that is the convenient scapegoat. And no doubt the Muslim world gets a distorted picture of the West as well, but it is less a concern.
Edit: my other concern was whether we, as well-off ex-pats, could identify with the problems that immigrants from Muslim countries have to deal with in Germany. But this does not seem to be the case. Being an immigrant to Germany is not strong enough to create a cohesive social group, apparently the divide between the Muslim and the Christian world is as strong as ever.

They inspire people.

They inspire people.

Evidently the Muslims have become a target in much of the West, and from the look of things this behavior will be tolerated and even cheered on by much of the much-vaunted "liberal" West. The whole point of freedom and tolerance is to protect precisely those groups with which you are not in agreement, otherwise it is a farce. It is not the majority that needs protection from tyranny, but rather the minorities.

The whole point of freedom and tolerance is to protect precisely those groups with which you are not in agreement, otherwise it is a farce. It is not the majority that needs protection from tyranny, but rather the minorities.

Go back and read the federalist papers; under Bush's regime they are probably classified as state secrets.

They suppress people.

All in all, he used religion to try and promote equality and justice but the same religion again to promote hate against homosexuals.

So how do we go about banning organized religions but allowing people to believe in their own personal God if they see fit.

But yes, a Christian missionary is not welcome in Mecca, but missionaries are annoying to many other people as well. You do not see Orthodox Jews or bearded Mullahs trying to stand on soapboxes on St. Peter's square either.
So Timmeh: is this the sort of religious freedom that you wanted?

I think the first step in the right direction is to remove tax exempt status on anything not directly related to charity.