Hacker News Reader

Comment by metamemetics | Hacker News Reader

You seemed to be confused and to not recognize that religion is intrinsically violent. It is not simply "a few bad apples" scenario nor just about Islam but a systemic problem that had been occurring for thousands of years. Are you aware the punishment for Apostasy in Islam (no longer believing in God) is also death?

In order to end violence, people must undergo cognitive dissonance, realize that one belief they hold prescribes death and another belief they hold prescribes that they shouldn't. The resolve this dissonance by permanently discarding the belief that prescribes them to kill, by encountering a situation that shows this belief to be absurd. People will NOT introspect on their deeply held beliefs unless beneficial situations like Everybody Draw Mohammed day occur.

edit:

    0

  --|--

    |

   / \

View on HN

> "Are you aware the punishment for Apostasy in Islam (no longer believing in God) is also death?"

Because if it's written in some holy text, it must mean modern practitioners still follow it to the T, right?

"Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woolen and linen together." - Deuteronomy 22:11

It seems disturbing that those who are anti-Islam use the same fucked up interpretations of Quranic texts that the extremists themselves use. Kind of a sick irony I suppose.

That treatment of Apostasy is a relatively mainstream interpretation. In Saudi Arabia today, the penalty for conversion to other religions is death:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Saudi_Ar...

The problem is that many practitioners do follow texts to a T, and I believe that's the point of most religious systems.

Yeah, but it's like they don't want to lose followers/members. And the only thing they can do about it is just death penalty, like how did the Catholic Church centuries ago.

It's important to note that christian descendant and "allies" control the majority of media. Eg. in Albania there is an estimation of 80/20% of Muslims (majority non practitioners)/Christians, while the government administration 80/20% Christians/Muslims.

EDIT: I was talking about worldwide majority, not national or regional.

You should know that information control, it's one of the fundamental weapons and control powers a government administration has. Every government knows this, and every government uses it (even though some use it less than others).

That's something you should think about. At least the Chinese government stated it publicly, while others mask it as democracy freedom.

I talk about governments and politics, but you should count religion in it. Do you think the Catholic Church (eg. the Vatican) doesn't influence decisions of governments? (I know something about this)

>use the same fucked up interpretations of Quranic texts

100% straw-man, I never quoted the Quran? I was referring to modern day. At least 2006 I recall the U.S. had to get Karzai to intervene in and order the release of a defendent facing execution in Afghanistan.

The claim you need to try and contest is "religion is intrinsically violent"

If anything religion is just the rationalization of intrinsic human tendency for violence, or perhaps fear. Getting rid of religion won't fix the problem.

> You seemed to be confused and to not recognize that religion is intrinsically violent.

You should clarify what you meant by the above.

(a) "You... [do] not recognize that religion [in general] is intrinsically violent." (b) "You... [do] not recognize that [that particular] religion[, Islam,] is intrinsically violent."

A) any religion that promises salvation to a Self group at the exclusion of an Other group or promotes faith-based thinking

Reply on news.ycombinator.com