Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
Post Reply
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14997
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Karpel Tunnel wrote: July 22nd, 2018, 4:51 am
Greta wrote: July 21st, 2018, 11:50 pm You cannot parse Islam from its believers any more than theists can "love homosexuals but hate the sin".
What groups is it OK to do this with and what not? IOW would we have the same reaction to similar critiques of Naziism?
No matter what your stated intent, the way your posts read, they would be highly threatening or annoying to innocent Muslims just wanting to lead a quiet life.

But then if they are simply quiet Muslims wanting to live a quiet life and they do not tacitly support the way Islam judges jews, atheists, women, gays, ought they not understand his concerns?
You can't equate Islam with Nazism. Nazism is extreme fundamentalist right wing politics and at present there is an equivalent form of Islamic fascism. So, just as I don't consider all right wingers to be Nazis, all left wingers to be anarchists, I don't see all Muslims as Islamic fascists. If I was a moderate Muslim I'd probably keep quiet too.

Yes, there is this virulent form of Islam going around but I think we here at the forum might already know that, and already find it as abhorrent as other forms of coercive fascism. However, the fact that endless harping on the subject comes across as dull and unpleasant does not mean I don't take the issue seriously.

There are numerous things in the world to worry about if we feel so inclined:

overpopulation
the US's increasing recklessness and Chinese and Russian expansionism and interference
climate change and associated political inertia
increased focus on nuclear weapons
increasing air pollution
loss of faith in reason and science
loss of natural habitats and arable land
extinctions
sea level rise and increasing wildfires, earthquakes, active volcanism and extreme storms
huge rises in property prices and rents with associated homelessness
inequality and the widening wealth gap
increasing virulent racism
unsustainable debt levels
increased technological controls and loss of privacy
corruption of governments by multinational companies
huge refugee populations
the Great Pacific Garbage Patch
loss of aquatic species in vast parts of the ocean either desertified or infested with jellyfish
the AI singularity
more urban ghettoes and dangerous suburbs in divided societies
increasing public discrimination of minorities
space junk threatening satellites
inadequate asteroid detection and deflection systems
workers being replaced by automation and associated social upheaval
workers in some industries, eg. hospitality being ever more exploited and underpaid
loss of full-time work available with ever more punitive approach to the unemployed
increases in obesity and diabetes
we still don't have a cure for cancer
lack of "death with dignity" laws
solar flares could potentially bring down comms networks
cyber terrorism and political hacking

No doubt I've forgotten dozens of other major concerns. Why are you not taking them "seriously"?

How many existential crises should the dutiful citizen be worrying out about at any given time?
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Iapetus wrote: July 22nd, 2018, 4:18 am Reply to Spectrum:

As I had stated most of your post are noise and is being ignorant of so many things and facts.


There you go again. Classic avoidance. No answer to the prejudice and bigotry. No answer to the cherry picking. Nothing to say about the use of the word, ‘evil’. Nothing about your unjustified assumptions of individual belief. Nothing about the accusation of dishonesty. No refutal when I criticised your sweeping and outrageous generalisations.

Re 'Buddhist violence'
Prove to me that Buddhism as a religion is inherently evil like Islam.
Have you read of Buddhists who kill citing and quoting from Buddhist Sutras [texts]?
Do Buddhists killed in the name of Buddhism or the Buddha?

True, there are Buddhists who kill but these killers are not inspired by Buddhism itself nor kill in the name of Buddhism.
Those Buddhists who killed did it by their own evil nature.
If a Buddhist monk raped someone, it is not because Buddhism condone rapes in anyway. The Buddhist monk or layman rapes because of his own uncontrollable sexual lust.


So predictable. Another ‘no true Scotsman’ fallacy. You generalise away all the violence. You have determined the reasons and they are nothing to do with the belief. Your arrogance is astonishing.
On the other hand, Islam [in the Quran] condones rape, killing and all sorts of evil act upon non-Muslims. This is so evident from the News we read everyday.
Just as I wrote; “Then, when you try to work on tactics to try to explain away these common human shortcomings, consider why you make no attempt to do the same thing for Muslims”.

There seems to be something missing from your post because there are gaps.

Then:
Thus you are ignorant of the above facts and you insist on ranting based on ignorance.
If you are able to raise a well informed, justified and sound argument I will surely response appropriately.


No, you don’t get away with that. I have written you plenty of line-by-line analyses. You haven’t responded because you daren’t.
Note I asked you questions on facts re your accusation just as SOME Muslims are violent, Buddhists & Buddhism is also violent, i.e.
  • Prove to me that Buddhism as a religion is inherently evil like Islam.
    Have you read of Buddhists who kill citing and quoting from Buddhist Sutras [texts]?
    Do Buddhists killed in the name of Buddhism or the Buddha?
Problem is your thinking is too shallow and do not differentiate believers from the ideology.

You have written plenty but they are all similar to the above nature that do not address the issue truthfully.

Answer the above questions which will help you to psycho-analysis your state of thinking.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Karpel Tunnel wrote: July 22nd, 2018, 4:33 am
The problem, I think, with Spectrums' position is that he
1) comes from his own extreme belief system (we could call it the physicalist fix-all, brain is you just matter, we're gonna tweak it ain't no hubris here fanaticism.
2) he cannot see how his binay thinking adds to the problems
3) he cannot see how his solutions are not tenable and actually will increase problems and
4) he cannot place Islam in the context of other even more damaging belief systems.
That is, there is no balance.
Note the world is full of PhDs and specialists who only prefer to talk most of the time about their specialty and forte [obviously boring to others]. Why are you not condemning them?
Btw, the majority of progress of humanity are contributed by tunnel-vision PhDs and specialists in their own narrow field of study.

I have stated many times I am aware of all significant problems [evil and general] in the world and all these problems must be addressed by humanity.
But the problem to these problems is no one can handle or resolve them alone and from past experiences we know it is more effective to break down these problems into specific small units to resolution. Thus what is need are specialists [plus a few generals to organize the whole project] who are expert in their specific field of knowledge.

My specialty happened to be philosophy and philosophy of religion, thus it is only optimal for me to give attention to religions which I have knowledge and are of critical concern to humanity at present.

Note at present there is a epidemic of a "mental disease" going on where those who critique Islam are quickly targeted to shut up or to are killed. Note the recent numbers of 'hate laws' coming from the West, UK, Germany, etc., to protect the ideology of Islam when it is a fact Islam is inherently evil, e.g. worst than the Main Kempf.
There is something wrong here and research need to be done by the average specialists [..I already know the answers].

One point is Islam has been very successful in their strategy [inherent in the Quran] to terrorize [subliminally] non-Muslims to the extent there are fears/pains in their heart when the issue [condemnation or praise] of the evils of Islam are raised.
I bet it is very painful at least subsconsciously when I raised and repeat the truths of the evils of Islam, thus the need to shut the critiques of Islam and only Islam not other religions or ideologies. I am aware of that but I think we have to continue to critique the inherent evil of Islam due to its critical threat to humanity.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Greta wrote: July 22nd, 2018, 7:08 am
No doubt I've forgotten dozens of other major concerns. Why are you not taking them "seriously"?

How many existential crises should the dutiful citizen be worrying out about at any given time?
WHY ARE YOU NOT TALKING ABOUT THEM [all or most] if they are that serious as you had portrayed them.
The point one person cannot focus on ALL the problems and the most effective is to specialize [with the view of the whole] on one or two of the loads of problems.

Ever since I have been here, there have been boring posters who are only interested in subjects they specialized in or have a strong inclination for, e.g. in ethics, politics [Democrats vs GOPs], metaphysics, religions. I don't read of any serious complains on them, but why are people getting so worked up when Islam is critiqued.

As I had explained before, there is a serious problem on the freedom of speech to critique Islam because the fact is Islam has a serious cause to hide the truths of its inherent evils. Recently there is a hate law enacted in Germany on writing anything negative about Muhammad, the exemplar for all Muslim, who married a young girl of 6 and consummated the marriage at 9 plus all the evil acts committed by Muhammad on non-Muslims as written in the Ahadith and Sira.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14997
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Actually, I have talked about plenty of those problems and of the problem with toxic Islam. It's the repetitiveness that annoys me. Rest assure, other repetitive people are criticised too, but you are unusually persistent.

I note that you are complaining about not being able to speak out, but you have spoken out more on Islam on this forum than most people speak about anything on any forum! It seems to me the media is full of people speaking out about Islam every day. In fact, I can't think of a single thing that western people speak out against more than Islam.

The German laws were obviously made to reduce risk to public order. I expect they figured it's easier to prevent locals from teasing Muslims than to deal with fighting in the street.
Iapetus
Posts: 402
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 6:41 pm
Location: Strasbourg, France

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Iapetus »

Reply to Spectrum:

Spectrum, you are wriggling and wriggling and wriggling. You keep on wanting to dig a deeper hole for yourself.

It appears that, to this point, you have written 5060 posts. You are not usually reluctant to reply. Why the reticence now?

I have accused you many times, deliberately, of bigotry. It was not a term which I would have chosen but it was the word which you picked up from Mark1955 when you asked, “so where is the bigotry?” You asked for a line-by-line response. That is what I gave you. I assumed that, on such a significant matter, you would have rushed to your own defence.

But you didn’t.

This is why I have kept repeating the claim. If you thought that you could have defended yourself against the detail of my claims, then you would have done so.

But you didn’t.

So, to try to press you, I claimed that you had lost the argument. Twice. That is not something I usually do. But I wanted to test you.

You didn’t deny it.

I accused you of incompetence in your use of statistics and ‘facts’.

You made no attempt to deny the accusation.

I accused you of cherry-picking and dishonesty. I backed up my accusations with evidence. They are serious accusations.

But you didn’t deny them.

Instead, you have resorted to cheap evasions. If my thinking is “too shallow”, then what does that say about yours, when you have implicitly accepted that you have lost the argument?

You can announce your genius to the world and decry my incompetence all you want but you are not the judge.
Dachshund
Posts: 513
Joined: October 11th, 2017, 5:30 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Dachshund »

Spectrum wrote: July 22nd, 2018, 10:08 pm There you go again. Classic avoidance. No answer to the prejudice and bigotry. No answer to the cherry picking. Nothing to say about the use of the word, ‘evil’. Nothing about your unjustified assumptions of individual belief. Nothing about the accusation of dishonesty. No refutal when I criticised your sweeping and outrageous generalisations.
Iapetus,

I think you are being unnecessarily pedantic and a "little" (ahem !) disingenuous when you criticise Spectrum for his use of the word "evil". Whether or not you "personally dislike" the term is irrelevant as it is a legitimate English word, and one that is widely and frequently used in both in the vernacular (common parlance) and in the mass communications media (print and electronic) of English -speaking Western nations like the United States, the UK, Australia and so on. I put it to you that know full well what Spectrum means by the term "evil", and I completely agree with him that what are typically referred to as the "Medina passages" (the passages of the Koran the prophet Mohammed claims were revealed to him by Allah during the time he was a powerful warlord based in the city of Medina are, in many cases, laden with evil content. When the "Medina verses" of the Koran are considered collectively, it is fair to say that they clearly articulate (amongst other wickness) a divine command for all Muslims to unquestioningly endorse/affirm what is best described as a violent, aggressive, totalitarian, (essentially fascist) political ideology; one which aspires to absolute global domination through the waging of offensive war against all non-Muslims.

Let's be clear about what Spectrum means by the term "evil". As a philosopher you will, I presume, know that there are traditionally three types of evil, namely : metaphysical evil ( i.e. the innate privations bourn by all finite, non-Godly/ non- perfectly good creatures, cf: Leibniz), natural evil ( e.g. the harms brought to bear by natural disasters like tsunamis, cyclones, erupting volcanoes) and moral evil. Spectrum is obviously referring to the later, i.e. moral evil - evil that is brought to bear as a consequence of human agency; the moral evil that is sometimes called "wickedness" in philosophy.

Moral evil refers to the intentional perpetration "bad"/ "wrong" acts by any human moral agent. So what is "bad" and what is "wrong", you might ask ? My response would be to say that I believe human morality is best conceptualised as a spectrum that is "stretched" between two diametrically opposed poles: "Right" and "Wrong". To do what is morally "good" is to do what is "Right", that is, to adhere to "Right" principles in ones behaviour and interactions.

So what are "Right" principles ?

"Right" principles are those that serve to: (1) reduce suffering (i.e. reduce the physical and/or mental pain) that is being experienced by any moral agent or (2) are life-affirming in the sense that they serve to protecting and/or increase the pleasure, liberty, ability, happiness, health and general well being of any moral agent ( including one's self). If you act in a way that is consistent with (1) and/or (2) then you are doing what is morally "good".

At the opposite pole of the moral spectrum is, as mentioned above, the "Wrong". What is "Wrong" is to act in a way that is morally "bad"; and a morally "bad" act I defined as one that intentionally and unjustifiably harms any moral agent. The basic harms are as follows: (1) Death ( terminating the life of another moral agent); (2) suffering ( the experience by any moral agent of physical and/or mental pain); (3) the disaffirmation of life; that is, failing to protect and/ or diminishing the quality/quantity of the life-affirming attributes of: liberty, pleasure, ability, happiness, vitality, health and general well being that are possessed and enjoyed by, or, are available/accessible for, any moral agent.

In short, morally evil acts are, strictly speaking, simply wrong/ morally bad acts as I have defined the terms "Wrong" and "Bad" above.

To continue. It is fair to say that in common parlance the term "evil" tends to refer to particularly bad, that is, to very bad or extremely/exceedingly bad acts. It is worth noting here, BTW, that the word "evil" ( as it is used today) is, in fact, derived from the old Anglo-Saxon term "yfel", ( pronounced: "ee-fell") which meant "beyond", as in the phrase "beyond the pale". That is, "beyond" in the sense that the term connotes going past - i.e. transgressing" - a given finite boundary or standard fixed limit of some kind. Thus, the descriptor "evil" is typically reserved for acts of moral badness that are so extremely bad they place themselves completely "beyond" (the pale) of rational comprehension by ordinary, everyday, "normal" persons. I mean that when someone describes an act as being (morally) evil today, what they tend to mean is that the act is so shockingly/astonishingly bad that the fact of its actual perpetration is something that lies completely "beyond" the understanding of the majority the reasonable -(sane and sensible) - mainstream of normal human beings; - that the degree of badness is - if you like - "beyond" understanding, in the same kind of way that the concept of "transcendent" or "potential" infinity) - is simply beyond the grasp of human reason ( i.e. rational human cognition) when one is ,say, contemplating that notion in the context of gazing up into the seemingly boundless depths of a starry night sky. The very idea simply "blows your mind".

To conclude , Spectrum is absolutely correct to point out that there is plenty of evil content written into the Koran, it appears in what are termed the Medina passages of this sacred scripture; and to quote the late Christopher Hitchins the idea that the Koran's Medina verses/ Medina ideology were, in fact, the divine word of Allah as spoken (in Arabic !!) by the archangel Gabriel to the prophet Mohammed who then dutifully recorded them for posterity is pure "********". The Mediuna verses were, of course, nothing more than Mohammed''s own morally twisted and perverted handiwork; and he wrote them at a time when he was, morally speaking, right "off the rails", and acting out big time as a power-mad, psychopathic, rampaging, blood-thirtsty warlord ( not to mention a middle-aged sexual pervert who took a six- year-old girl for his wife !) and I could go on and on telling you about the prophet's legion evil behaviours in the Medina phase of his career but there is no good reason you can't get off your butt and google this history for yourself. As for the Koran's "Medina ideology", there are something like 140 so-called "Sword Verses" just to start with, and if you try to tell me that when Mohammed commands the faithful to lop of the thumbs, limbs and heads of the infidel in these passages he actually means something else entirely ( i.e. something subtly kind and peaceful and loving that I and a millions of other sane human beings are just too stupid/obtuse to nuance in your sophisticated postmodern opinion ) well I'm sorry but that is also as CH would say - pure and utter, 100% ********. To cut to the chase, "moral evil" is, as a US Supreme Court jurist once famously put it, just like pornography, (i.e.) : "you know it when you see it", and I see plenty of it ( moral evil) written into the Koran my friend- PLENTY !

Regards

Dachshund
Gertie
Posts: 2181
Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Gertie »

Sausage dog
To conclude


To conclude - Anyone - that means you - who believes women shouldn't be allowed to vote is morally and intellectually inferior to the most heinous and unprogressive Islamic states you criticise.

You're worse than them. Despite your opportunities to know better, you're an insecure mysogynistic idiot with no excuse.
Dachshund
Posts: 513
Joined: October 11th, 2017, 5:30 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Dachshund »

Morally and intellectually inferior, you mean, in the same sense that Aristotle, Plato, Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were morally and intellectually inferior, THEY who all argued that it was in both their own best interests and the interests of the State at large AND the broader interest of true justice being served that women OUGHT NOT be granted the political right to vote. They who argued that women and the rest of civilized, decent society ought be protected from their own stupidity ! How very bloody right they were ! Consider the monumental harm that has been inflicted by the fools of modernity who ignored their most earnest, emphatic and solemn warnings...The collapse of the traditional nuclear family, i.e. the intentional destruction of the essential moral bedrock of any civilized human society that ever emerged over the past 6000 years of mankind's history; rates of divorce that are currently stratospheric yet still sky-rocketing ever higher , the legion miseries and suffering brought to bear on countless innocent children from broken homes in the modern West since the late 1960s, the reality of an EVIL, industrial- scale abortion industries in the United States, and other major Western nations that are the tragic legacies of female suffrage. Yes, that right , Gertie, it was the granting of suffrage to women that inevitably unleashed the mindless radical militancy of crazy/( bitter and twisted) gender feminist intellectuals/(lesbians - i.e. psychiatric cases - many of them) who orchestrated all of these and innumerable other social disasters. They and the pathetic cadre of vicious street-level political foot-soldiers campaigning their cause ( idiots like YOU) whom they managed to dupe into their irrational, fatally-flawed ideological fray. The mind boggles !!

Regards

Dachshund
Gertie
Posts: 2181
Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Gertie »

Morally and intellectually inferior, you mean, in the same sense that Aristotle, Plato, Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were morally and intellectually inferior, THEY who all argued that it was in both their own best interests and the interests of the State at large AND the broader interest of true justice being served that women OUGHT NOT be granted the political right to vote. They who argued that women and the rest of civilized, decent society ought be protected from their own stupidity ! How very bloody right they were !
Yup. You are morally and intellectually warped.

In the 21st century you have no excuse for this inexplicable bigoted idiocy, except you clearly have personal 'issues' .
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Belindi »

Dachshund , I think that you have superimposed fluent use of English on to your backward village ideology. How did you personally arrive at that unsophisticated ideology?

Is it possible for you to appreciate that cultures evolve?
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Fooloso4 »

Dachshund:
As a philosopher you will, I presume, know that there are traditionally three types of evil, namely : metaphysical evil ( i.e. the innate privations bourn by all finite, non-Godly/ non- perfectly good creatures, cf: Leibniz) …
Cf. the Hebrew Bible:
If we accept the good from God must we not also accept the evil? (Job 2:10)
And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do to his people. (Exodus 32:14)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)
There are other passages but this should suffice in order to make my point, it is theologically far too simplistic to equate evil with the absence of God.

And let’s not forget the story that stands as a shining example of faith for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the story of Abraham and his blind obedience to God in leading his son Isaac to sacrificial slaughter. Abraham believed he was doing God’s will, just as Christians and Muslims do whenever they defend their actions as divinely commanded or sanctioned. Christianity developed out of powerlessness - the need for a savior who saves us from ourselves and our enemies, into a religion of domination by scriptural and priestly authority wielding enormous political, social, and psychological power. Make no mistake about it, the Christian Right is a political power whose influence extends to all aspects of life in the United States, and they are doing whatever they can to usher in Armageddon (which is why they were so keen on making Jerusalem the capital of Israel). As with the Inquisitions intent to save the soul even if it meant destroying the body, the Christian Right is intent on destroying the world to save it.
Iapetus
Posts: 402
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 6:41 pm
Location: Strasbourg, France

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Iapetus »

Reply to Dachshund:

I think you are being unnecessarily pedantic and a "little" (ahem !) disingenuous when you criticise Spectrum for his use of the word "evil"…


I doubt that we are going to see eye to eye on this one. For a start, I don’t think I was being at all pedantic. The definition of a word matters and, in any discussion, it is important that those involved in a particular conversation agree on that definition. I don’t agree with Spectrum on his use of the term. I explained why and I explained the difficulties I had with use of the term. You don’t sound as if you read what I wrote and I don’t see why I should have to repeat myself. In any case, Spectrum did not respond to what I wrote so the difference in our positions could not be clarified. That was not my fault.

So the issue about ‘evil’ which I raised was Spectrum’s lack of reponse, not the ‘evil’ itself which – obviously - we never got round to discussing. If you had actually read the exchanges then I am sure you would have appreciated this.

Thus, “I think you are being unnecessarily pedantic and a "little" (ahem !) disingenuous” in your criticisms and, in the context of that particular discussion, your particular views on evil are not relevant. Moreover, Spectrum referenced the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy for his definition but omitted to say that it includes several distinct definitions and there is also a section which explains why many people object to use of the term. That is why I accused him of cherry-picking. Perhaps you didn’t read that either.

Nor do I need a lecture from you on your interpretation of good and bad. Even if you are trying to be an apologist for Spectrum, it is irrelevant. I have written thousands of words about good and bad on this site and I see no need to rehash them now. The thread relates to Muslim immigration.

I really do understand that you don’t like the Quran. Neither do I, particularly, and if you had read what I wrote then you would know this. I am, however interested in a discussion based on considered views rather than repetitive rants, which is what you are offering. I think that Steve3007 expanded on this point rather well on July 17.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14997
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Dachs, I was fine with Spectrum pointing out the nasty parts of Islam the first, second, third, fourth - hell, twenty times, I don't care.

But this has been repeated hundreds of times. https://www.google.com/search?q=evil+is ... hyclub.com

Boooooooring!!
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Greta wrote: July 23rd, 2018, 8:05 pm Dachs, I was fine with Spectrum pointing out the nasty parts of Islam the first, second, third, fourth - hell, twenty times, I don't care.

But this has been repeated hundreds of times. https://www.google.com/search?q=evil+is ... hyclub.com

Boooooooring!!
Boooooooring!! is very subjective and more so confined to this cocoon.
Outside this cocoon, the subject and topic on the inherent evils of Islam are spreading like wildfire.
Googling 'Islamic Terror' we have "About 31,200,000 results (0.41 seconds)".
I am optimistic this particular cocoon will break into something spectacular.

Btw, what is critical is I am presenting facts and not fictions and lies.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021