How many murders of Atheists are OK?

[MineralMan]

Last edited Thu Feb 22, 2018, 08:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Here's a story about one. It's from 2017, so maybe it doesn't matter, because that was, you know, a long time ago. And, you know, besides, the murdered man was a vocal atheist. So, maybe, never mind:

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/tamil-nadu-youth-h-farook-killed-for-being-an-atheist-father-says-he-too-will-become-one-4586999/

Tamil Nadu youth killed for being an atheist, father says he too will become one

THE FATHER of H Farook, the atheist who was murdered in Coimbatore 10 days ago, allegedly by members of a Muslim radical group, has said that if his son was killed for his views, he too would become an atheist.

Speaking to The Indian Express, 54-year-old R Hameed said, “If the police version is true, that he was murdered by a radical Muslim group, then they killed my son using wrong interpretations of the Quran. The Quran is one holy book that insists on and allows the right of dissent since the time of the Prophet. If they killed him for being an atheist, I have decided to join his organisation and do what he did.”

{snip}

Farook, a member of the Dravidar Viduthalai Kazhagam (DVK), was Hameed’s elder son and used to run a scrap business in Ukkadam, near Coimbatore. On March 16, the 31-year-old was hacked to death, 15 days after he posted a photo of one of his children holding a placard with the handwritten slogan “Kadavul illai, Kadavul illai, Kadavul illai (No God, No God, No God)”.

[yallerdawg]

1. One is too many - for any reason.

The article I referenced was regarding conversion to Christianity.

The news that a man in Afghanistan might face a death sentence for converting to Christianity brought cries of outrage around the world last week.

Apostasy does not equate to Atheism.

I also pointed out that these extremes in "religion" are political, and corrupt the religion.

Progressive Muslim scholars argue that the meaning of those laws has been lost over time: When the laws were created, they say, apostasy was seen as the equivalent of treason. "To be a Muslim was to live in an Islamic state or empire, so the presumption was you were not only becoming the enemy of God but the enemy of the empire," said John L. Esposito, a professor of religion and international affairs at Georgetown University.

But while the Koran mentions ridda, it never calls for the execution of apostates. There is no record of the prophet killing an apostate himself. And executions of apostates have been rare in Islamic history.

[MineralMan]

3. See, I don't think anyone should be killed over religion.

I don't give a damn what religion anyone follows or whether they follow one at all. I'm very weary of hearing people deemed to be somehow bad for their beliefs or non-beliefs.

I don't care how many die. It's too many. I don't care if it is a "corruption" of religion that leads to such deaths.

It all starts by believing that religion matters so much. It doesn't. I'm an atheist, but my ethical standards fit well within what Christians are supposed to follow. Some do. Some don't. It fits within what Islamic standards are supposed to be, as well, or Hindu or Buddhist or any other religion. But I don't believe any of that supernatural clap-trap at all. Why would anyone care?

When beliefs matter too much, as they obviously do to too many, people die because of those beliefs. That's my objection.

My atheism doesn't make me want to kill anyone. It doesn't make me want to force others not to believe. However, there are examples everywhere of beliefs leading to people dying. Why is that, yallerdawg? Why are we even debating such things here?

You, in another thread, minimized the importance of such murders by talking about numbers. Numbers do not matter. In the article I posted here, a young man died because of religious beliefs. He was "hacked to death." Are you not horrified by that?

I don't care about the "rarity" of such things. That does not matter to me at all. What I care about is that beliefs lead to such murders. I don't what what beliefs. I only care that people are murdered over beliefs.

Don't minimize those deaths by quoting numbers. That's lousy logic. It's dangerous logic. That kind of logic perpetuates the problem.

[yallerdawg]

8. You are condemning religions for the acts of a few extremists who CLAIM a religious mantle.

This is the faulty logic.

"Radical Muslim extremists" are not representative of Islam.

Radical extremists of any religion are not representative of that religion.

You seriously think that if I disagree with how YOU are characterizing these religions I am a bad person?

[MineralMan]

13. No, my dear yallerdawg, I am not.

I am condemning religious beliefs for those acts. Clearly the religious beliefs of those who murdered that man by hacking him to death were the proximate cause of his death.

Radical believers are still believers. Radical Muslims. Radical Christians. Radical Hindus. Radicals of all belief systems. If they commit murders because of their beliefs, they are murderers in the name of their beliefs.

I don't know why you disagree with me. I don't even know if you do disagree with me. I don't much care, to tell you the truth.

[marylandblue]

33. They are as much representatives of Islam as the saintliest Sufi mystic

Neither has a stronger claim to Islam. It's just that one garners admiration and the other garners headlines.

[trotsky]

2. Now, now.

The important thing here is that atheists stop being so offensive. If they'd just keep their opinions to themselves, there'd be zero murders! Problem solved!

of course.

[MineralMan]

4. Yeah, well, I guess that atheist in India got the message,

loud and clear, eh? As I said in another thread, "Fuck that."

[yallerdawg]

6. "Muslim radical group."

Is that representative of Islam?

Is this justification to denounce an entire religion?

For some people, it would sure seem to be!

I just don't think that's us.

[MineralMan]

9. What does that matter? They believe.

They are Muslims. They killed an atheist over those beliefs. Why would I care if it's representative?

I am not denouncing Islam. I'm denouncing murder based on beliefs.

I have not denounced Islam or any other religion. Ever. I have written a post on DU, in the Religion Group. That's all.

Pay attention, please. I have denounced murder based on belief. Muslims have killed people, Christians have killed people, Hindus have killed people, atheists have killed people. I denounce them all for killing people over religious belief.

What about that do you fail to understand? You're arguing with me about something I have never said. Why are you doing that?

It's illogical. I am not "some people." Clearly, I am one person, writing posts on a discussion forum.

I denounce violence based on religious belief. Period. I denounce it whether it's one instance or some freaking holy war.

Do you denounce it across the board as I do? If not, please explain yourself.

Religious beliefs and attitudes toward religious beliefs too often lead to murder. It happens all the time. I denounce that. All reasonable people denounce that. They don't try to justify it using numbers. They don't try to justify it for any reason. Those who do are not using reason at all. Are you one of those?

Consider your answer carefully, I suggest.

[Iggo]

5. Prepare yourself for the Whataboutists.

Expert score-keepers, they.

[trotsky]

7. Judging by the number of posts on this thread I can't see...

they must already be busy. Lovely feature, that Ignore button.

[MineralMan]

10. I do not use the ignore button, because I want

to be aware of what is being written by everyone. Sometimes, that's very uncomfortable.

[trotsky]

11. There are some individuals who contribute nothing.

I don't feel like I'm missing much.

[MineralMan]

15. That's fine. That's your decision.

I am here to argue against the worst of people's beliefs. That's my reason for bothering at all with this particular group.

[yallerdawg]

12. I have never used the 'ignore' button.

It certainly doesn't mean I can't ignore.

[MineralMan]

16. Why are you using the silly waving smilie?

Do you think it's funny, somehow, this discussion?

[guillaumeb]

22. Amen to that.

No smilie here.

[Iggo]

14. My DU experience has been greatly enhanced by well-targeted use of the ignore function.

[Mariana]

18. I ignore habitual liars, unless they're interesting.

One of the habitual liars in this group is entertaining, at least sometimes. The other one is just boring.

[MineralMan]

19. I'm always interested in habitual liars in public places.

I find them very interesting. I have great patience, I guess. I also have time. So, it amuses me to engage with them. I'm easily amused, I suppose.

[guillaumeb]

21. So, name calling with no names?

Talk about a smear campaign. Perhaps a follow up with private messages to reinforce?

Sad.

[Mariana]

24. Private messages are your thing, Gil.

They are not mine.

[guillaumeb]

25. Some use private messages to express anger at others.

But the same anger is also expressed more diplomatically by others.

Edited to add: What are athiests? (referring to the title)

[Mariana]

29. You would know a lot more about what goes on in private messages

than I would, since as you've told us, you receive numerous personal messages praising you for your performances here. Am I to understand that you and your fan club also engage in gossip via private messages?

Gil, honestly, you come off as stupid when you feign misunderstanding of an incorrectly typed word. Now, I know you aren't stupid, so why would you want to pretend to be? What does that accomplish?

[MineralMan]

27. Nobody's smearing anybody.

Last edited Thu Feb 22, 2018, 09:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Those with no blame know their names.

[guillaumeb]

30. Of course not!!!

[Mariana]

34. A smear campaign? Against whom, Gil? Do tell. nt.

[Pope George Ringo II]

32. I've thought about it. I must respectfully disagree.

Last edited Sun Feb 25, 2018, 06:04 PM - Edit history (1)

One simply spams a deliberately semi-literate strawman over all objections, then puts on an aggrieved act for his audience when he's called on it. The other just says egregiously stupid stuff and doubles down on it in the most obtuse manner possible until rational human beings lose interest. Even watching the two regularly being beaten like drums gets very boring very quickly.

[MineralMan]

17. Oh, I'm prepared.

[guillaumeb]

20. Do not conflate the actions of individuals with an entire group. eom

[guillaumeb]

23. It is spelled atheist, not athiest. eom

[MineralMan]

28. Thanks. I've corrected that.

It's a common typo, I guess. I before E thing with the fingers. Thanks again. I always appreciate someone reminding me.

[guillaumeb]

31. I do it all the time with those 2 letters.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

26. Technically, the "crime" was probably apostasy rather than atheism,

but it doesn't matter. Nobody should be murdering anybody.