[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Toddytapper: *
that children when **opposed* to athiesm, find the fallacy there and go back to religion...?
[/QUOTE]
You mean 'exposed', right?
In an islamic state, i am sure atheism would be taught as a topic similar to philosophy and ideologies like capitalism and communism. they would be studied and refuted.
This is how the great scholars such as abu hanifah(ra), did in the past, they where confronted by scholars of philosophy and secualrism all the ideas at the time and they refuted them on intellectual basis, this is only way you will find the strongest of ideas and strength in debate.
^ that's not really relevant since there is no Islamic State and the scholar you admire lived some 1300 years ago. Many things have changed since then. Science, technology, and education has moved forward by leaps and bounds and scholars from ancient times were not confronted with these new innovations, ideas, philosophies and evidence. It's all well and good to say it would be refuted, but I'm still waiting for democracy and freedom to be refuted on an intellectual basis (not an insultive, exclamation point laden basis) from these great debates.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Atheism is a belief just as much as any religion is a belief. It is just as relevant in spiritual study as an organized religion. To not address it would ignore a large school of thought. To say someone has to be part of a group to study it does not make sense. Because to fully comprehend any belief one would have to be a believer, which is not possible.
[/QUOTE]
I also think that if we want to push for Islam and other religions to be taught, we have to be willing to open up to other religious learning too.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
^ that's not really relevant since there is no Islamic State and the scholar you admire lived some 1300 years ago. Many things have changed since then. Science, technology, and education has moved forward by leaps and bounds and scholars from ancient times were not confronted with these new innovations, ideas, philosophies and evidence. It's all well and good to say it would be refuted, but I'm still waiting for democracy and freedom to be refuted on an intellectual basis (not an insultive, exclamation point laden basis) from these great debates.
[/QUOTE]
^Wow people have short memory Democracy refuted is an old subject.
Democracy, in its true meaning, is an imaginary and inapplicable idea. It never existed and it will never exist. Bringing all the people in one place permanently to look after the public affairs is impossible. That all the people should assume the ruling and the will is also impossible. That is why they resorted to tricks regarding democracy and interpreted it loosely and created for it what is known as the head of state, the government and the parliament.
The governments in America and Britain, represent the will of the capitalists from the businessmen and big landowners. They do not represent the will of the people or their majority. The big capitalists are the ones who bring to power or into the representative assemblies those who will realise their interests. They are the ones who pay for the costs of the elections for the post of head of state and the membership of parliament. As a result, they have control over the head of state and the members of parliament. This is a well known reality in America.
How ridiculous and disgusting it is that the colonialist democratic countries like America, Britain and France boast and brag of democratic values and human rights, and at the same time they trample all over all the humanitarian and ethical values. They squander all the human rights and even the blood of humans. Thus, Palestine, South East Asia, Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa, Iraq, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Chechnya are the best evidence which slaps them in the face and highlight the true extent of their lies, deceit, and also the extent of their impudence and their insolent faces.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
Democracy, in its true meaning, is an imaginary and inapplicable idea. It never existed and it will never exist.
The governments in America and Britain, represent the will of the capitalists from the businessmen and big landowners.
colonialist democratic countries like America, Britain and France boast and brag of democratic values and human rights, and at the same time they trample all over all the humanitarian and ethical values.
[/QUOTE]
Democracy refuted is an old subject?
On the contrary with grand generalisations and gross misrepresentations, you cannot even refute anything...
For example
Does US UK France = Democracy? No Sir...
Why is Democracy in its true meaning inapplicable? That seems to be the basis for the argument but has no backup for it....
So are you saying that if it was not a democracy but a dictatorship or a religious systm of governance it wouldbe any different?
Show me any govt where corruption and vested interests have not raised its ugly head.
Democratic principles are representative more or less of the people of the country and therefore remain flexible for fine tuning..
Now if you could refute the whole concept of democracy with reasonable arguments backed by FACTS......
read again
Bringing all the people in one place permanently to look after the public affairs is impossible. That all the people should assume the ruling and the will is also impossible.