Gays, population growth, the environment, clouds!

[DB_Hunter]

And because of that it is impossible to truly argue objectively.

It depends what you mean. If we are talking about proving the validity of a viewpoint, then if one is sincere in the discussion then you have to argue objectivley. As I have been saying all along, concepts dictate actions, and the concepts spring from your viewpoint in life. Change the viewpoint, you change the concepts which change the actions.

As for myself personally, I understand Islam conceptually. I agree if someone holds on to their viewpoint in an emotional manner rather than conceptually, then the discussion becomes much more difficult. Since I did not start labelling people blasphemous heretics for holding views opposing my own, I hope it can be seen that I am able to discuss in a conceptual manner.

By the way as a side point... I've got this horrible cold right now, so if I take some time in responding to posts from now on you know why.

[SK]

I won't listen to a Muslim until the Middle East region has a period akin to the European Enlightenment.

[Yukimura]

So you won't listen to any Muslims until people in the Middle East stop basing their laws on Islam?

[Assassin]

man, those crazy muslims. you never know what they're planning. freaking terrorists

[Uchiha Barles]

The muslims don't need a period of enlightment. Unlike the europeans, they were never, as a whole, into the burning of books containing useful knowledge. While the Europeans were still amputating limbs from minor war injuries and burning things that were contradictory to their interpretation of the bible, the Muslims had devised methods of healing those wounds preventing and treating infections that hadn't progressed too far using a combination of skills and information from their own devising, and from the work of other cultures. So they don't need such a period, they've known for quite sometime to take what's useful from others.

[Lefty]

man, those crazy muslims. you never know what they're planning. freaking terrorists

Well if you want to blame terrorist you need to look at Israilies as well. Cuz yeah the Zionist created the modern forms of terrorism against the british and Palistinians that are popular today.

But back on topic. Basing weathor not you will listen to some based on religion is a bullshit move. If you want to make an educated response thats not how you go about it. Knowing everythign that you can about a subject then making a response is what everyone, especially a christian when your own religion requiers an open heart and mind, should do.

[complich8]

Discussion on the validity or culpability of various Abrahamic religions aside...

The issues of population decline and whatnot... the stuff I mentioned way back... that was an example of what happens when people follow the idea of sexual freedom. Gays, non-marriage hetro relationships... this all points towards societal breakdown.

If you're going to claim that society is in a decline, I challenge you to pinpoint precisely when it was better than it is now.

I can see you are deeply convinced of the idea that God does not exist. I am a Muslim, and I do believe that Allah exists. Since Islam forms my viewpoint on life, I could have indeed issued a 'God says so' kind of statement and left it at that. It is afterall something I am deeply convinced of.

See, that's the thing. My views are irrelevant, because I'm not the one you're trying to convince. Your task is to convince everyone who does the things you find objectionable that they are in fact justifiably objectionable. My task, on the other hand, is to demonstrate to you that you have no universally accepted (or acceptable) basis to make such claims.

I've already conceded that if you're noncritically religious, you would find your religion's proscriptions to be compelling. But to anyone who doesn't buy into your particular flavor of holy book, such an argument will be very lacking indeed. I'd rather not turn this into a "does God exist" or "is Islam right" thread... those never end well.

[DB_Hunter]

If you're going to claim that society is in a decline, I challenge you to pinpoint precisely when it was better than it is now.

I'm not claiming to be a sage on stats, I would not be able to do that for you.

However, addressing your implicit point of whether things were ever better in the past, I think that can be answered satifactorily fom present day society. Things are getting pretty screwed up, I mean when you have polticians (in the UK) suggesting control order for babies for the first time in history, you know something is seriously wrong. That's one example only, and by itself could be anamolous, but there are a host similar initiatives being carried out, which I am not addressing simply due to the fact that I would just go on and on and on.

Crime has reached epidemic proportions, societal relations are a mess and economically people are being worked to near death for a minimal increase in living standards from say a few decades ago. This clearly indicated a downward gradient in living standards, and I'm saying that as long as society holds on to its current values this will not change.

See, that's the thing. My views are irrelevant, because I'm not the one you're trying to convince. Your task is to convince everyone who does the things you find objectionable that they are in fact justifiably objectionable. My task, on the other hand, is to demonstrate to you that you have no universally accepted (or acceptable) basis to make such claims.

I agree with you that my basis or viewpoint in life is not univerally accepted.

I've already conceded that if you're noncritically religious, you would find your religion's proscriptions to be compelling. But to anyone who doesn't buy into your particular flavor of holy book, such an argument will be very lacking indeed. I'd rather not turn this into a "does God exist" or "is Islam right" thread... those never end well.

Again I'm at an agreement with you. I totally second your thought that those who do not buy into my 'flavour of holy book' would not find my arguments compelling. But the same goes from my end... as I don't by in to certain concepts you guys may hold on to, such as sexual freedom etc, I don't find these arguments compelling.

That's why I'm saying to resolve this stalemate we will have to discuss the basis of our viewpoints themselves. Unless we agree which one is valid then there is no point in discussing further... we will just go blue in the face saying the same things over and over and get no where.

As for threads never ending well, I'm pretty sure that a lot of people thought that this discussion on homosexuality was going to get ugly. Yet I think its been kept very sensible, and its a credit to all those who have particpated.

Edit: As for SK's comments, I would just echo what Lefty and Uchiha Barles have said.

[Turkish-S]

I won't listen to a Muslim until the Middle East region has a period akin to the European Enlightenment.

Lots of the rappers you listen to are muslim...