patrick.net

Religion does not guarantee violence, of course, but it does guarantee irrationality and the disregard of evidence and that does greatly increase susceptibility to becoming violent, promoting violence, or condoning violence done in the name of one's own tribe. Additionally, those two things promote all sorts of bad decision making while undermining wise decision making.

Against that, what good does religion offer that cannot be achieved without religion?

Dan8267 says

And P N Dr Lo R cannot even understand how irrational and ridiculous his statements are because he is so brainwashed

And you're not? Right out of Saul Alinky's Rules for Radicals, dedicated to Lucifer, the Father of LIes, which makes it appropriate. What is amazing is the endless anger I provoke, which is always entertaining--and predictible.

P N Dr Lo R says

What is amazing is the endless anger I provoke,

You are confusing pity and disappointment for anger.

P N Dr Lo R says

Right out of Saul Alinky's Rules for Radicals, dedicated to Lucifer, the Father of LIes, which makes it appropriate.

Lucifer is a fictional character. If you do not understand that, you are crazy and proving my point that religion needs to die.

As P N Dr Lo R demonstrates, religion destroys the ability of people to grasp reality. This is a very dangerous thing. Not all evils are caused by this, but many of the greatest evils are.

Christianity has a long history of such insanity from its beginnings all the way to today. Christianity isn't some "tame" religion that no longer causes harm. It destroys minds.

All religions, including Christianity, do more brain damage than lead poisoning, and exposing children to it is child abuse.

P N Dr Lo R says

What is amazing is the endless anger I provoke, which is always entertaining--and predictible.

Islam provokes anger too, but that isn't something to be proud of:

"The FBI prevented a Milwaukee mass shooting by a 23-year-old man who hoped to kill 30 people at a Masonic temple in an attack that would “terrify the world,” authorities said Tuesday.

The Wisconsin man “wanted this mass shooting to be ‘known the world over’ and to ‘ignite’ broader clashes,” Acting United States Attorney Gregory J. Haanstad said in a statement."

Dan8267 says

irrationality and the disregard of evidence...does greatly increase susceptibility to becoming violent, promoting violence, or condoning violence done in the name of one's own tribe.

True, but some doctrines show a much worse risk of producing that result. Christianity tells believers to love the unbelievers and to pray for them, and to forgive them for calling the believers foolish. Islam tells believers to cut off the unbelievers' heads. If I have to choose between annoying Morons trying to sell me their underwear, vs a team of armed Muslim assailants trying to kill me, I'll survive the Morons. (Beware of Morons in Mountain Meadows, though, and never vote the way they tell you to vote.) Even when Christians commit mass shootings "for the babies," it's one lone Christian wacko; when Muslims do the same, it tends to include a whole support team (partly because each martyr perpetrator can name up to 70 helpers for inclusion in paradise).

curious2 says

If I have to choose between annoying Morons trying to sell me their underwear, vs a team of armed Muslim assailants trying to kill me, I'll survive the Morons.

very true.

not all religions are the same. in fact, they are very different from each other.

islam is unique in having hate of unbelievers as its core doctrine.

curious2 says

Yes, and I feel dismayed that most people who call themselves "liberal" support policies that I consider illiberal,

Agreed, but the term has now stuck deep for anything left of the spectrum. Similar though for what passes as conservative, original conservatives were more isolationist in nature (as opposed to the southern democrats then turned republican), and neocons are no conservatives.

curious2 says

The strongest countries have (or had) Christian majorities, but some of the weakest still do, e.g. Haiti, so a prevalent religious culture or tradition might not provide a reliable predictor of strength. Also, in the west, even many of the Christian religious leaders are welcoming Islam. ("The pontiff used an address to Vatican ambassadors on Monday to urge European governments to keep welcoming migrants....") Meanwhile, eastern European countries are resisting, even in countries that are relatively less religious (e.g. Hungary and the Czech Republic). So, the correlation at the level of whole countries seems relatively weak, and there is a lot of irony within countries: while the opposition to Muslim immigration comes mainly from Christian nationalists, in fact the atheists are at greatest risk from Islam and should be most opposed to it.

Most of the strongly resisting eastern European countries are fare more Christian/nationalist/religious than their western brothers and sisters, so I see some correlation here. Also, religion plays a strong role in the resistance, for example in the anti-immigration rallies in Poland. I see the Pontiff and the western nations more as NATO/UN puppets, so they do as they have been told.

Dan8267 says

Against that, what good does religion offer that cannot be achieved without religion?

While religion often offered little explanation for rules a lot of the rules made sense before they could be scientifically explained such as the bleeding out of meat followed by salting it (to reduce food borne illness) or discouragement/intolerance of (esp. male) gay sex (spreads STDs much more rapidly). It also served and still serves as a moral compass for people who would otherwise potentially act far worse. It is questionable whether humans behave better without faith despite all the shortcomings and shortcuts faith-based action/lifestyle may come with. Some of the "best" (in terms of do-gooders and altruists) people I know are deeply Christian and I support their causes even though I stay mostly out of organized religion.

mell says

Dan8267 says

Against that, what good does religion offer that cannot be achieved without religion?

While religion often offered little explanation for rules a lot of the rules made sense before they could be scientifically explained

In other words none today now that we have science and reasoning. I would argue that just because cultures used religion to codify knowledge gained by trial and error, religion was not a necessary or an optimal way to codify that knowledge in culture.

curious2 says

True, but some doctrines show a much worse risk of producing that result.

islam is unique in having hate and murder of unbelievers as its core doctrine.

Yes some doctrines are far worse than others, but the fundamental problem of faith crosses all religion. And faith causes even the best written religion to become evil. Jesus was all good and hippie since the beginning of Christianity and yet that did not prevent Christians from committing atrocities throughout the ages including genocide, slavery, mass rape, torture, terrorism, burning people at the stake, and countless other evil actions. The noble -- and I use that term loosely -- New Testament did not stop Christians from behaving as badly as Muslims for a thousand years.

Good doctrine + faith = evil
Evil doctrine + faith = more evil
Evil doctrine - faith = repeal of evil doctrine

Without faith, society can build moral systems and establish socially just systems. With faith, even the best foundations will become corrupt and evil.

The most dangerous aspect of faith is not the particular doctrine accepted but the fact that the faithful accept doctrines to begin with. Doctrines are inherently dangerous.

and again, a small group of devout self-directed muslims planning to kill as many random people as possible:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/fbi-man-plotted-machine-gun-attack-on-masonic-temple/article_9ad823a6-903e-5758-ad4b-e344ee82fe7c.html

Yep, another Paleban attack.

Hamzeh had been under investigation by the FBI since September, which used confidential informants who secretly recorded him. Undercover FBI agents arrested him this week after he tried to buy automatic weapons from them, the complaint says.

Hamzeh originally had planned to travel to Jordan to attack Israeli soldiers and civilians in the West Bank, but ditched those plans because of logistical issues and focused on attacking a target in the U.S., according to the criminal complaint.

He hatched a plan to attack a Masonic center in Milwaukee with two others, who were actually the informants cooperating with the FBI.

Last week, Hamzeh and the informants went to a local shooting range and practiced firing a handgun. Afterward, they went to the Masonic center and got a tour of the facility. Later, Hamzeh spoke with the informants in detail about the planned attack, according to the complaint.

mell says

curious2 says

... Also, in the west, even many of the Christian religious leaders are welcoming Islam. ("The pontiff used an address to Vatican ambassadors on Monday to urge European governments to keep welcoming migrants....") Meanwhile, eastern European countries are resisting, even in countries that are relatively less religious (e.g. Hungary and the Czech Republic). So, the correlation at the level of whole countries seems relatively weak, and there is a lot of irony within countries: while the opposition to Muslim immigration comes mainly from Christian nationalists, in fact the atheists are at greatest risk from Islam and should be most opposed to it.

Most of the strongly resisting eastern European countries are fare more Christian/nationalist/religious than their western brothers and sisters, so I see some correlation here.

This reminds me of something else I read recently:

"when some high-ranking Christian cleric, as part of his Interfaith Outreach, offers this slippery solipsism — All religions are a force for good. Islam is a religion. Therefore, Islam is a force for good. — he is wrong"

Respectfully, I think you are perhaps too quick to give religion more credit than it deserves, maybe a result of trying to find common ground among the mostly religious Texas culture. I mentioned the example of the Czech Republic because it is even less religous than France, and far less religious than Germany. A much stronger predictor along the east/west European divide is that the Eastern Europeans have experience of being invaded and occupied and dominated by a foreign ideology, which they only recently got out from under. Occam's razor applies: the simplest explanation is, "once burned, twice shy." The western Europeans have no comparable experience since the Nazis, so long ago that only the elderly remember; the young tend to draw oversimplified and sometimes wrong lessons from it (e.g., "religious discrimination is bad"). The elderly tend also to be more religious, so there is overlap, and that may explain some of the Christian/nationalist/anti-Islam overlap. The #1 predictor though is actual experience. Most western Europeans have been free so long they've taken it for granted, even become bored with it. Most eastern Europeans, from the least religious to the most, remember their experience behind the iron curtain, and value the progress they have made since then.

and again,

thunderlips11 says

another

In fairness, those both report the same thwarted attack that I had already linked to, so it's one thwarted attack, not three.

curious2 says

this slippery solipsism — All religions are a force for good. Islam is a religion. Therefore, Islam is a force for good. — he is wrong"

The logic is not incorrect. The premise is. It is not true that all religions are good.

However, I have made a case, which no one has presented any counter-argument against, that all religions are bad because all religions intrinsically require faith, which is inherently bad as faith is the suspension of rationality, open-mindedness, and objectivity and the replacement of these things with blind acceptance.

With a correct premise, one can state with 100% mathematical confidence...
All religions are a force for evil. Islam is a family of religions. Therefore Islamic religions are forces for evil.
All religions are a force for evil. Christianity is a family of religions. Therefore Christian religions are forces for evil.

I do distinguish between religions, which are specific power structures based on faith, and families of religions with a common mythology. Christianity was at one time a religion, but it split into Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy during the Great Schism and later fragmented into many religions under the Protestant reformations. Same is true for Judaism and Islam. If one makes the case that Catholicism and Lutheranism are the same religion because they share the same mythology and fictional god, then Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are all the same religion that worships the same false god of Abraham. Personally, I prefer unambiguous terms.

mell says

Most of the strongly resisting eastern European countries are fare more Christian/nationalist/religious than their western brothers and sisters, so I see some correlation here.

This fact would appear to contradict the hypothesis that Christianity is the factor that made the greatest nations in history great. The "best" nations by our economic, political, and social standards are those in Western Europe, not Eastern Europe, yet Western Europe is far less religious than Eastern Europe.

However, this is how we view those very Christian Eastern European nations.

www.youtube.com/embed/1mYqY5YELd0

That and the fact that Western Europe and America only got good when Christianity got neutered and people stopped going to Church.

Eastern Europeans: "It's because we've been at the front lines defending Europe against Islam. Meanwhile, Western Europeans were powdering their hair and writing insurance contracts for slave ships."

While Eastern Europe was doing this:

Western Europe was doing this:

Dan8267 says

This fact would appear to contradict the hypothesis that Christianity is the factor that made the greatest nations in history great. The "best" nations by our economic, political, and social standards are those in Western Europe, not Eastern Europe, yet Western Europe is far less religious than Eastern Europe.

Dan - did those nations become "great" after they gave up Christianity? Really? Imagine what Europe would look like today without Christianity.

www.youtube.com/embed/HIeG_0WfaJw

Funny how many post-Christian Western nations need religious population breeding levels to maintain their vaunted welfare systems. So how smart is it to import a bunch of "religious" Muslims to keep their populations from dying out and welfare systems from going bankrupt?

Finally, I think it is funny that Liberals/Progressives (what ever you call yourself these days) seem absolutely incapable of criticizing Islam's obvious problems, misogyny, patriarchy, intolerance and bigotry without trying to dump on other religions that have managed to accept pluralism and live peacefully with each other. Do you do this out of knee jerk liberal political correctness? Do you do it out of fear? Ignorance?

Eastern Europeans rank pretty high on non-religious, except for the Winged Hussars and the Lithuanian Wannabe Germans.

thunderlips11 says

Eastern Europeans rank pretty high on non-religious, except for the Winged Hussars and the Lithuanian Wannabe Germans.

Not for long based on their refugee/immigration policies.

socal2 says

Do you do this out of knee jerk liberal political correctness? Do you do it out of fear? Ignorance?

Are they allowed to choose all three? The theory I've heard is that the left assumes most Muslims are poor, and since poverty trumps every other consideration, they're allowed a pass regardless of their cruelty or ruthlessness.

Dan8267 says

New Testament

Jesus is the New Testament. Jesus is God.

socal2 says

Not for long based on their refugee/immigration policies.

If you look, it's the Eastern Europeans led by Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, etc. that are fighting the Western Neoliberals, who want higher rents and lower wages no matter what the cost.

socal2 says

Dan - did those nations become "great" after they gave up Christianity? Really? Imagine what Europe would look like today without Christianity.

OK

So then without Christianity, Europe would look like this...

www.youtube.com/embed/m4QaewmO9n8

P N Dr Lo R says

Jesus is the New Testament. Jesus is God.

Jesus was pro-slavery. He's hardly a moral authority given that he couldn't even correctly answer the easiest moral question, "is slavery ok?".

The fact that you actually think Jesus, a Bronze Age man who no longer exists, is a god and rose from the dead demonstrates how much religion, including Christianity, fucks up a person's mind and makes them lose even a common sense grasp on reality. Do you have any idea how crazy the statement "Jesus rose from the dead" sounds to any sane person? If you said that about other people, you'd get locked up in an asylum. Just because a delusion is socially accepted in a society, does not make it any less of a delusion.

Dan8267 says

Yep, the material, economic, and cultural life also took a nose-dive.

God sure rewards his followers strangely after the majority begin to believe in him.

In the Dark Ages, Rome had like 20-40,000 people. Think of it! The seat of the Pope, the ancient capital of Europe, a least a tenth of it's former size.

40,000 people is smaller than Waterloo, Iowa - not exactly a bustling metropolis. Naples, the biggest city in the Dark Ages, barely had 40,000 people.

Waterloo, Iowa - aka Gotham. Would be dwarfed by 200AD Alexandria, Athens, Rome, even Bibracte (Arles) or Londinium. Bigger than the biggest medieval cities.

Dan - without Christianity, Europe would look like this.

www.youtube.com/embed/5AC0dKBiUXE

thunderlips11 says

If you look, it's the Eastern Europeans led by Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, etc. that are fighting the Western Neoliberals, who want higher rents and lower wages no matter what the cost.

Wig powder ain't cheap! Gots to keep yo rent hand strong!

socal2 says

Dan - without Christianity, Europe would look like this.

Bullshit. It is a false dichotomy to state that one must choose between Christianity and Islam. In fact, the existence of Christianity makes a society more susceptible to Islam than an atheistic society. People do convert from Christianity to Islam. No one converts from atheism to Islam. No one who is rational and demands proof will accept supernatural claims based on faith.

Your assertion is a bold-face lie. In reality, the video you posted demonstrates that we as a society should strive to eliminate the poison of faith altogether.

By the way, for 1600 of the 2000 years of Christianity, which is 80% of Christian history, Christians were just as barbaric as Muslims are today. The past 20% has been improved only by weakening Christianity and that false religion's grip on state power and cultural influence. The more Christianity has been weakened, the more peaceful, productive, and happy society has become.

In the past few decades the great waning of Christianity in the United States and western Europe has been accompanied by a great decline in murder, rape, burglaries, various other crime, warfare (although the Christian president Bush did reverse that trend temporarily), abject poverty, racism, sexism, homophobia, other forms of bigotry, and overall ignorance. Meanwhile, the lifespan of human beings has literally doubled as science, once outlawed by Christian law, has replaced faith in all matters.

Although eliminating religion won't solve all problems, it will solve most of the severe problems in the world and mitigate others.

Dan, this is the reason why a society needs Christianity or some other "-ism". The stupid people (read: CIC and friends), need to believe that they are saved, if they follow a doctrine, Messiah, or even a cult of bozos like themselves.

But then, the smarter folks, live their lives w/o needing a church to validate their existence. If you remember one of the tenets of Huxley's 'Brave New World', the leader Mustapha Mond made sure that the masses had their bread and circuses, while he got in indulge in the arts and literature, w/o it destabilizing society.

And for the most part, I concur with the above. Ppl are stupid. Think about how many ppl had entered the financial services sector, just to burn their bonuses on cars and houses. What percent of them went into the sciences, arts, or literature, as a result of being free of having to work for a living? And that's the mass of humanity.. fucking losers.

The atheistic human race will gravitate back toward some other form of all encompassing and unprovable "truth" - like genetic reassignment, quantum Internet, or climate change 2.0. Reject deity but bow down to East Anglia Climate Research. Another day another god. I personally am going back to worshipping the Sun. It makes complete sense scientifically.

But today's Islamic radicals (whom I define as those who would push for Sharia law) need to wake up and smell the 19th Century. Eh...maybe I'm wrong and a good strict Don't-Rape-Strangers Class will clear the whole messy problem up. Those signs with a guy' hand reaching for a girl's butt - with a big black line across it are an excellent start. Don't be surprised if "guns" are used to correct the problem - even over there in liberally enlightened Europe.

Dan8267 says

Bullshit. It is a false dichotomy to state that one must choose between Christianity and Islam.

Not a false dichotomy. It was history. It is a damn good thing that our Christian ancestors were strong enough in their religion and culture to keep the Islamic mind virus of infecting the West.

Dan8267 says

In fact, the existence of Christianity makes a society more susceptible to Islam than an atheistic society.

Right - have you been paying attention to what has been happening in Europe lately? The Post-Christian societies can't even be bothered to breed to maintain a sustainable population. No kids, not future. Now they are busy importing primitive Muslims and learning to live with Islam's intolerance and backwardness.

Dan8267 says

Meanwhile, the lifespan of human beings has literally doubled as science, once outlawed by Christian law, has replaced faith in all matters.

The smug ignorance is staggering.

"Following the Fall of Rome, monasteries and convents remained bastions of scholarship in Western Europe and clergymen were the leading scholars of the age - studying nature, mathematics and the motion of the stars (largely for religious purposes).[citation needed] During the Middle Ages, the Church founded Europe's first universities, producing scholars like Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon and Thomas Aquinas, who helped establish scientific method.[citation needed] During this period, the Church was also a great patron of engineering for the construction of elaborate cathedrals. Since the Renaissance, Catholic scientists have been credited as fathers of a diverse range of scientific fields: Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829) prefigured the theory of evolution with Lamarckism; Friar Gregor Mendel (1822–84) pioneered genetics and Fr Georges Lemaitre (1894-1966) proposed the Big Bang cosmological model.[citation needed] The Jesuits have been particularly active, notably in astronomy. Church patronage of sciences continues through elite institutions like the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and Vatican Observatory."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science

Dan8267 says

By the way, for 1600 of the 2000 years of Christianity, which is 80% of Christian history, Christians were just as barbaric as Muslims are today.

Nope. Not even close.

Dan8267 says

The more Christianity has been weakened, the more peaceful, productive, and happy society has become.

Soviet Union being a great example - right? China under Mao? Laos under Pol Pot? North Korea under Kim? Cuba under Castro?

socal2 says

Finally, I think it is funny that Liberals/Progressives (what ever you call yourself these days) seem absolutely incapable of criticizing Islam's obvious problems, misogyny, patriarchy, intolerance and bigotry without trying to dump on other religions that have managed to accept pluralism and live peacefully with each other. Do you do this out of knee jerk liberal political correctness? Do you do it out of fear? Ignorance?

this is definitely funny and interesting. is it just the poverty of the immigrants, like P N Dr Lo R suggested?

or the fact that they are ethnic and exotic from the western point of view? could it be that anything at all that is not traditionally western will be glorified by the PC crowd?

why is fundamentalist christianity dumped on so hard for relatively trivial things like not believing in evolution, while at the same time not a word comes from the left about the truly unspeakable horrors committed daily in the name of islam?

the next mass murder of random innocent people by muslims in the name of islam will likely happen today or tomorrow somewhere, probably somewhere america's foreign policy is utterly irrelevant. and again, there will be not a peep of disapproval by the same people who so intensely hate christianity. why exactly is this?

Rin says

Dan, this is the reason why a society needs Christianity or some other "-ism". The stupid people (read: CIC and friends), need to believe that they are saved, if they follow a doctrine, Messiah, or even a cult of bozos like themselves.

The solution to that is to prevent stupid people from breeding. Otherwise, you are simply allowing the gene pool to be polluted and making life harder and less safe for future generations. Revolving society around the most stupid of people is never a good idea.

Strong laws and isolating the violent so they cannot reproduce is also effective.

Rin says

Ppl are stupid

Ah, but why are people stupid? For 10,000+ years stupidity and superstition has been strongly encouraged while atheism and rationalism has been weeded out of the gene pool. It's time to do the opposite.

deepcgi says

The atheistic human race will gravitate back toward some other form of all encompassing and unprovable "truth" - like genetic reassignment, quantum Internet, or climate change 2.0.

That is just a retarded statement. People become atheists because they value evidence and proof. And genetics, quantum mechanics, and climate change are provable and proven. Again, only brainwashed idiots deny man-made climate change, and it's no coincidence that 100% of these brainwashed idiots are religious.

deepcgi says

Soviet Union being a great example - right? China under Mao? Laos under Pol Pot? North Korea under Kim? Cuba under Castro?

Dan usually resorts to name calling and sexual attacks when these facts are brought up. He's fairly predictable that way.

"There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."

Dan8267 says

Revolving society around the most stupid of people is never a good idea.

Strong laws and isolating the violent so they cannot reproduce is also effective.

Well... we live in a 'No Retard Left Behind' type of culture.

socal2 says

Dan8267 says

Bullshit. It is a false dichotomy to state that one must choose between Christianity and Islam.

Not a false dichotomy. It was history

No, it's not history that people must choose either Christianity or Islam.

And atheism and agnosticism are growing exponentially.

socal2 says

It is a damn good thing that our Christian ancestors were strong enough in their religion and culture to keep the Islamic mind virus of infecting the West.

It's a damn bad thing that Christianity held Europe in the Dark Ages for a thousand years. Had rationalism, naturalism, and atheism taken over Europe in 300 A.D., Europe would have had stealth bombers, ICBMs, and nuclear weapons by the time Islam was even invented and Muslims were riding camels and throwing spears. The Middle East would have followed the same path as the Native Americans only quicker.

socal2 says

Dan8267 says

Meanwhile, the lifespan of human beings has literally doubled as science, once outlawed by Christian law, has replaced faith in all matters.

The smug ignorance is staggering.

Once again, you are caught making blatantly false statements. In contrast, I do not have to make any false statements to support my position.

socal2 says

Dan8267 says

By the way, for 1600 of the 2000 years of Christianity, which is 80% of Christian history, Christians were just as barbaric as Muslims are today.

Nope. Not even close.

OK, so let's discard 1600 years of history because you say "nope, not even close". That's not how arguments work.

Christians committed torture, rape, enslavement, and genocide throughout their reign. And it's only been three generations since most, but not all, of this shit has stopped. Your denial is simply a lie.

socal2 says

Dan8267 says

The more Christianity has been weakened, the more peaceful, productive, and happy society has become.

Soviet Union being a great example - right? China under Mao? Laos under Pol Pot? North Korea under Kim? Cuba under Castro?

So, I point out that the United States of America has gotten far better as the power of Christianity has waned, and you have to resort to the false association of the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea as "atheist" states to respond to this fact. Well, that is simply disingenuous. It's time you read my classic thread, Tom Selleck and Charlie Chaplin are the most dangerous despots ever.

Once again, those who support religion have to resort to repeating debunked lies because there is nothing in history to support their ridiculous assertions.

this is definitely funny and interesting. is it just the poverty of the immigrants, like P N Dr Lo R suggested?

I think it is a combination of many things. A big part is Western self-hatred and the belief of the "Noble Savage" taught in our schools. Basically believing Islam wouldn't be so fucked up if Europeans and Americans didn't "meddle" with them. Totally not realizing that Islam has been a retrograde force and aggressor since it's founding and that primitive people weren't that noble in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and North America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_savage

The other major part is that if they criticize Islam specifically, they MUST concede that Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism (Western Civilization) are superior in many respects and atheist fanatics like Dan can't concede a single inch that these other religious beliefs provided humanity any good at all.

this is definitely funny and interesting. is it just the poverty of the immigrants, like P N Dr Lo R suggested?

Poverty and income inequality are the two greatest causes of violent crime in the United States because the other major causes of violent crimes have been effectively addressed. However, the crimes committed by the Muslim immigrants is almost certainly not caused by poverty or income inequality, but rather by the culture of violence and selfishness created by unrestrained religious fever. Religion requires faith which is mutually exclusive with rational thought.

Rational thought is an effective means of creating a peaceful, productive, and just society. It may not be obvious why this is as sometimes it is rational to be evil depending on your values, but empirically rational people throughout society and rational societies have been statistically more peaceful and just than irrational ones. The mechanism for this certainly warrants study, but the evidence is so overwhelming that it's obvious.

could it be that anything at all that is not traditionally western will be glorified by the PC crowd?

The PC crowd, i.e. the left, loves to glorify non-Western cultures because they falsely think that doing so makes them look cultured and enlightened. It doesn't. Hollywood will glorify Gandhi and Buddhism even though Gandhi was extremely racist and real Buddhism would be offensive to Hollywood and vice versa.

However, the left are not liberals. As a liberal and as a rationalist, I have no problem saying that western culture is far superior to Middle East culture or eastern Asian culture. The only problem with the west is that our societies have rarely lived up to our ideals, but thankfully that is changing with each decade. The entire history of the United States can be viewed as a barbaric and tyrannical society gradually becoming like the society it likes to pretend it is. So I'm hopeful about the future of western society.

why is fundamentalist christianity dumped on so hard for relatively trivial things like not believing in evolution, while at the same time not a word comes from the left about the truly unspeakable horrors committed daily in the name of islam?

An easy way to tell liberals and the left apart is that a leftist won't criticize Islam and a liberal won't stop criticizing it. Of course, we liberals reserve the right to criticize Christianity, the dominate religion in our society, as well since it's more relevant to our lives and our laws.

the next mass murder of random innocent people by muslims in the name of islam will likely happen today or tomorrow somewhere

The best way to defeat Islam is to defeat all religions by creating a unified western culture of rationalism, naturalism, atheism, and liberalism. Unfortunately, I can't come up with a descent acronym for this. Ideas anyone?

Rin says

Well... we live in a 'No Retard Left Behind' type of culture.

Best counterargument ever made against any of my positions.

Dan8267 says

The best way to defeat Islam is to defeat all religions

It doesn't even dawn on Dan that he shares ISIS' goals of defeating all other religions.

Militant atheists like Dan are ISIS' useful idiots in the West by constantly projecting Islam's dysfunction on millions of peaceful and tolerant Christians, Jews and Hindus. Dan8267 says

Unfortunately, I can't come up with a descent acronym for this. Ideas anyone?

It was called Communism. How did that work out for humanity?

"The state was committed to the destruction of religion,[2][3] and destroyed churches, mosques and temples, ridiculed, harassed, incarcerated and executed religious leaders, flooded the schools and media with atheistic teachings, and generally promoted atheism as the truth that society should accept.[4][5] The total number of Christian victims of Soviet state atheist policies, has been estimated to range between 12-20 million.[6][7][8]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union

socal2 says

It doesn't even dawn on Dan that he shares ISIS' goals of defeating all other religions.

I'm well aware of that, which is exactly why the very core of religion, faith itself, must be defeated.

socal2 says

Militant atheists like Dan are ISIS' useful idiots in the West by constantly projecting Islam's dysfunction on millions of peaceful and tolerant Christians, Jews and Hindus

1. How the fuck am I militant?
2. Why should anyone take your opinion of others seriously when you are clearly an idiot yourself?
3. Faith is, by definition, a dysfunction. The belief in spite of reason is mentally dysfunctional.
4. Christianity has a 1600-year history of being extremely evil and a 400-year history of becoming less evil solely because it has become less powerful.
5. Do you believe Jesus is a god who rose from the dead and is all-knowing and all-powerful? Because if you do, then you are clearly insane and have no grasp on reality. And that is why your opinion on any subject matter carries no weight. In comparison to you, someone who thinks he's Napoleon is sane and reasonable.

socal2 says

It was called Communism.

Communism was not rationalism, atheism, naturalism, or liberalism. Nope, not even atheism. Sure, the Soviet Union outlawed religion, but that had nothing to do with Communism. Cuba was and still is Communistic and it is very religious. Once again, mustaches don't make people dictators, you fool. The fact that you are incapable of understanding this simple truth demonstrates how warped your mind is and why no one should ever listen to you.

Dan8267 says

The best way....

Dan, I agree in part: the best argument against Islam is reason, including pointing out objectively that Islam makes cultures worse off than they were before they became infected with it. In contrast, Christian W's global "crusade" made matters worse, especially since he claimed to "respect" Islam and seemed to be working primarily for Bandar Bush.

However, many people feel a need for religion, e.g. the elderly widow who has nothing left but the hope of being eventually reunited with her husband. Calling her stupid for failing to recognize the hopelessness of her situation doesn't really help. At best, one might point out that paying charlatans won't improve her chances, and she should think rather of her family and community.

Another way might be to encourage Muslims to study their own history and consider the religions that worked best for their ancestors.

Regarding Christianity and western Europe, you could really extend your argument further. Much has been written about why Rome fell, but one huge reason was the imposition of Christianity as the official religion. Rome rose as a republic with freedom of religion, continued to prosper as an empire with officially divine emperors, then became Christian, then fell. Neitzsche would say that the conversion to Christianity replaced master morality with slave morality. The consequent weakening of Roman ideals created a power vacuum, allowing both Christianity and Islam to rise. Eventually, Christians dismissed the original deities of Hadrian's Pantheon as "pagan filth" (reminds me of ISIL/Daesh smashing Roman artifacts at Palmyra) and replaced them with Christian saints, and it took 1,000 years for anybody to build a dome surpassing it (Brunelleschi's duomo in Florence, with help from Davinci). Although today's Christians blame irreligion for the western European doormat attitude towards Islam, I think it results more from what Neitzsche would call Christian slave morality, idolizing self-sacrifice. When the Danes enacted legislation saying refugees who could afford to pay for their own housing should do so, other Europeans criticized them for being "selfish", instead of sharing the burden of supporting the Muslims (and thus Islam). Expecting people to sacrifice themselves in service to hostile enemy invaders makes no sense in any other moral system that I have ever seen, except Christianity. Also, Saudi patronage of NATO politicians and military-industrial contractors greases the wheels, shall we say. If Rome had stuck with its various deities and quarrels, or even if Rome had stuck with divine emperors, then it might have continued to rule the west and the period of Islamic conquest might never have happened.

America's founders chose expressly Roman symbols as the model for the new republic, and although they acknowledged their Christian heritage, they stated expressly that the new government should have no religious test of office, and should make no law respecting an establishment of religion - nor restricting the free exercise thereof. ISIL/Daesh have declared war on what they call "Rome", i.e. the west, including us. They use "Rome" as an insult, but I take it as a compliment, because Rome achieved the greatest civilization the world had ever known, and the greatest the world ever saw until the west surpassed it, which took 1,000 years to do.

Our ironic "alliance" with the Saudis reflects shared interests, but not shared values. They aspire to establish an Islamic caliphate. They say quite openly, even on their flag, "there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet." Their flag literally underlines that assertion with a sword, similar to the ones they use to behead apostates and blasphemers. Yet, for some reason, western leaders blind themselves to the Saudi flag that is literally right in front of them. "Money changes everything:" "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Dan8267 says

By the way, for 1600 of the 2000 years of Christianity, which is 80% of Christian history, Christians were just as barbaric as Muslims are today. The past 20% has been improved only by weakening Christianity and that false religion's grip on state power and cultural influence. The more Christianity has been weakened, the more peaceful, productive, and happy society has become.

Just reading about Vasco de Gama. He set fire to a pilgrimage ship after he looted it, with infants and babies on board, in the name of Portugal and the Holy Family.

curious2 says

Pantheon as "pagan filth" (reminds you of ISIL/Daesh smashing Roman artifacts at Palmyra) and replaced them with Christian saints, and it took 1,000 years for anybody to build a dome surpassing it (Bruneleschi's duomo in Florence, with help from Davinci).

Interesting! The Pantheon is still the world's largest unsupported concrete dome, never surpassed. I had thought some train station in Victorian England surpassed it, but it's dome is supported.