gher-shyu3i

There is already no trust in the financial system (it's based on usury after all).

It's not about needing religion. It's about once it's proven to be correct, the only rational decision a rational person can come to is to accept it. In other words, you have it the other way around.

Secondly, the media does a very good job at distorting the truth.

I meant WWI. I'll edit my post. The point remains however.

> I've tried to understand the core issue and frankly, failed

It's quite straight forward. Up until WWI, Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived in Palestine, which it and other areas of Arabia and North Africa were under Ottoman rule. During WWI, Sykes–Picot divided up the Muslim lands into arbitrary borders to make them easier to occupy. Syria was occupied by the French, Libya by the Italians, etc. Palestine was under British rule. Post WWII, the Zionists convinced Britain to give them Palestine, so they moved in and formed an illegal government, which ironically applied similar tactics the Nazis applied to the Jews in WWII (ethnic cleansing, killing discriminately, etc.). The conflict continues to this day until the Palestinians get back their rightful land.n

Edit: changed WWII to WWI.

> So do I think governments having more money NOT by squeezing me and all those I live near more is a good thing? Why yes, yes I do.

Unfortunately, those same governments don't see it as a mutually exclusive matter. They want to both tax you and everyone else. Not only that, they will end up wasting that money and nothing will get accomplished. You said it yourself, Canada has very bad wait times for healthcare. We need a fundamental solution.

What do you recommend as a solution? Do you honestly think if MS and a few other companies paid more in tax things will magically get better? Do you trust the government to send that money properly? The problem runs much much deeper. This is only scratching the surface.

Isn't this basically stack ranking?

Did you read some of the emails? There was already talk about the virus being engineering. The one about the CCP government cleaning paper money in Wuhan is quite telling.

There is a power imbalance, of course it makes sense to blame not only the one with power to control the situation, but the same one that started the conflict in the first place.

Another factor is money pumping by the government resulting in devaluation of currency. People want to put their money in hard assets that are resistant to inflation.

> And why are self-employed hit with a special tax?

To discourage self employment and innovation so people remain corporate slaves.

Alcohol is an extremely dangerous drug that is unfortunately normalized and expected by society. I wonder how much it is costing them in terms of healthcare, accidents, crimes, rape, etc.

Islam prohibited intoxicating drinks over 1400 years ago, and for good reason.

Challenging to overcome languages like C++, Rust, Java, and C#. D seems to sit somewhere in between, a better C++, but with (optional) GC. The thing is, Java and C# are already making strides into that space.

Extremely filthy behavior on the CCP's part, though not unexpected. Governments should step up their effort to stand up against their bullying and atrocities.

The article lacks substance, and asks the reader for suppositions. "Science" will not be able to, nor is in the realm of deducing or making morality. It's quite annoying how scientism is being pushed these days.

A company that provided jobs and services for millions of people. Nothing wrong with being valued at "billions of dollars" as long as things are done ethically.

The problem is idealizing such people in the first place. Sure, they may have had incredible achievements, but they're humans at the end of the day.

Borrowing is fine, just without interest. Suppliers already lend retailers and restaurants with no interest, and car dealerships offer 0% interest loans when they want to sell. It can be done.

Islam recognizes the time value of money, just do it in a proper manner. Invest in a business and get a return. Purchase property and rent it out and make a return. There are many ways to make money that do not involve usury or gambling.

What does that have to do with following Islamic finance practices? The Saudi government does not fully apply Islamic law, e.g. they allow usurious banks to open, as well as other things not worth getting into for this discussion. The Saudi government is not a reference for Islamic law.

Secondly, being rich is not prohibited in Islam.

Everything requires faith at some point, even science. You have to accept certain axioms that you are then able to build science and math on top of, there is no way around it. Are you going to call science a form of religion then? We know that scientism definitely is, and it's emerging these days.

More "independence and freedom" is just an illusion. She's simply a slave to the desires of men looking at her body. Only a secular capitalistic society can believe that any good can come out of it.

It's a straw man because no one brought up the issue of "selling your body doing back breaking work", or whether that is acceptable or not.

Of course selling one's body doing prostitution is bad, I don't know how that's even an arguing point. Not all "freedom" is good, some of it is destructive, like the example above.

> but a man (or woman) selling their body doing back breaking work for menial wages is OK?

Straw man fallacy.

> It should be easier to start families because families earn twice as much.

In practice, it doesn't translate to immediately doubling the effective income. You hear many accounts of people whom their father was working a single job in a gas station, yet they afforded a house and car and other amenities. Today that doesn't happen anymore. Furthermore, the children will suffer when both parents are working.

Not necessarily, is selling your body on prostitution websites more freedom? I think not. It's known what women face in a secular captialism-first economy.

It just means it's now harder for families to make it on a single income that used to be the responsibility of the father. This drives wages lower as we're seeing and makes it harder on everyone.

> I'm attempting to use examples like Islam, Christianity, etc., etc. is that not clear enough?

You just grouped Islam with Christianity with "etc." :) That's still a continuation of the fallacy. You admitted earlier that you have not looked at the Quran, and that you mixed it up with Hadiths that I quoted. Do you agree that you do not have the necessary or even sufficient background to make claims about Islam in that case? I don't mean it in a disparaging way, and I absolutely encourage you to learn more about both, and about Islam.

> Alright... there you go. Can you doubt those principles? That is my main point!

I explained in my post, that a non-Muslim can look at those principles with an interrogative or even doubtful manner. Once he accepts them (and subsequently accepts Islam), it doesn't make sense to doubt them once more does it? Islam does not prohibit asking questions, it tells us to consult with people of knowledge when we do have questions about things we don't understand.

> Again, that is my point, science does not claim absolute truth!!

We don't claim that we know everything in Islam, the Quran states[1][2]

> and say, "My Lord, increase me in knowledge."

> and you ˹O humanity˺ have been given but little knowledge.”

Absolute and full knowledge is an attribute of God. Only He has it, and not anyone or anything else in this world. Islam tells us that our knowledge is limited, yet it pushes us to acquire more. The Islam Golden Age was a direct result of this understanding of Islam. The Islamic empire at the time became a central hub of science and knowledge, at the forefront of scientific endeavor. My point is that the false dichotomy that some people try to claim between "science and religion" totally depends on which religion is being discussed.

[1] https://quran.com/20/114

[2] https://quran.com/17/85

> I'm using it to mean 'absolute doubt', the act of questioning something to the core with no presupposition.

I alluded to that toward the end of my reply. A non-Muslim may start off with that presumption until he is convinced that Islam is the truth, at which point he accepts it. Once the foundation is set, it does not make sense to keep that doubt or skepticism around any longer. Why accept the religion otherwise?

> Science cannot make such statements of certainty

God is outside the realms of time and space, which are the domains of science. It is a non-question to attempt to answer philosophical and religious questions through (experimental) science.

Furthermore, it's a fallacy to break up the world into "science" and "religion". Which religion are you talking about?

> Science allows restructuring its own foundation

I don't see how that has anything to do with the subject matter, or that it is indicative that science is somehow the absolute truth, or even leads to it.

The foundations of Islam are the Quran and Hadith. Islam has immutable and axiomatic principles (e.g. God is one, Muslims have to pray 5 times a day, the Hijri year is 12 months and follows a lunar system, etc.), some other aspects are open to interpretation (contingent on having a proper scholarly background of course - a layperson cannot interpret as he/she wishes), while other aspects are left open for society to decide as per its needs and evolution of time. I read that Muslim scholars hundreds of years ago derived rulings for how to pray if we were to fly one day - they were that forward thinking, and today we have airplanes.

> and they can't stand that poor people would have a fair shot through a standardized test.

That's quite the accusation. Citation needed.

If Trump ordered this it would be all over the news. The double standards are astounding.