Agree. But the content of their faith is so diverse that it affects them in radically different ways. They all pick and choose the parts that fit their inherent values. Often, it's not harmful. The danger is when it leads them to view geopolitics in terms of hadithic prophecy.
-
-
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
Diverse, perhaps, but "radically diverse"? Are Muslims as likely to interpret scripture in feminist manner as they are an anti-feminist manner? As likely to celebrate religious dissent as they are to proscribe the killing of apostates? There are patterns.
4 replies 0 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @SarahTheHaider
Sure, I pretty much agree with you on this topic 100%. But there appear to be a growing number of Muslim movements which claim to be feminist, or trans-inclusive, or egalitarian, etc. That doesn't justify Islam, but it does mean that the definition of Islam is evolving, widening
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @SarahTheHaider
It's the same of of any other religious group out there. And it's not like there isn't a lot of conservative Christians and Jews out there.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @WingTransparent @SarahTheHaider
True. As Hitchens pointed out, all religions are latently harmful, because they undermine us in our most basic integrity. Islam gets all the criticism because it is currently implicated in most violence, but ultimately, faith is what's dangerous, because it can lead you anywhere.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @SarahTheHaider
I am not a fan of people who are so aggressive against religion, it goes against basic principle of secularism. Live and let live. Hitchens didn't understood this as he supported the illegal invasion of Iraq.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WingTransparent @SarahTheHaider
It is possible to despise someone's behaviour while holding no ill will toward them personally. I think smoking is a bad habit, but don't dislike smokers. And Hitchens' advocacy for Iraq intervention was based on his love for the Kurds, not hatred of religion (Saddam was secular)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @SarahTheHaider
He still supported one of the greatest war crimes in recent memory, as the US war on terror led to something between 2 and 4 million deaths. http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/unworthy-victims-western-wars-have-killed-four-million-muslims-1990-39149394 …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WingTransparent @SarahTheHaider
I personally thought Hitchens was wrong on Iraq. Still he gave good reasons for why he believed it was the right thing to do at the time, including the fact that *not* intervening would also have led to catastrophe eventually, given Iraq/Afghan internal sectarianism.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @SarahTheHaider
Afghanistan was a chaotic mess for a long time, especially after Operation Cyclone. The invasion of Iraq only increased sectarian tensions in the country, especially thanks to the policies of Paul Bremer.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Even if you think Hitchens was wrong on Iraq, it should have no bearing on your opinion of antitheism, given that the two things are completely unrelated.
-
-
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @SarahTheHaider
From what I have seen that kind of intolerant and warmongering stances are common in the community. Maybe it's because they want to claim moral superiority even though the lack of belief in god makes it impossible.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @WingTransparent @SarahTheHaider
Most atheists, humanists and even antitheists lean left and opposed the Iraq war. It is largely the Christian conservative right that supported it. And it is possible for an atheist to be morally superior precisely *because* they don't get their morals from an imaginary friend.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.