The bible always gives clarification in this way, that it gives a blanket distinction of what is right and wrong, (killing) and then further clarifies how this may be applied in different situations (self-defense).

As far your comment regarding blasphemy and the like, that is part of the Mosaic law which was given to the Jewish people. Christians are not under the Mosaic law because Jesus did away with it. That was only for the nation of israel in that time and place. If I killed someone for blasphemy I would be guilty of murder. Jesus told us to love our neighbor as ourselves, and murder I don't think would be very loving.

>> ^Psychologic:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Yes, there are some exceptions made, such as for self defense. I am not speaking of the law of the land but within the bible.
If the christian bible makes exceptions to "Thou shall not kill" then the distinction is the reader's choice. Many christians believe it is wrong to kill ever, even in self-defense. I tend to hold your view, that the moral justification is relative to the situation.
That's very similar to what Dawkins believes. People follow religious texts when they agree with them and ignore the parts they don't agree with. Would you feel morally justified killing someone for blasphemy or adultery if your god said it's the right thing to do? I doubt it (at least I would hope not).
Discussion about morality is a good thing. People are much more likely to behave morally when they understand why a certain behavior is positive or negative rather than simply being told to do (or avoid) a behavior.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Yes, there are some exceptions made, such as for self defense. I am not speaking of the law of the land but within the bible.

If the christian bible makes exceptions to "Thou shall not kill" then the distinction is the reader's choice. Many christians believe it is wrong to kill ever, even in self-defense. I tend to hold your view, that the moral justification is relative to the situation.

That's very similar to what Dawkins believes. People follow religious texts when they agree with them and ignore the parts they don't agree with. Would you feel morally justified killing someone for blasphemy or adultery if your god said it's the right thing to do? I doubt it (at least I would hope not).

Discussion about morality is a good thing. People are much more likely to behave morally when they understand why a certain behavior is positive or negative rather than simply being told to do (or avoid) a behavior.

Also, it's important to check out the Youtube comments and the video uploader's description. If you did that, you'd know his non-dying performances outweigh his dying performances. Someone did all that work and now you don't need to: http://www.compleatseanbean.com/deathbycow.html

HE DIES IN:
Airborne - bye bye Toombs
Caravaggio - Rannuccio gets his throat slashed
Clarissa - Lovelace is skewered by Sean Pertwee
Don't Say a Word - Patrick Koster is buried alive
Equilibrium - Death by Poetry - Partridge is blasted away by Christian Bale while reading Yeats
Essex Boys - Jason Locke meets a nasty end in a Range Rover
Far North - Loki is frozen. Naked. In the snow. A chilling end if there ever was one.
The Field - the infamous Death by Cow - Tadgh falls over a cliff, pursued by a herd of stampeding cows
GoldenEye - Alec Trevelyan falls a long way down and is crushed by a satellite dish thing
Henry VIII - Robert Aske meets a gruesome end
The Island - Death by Clone. Merrick is shot in the throat by a nasty grabber thingy with a sharp
hook and a cable that gets wrapped around his neck, and while he's struggling with Lincoln
Six-Echo, the catwalk they're on collapses, and Merrick ends up dangling by the neck. Currently
the most creative dispatch of Sean's career. Definitely well hung.
The Lord of the Rings (The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King) - Death
by Orc. Boromir. Arrows. Need I say more?
Lorna Doone - Carver Doone drowns
Outlaw - Dead Dead Dead. Was there ever any question? Dead.
Patriot Games - Sean Miller is beaten up, boathooked and finally blown up by Harrison Ford
Scarlett - Lord Fenton is dispatched
Tell Me That You Love Me - Gabriel Lewis is stabbed by Laura. Or he stabs himself. We're not
quite sure about this one, actually.
The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion - Death by summoning a god's avatar. Martin Septim (the son of the Emperor, aka The Lost Heir) meets his X-Box end when he attempts to save the world.
The Hitcher - Surely you jest. You need to ask? (There were two different versions filmed. He dies
in both of them.)
War Requiem - The German Soldier dies, but returns in the afterlife


HE LIVES IN:
(Leo Tolstoy's) Anna Karenina
A Woman's Guide to Adultery
The Big Empty
The Bill
Black Beauty
Bravo Two Zero
Exploits at West Poley
Extremely Dangerous
Faceless
The Fifteen Streets
Flightplan
Fool's Gold
How to Get Ahead in Advertising
In the Border Country
Inspector Morse: Absolute Conviction
Jacob
Lady Chatterley
The Loser
My Kingdom for a Horse
National Treasure (But only because of a rewrite. In an early version
of the the script Ian Howe got eaten by alligators in the subways of
New York. Really. Honest. I wouldn't lie to you. I wouldn't.)
North Country
Percy Jackson (Zeus is more or less an immortal so death seems a bit
redundant, really...)
The Practice
Pride
Prince
Punters
Ronin
Samson & Delilah
Sharpe (14 films)
Sharpe's Challenge
Shopping
Silent Hill
Small Zones
Stormy Monday
Tom & Thomas
Troubles
The Canterbury Tales - The Nun's Priest's Tale
The Dark
The True Bride
The Vicar of Dibley
Troy
Wedded
When Saturday Comes
Windprints
Winter Flight

Major Theatrical Performances:
Macbeth ... Yes. He dies. And gets his head impaled on a spike.
Romeo & Juliet... What do you think?
Fair Maid of the West ... Spencer doesn't die!

(a copy of the messy comment above)

A collection of verses from the Qur'an about unbelievers

A person's beliefs about life (and afterlife) have a huge effect on how they live and perceive the value of other people's lives; it is nothing like blaming school shootings on violent video games, unless you assume that the shooters actually believed they lived inside a videogame.

The Qur'an, Islam's founding text, makes it quite clear that
a) The unbeliever will burn in hellfire forever (e.g. 4:56)
(nothing new here, M's recycling the holy texts already in existence)
and b) the unbeliever must be killed if he does not accept Islam (4:89), either by God or "or at our hands" (9:52); only Islam can exist on earth (2:193).
See this article on the history of Jihad and martyrdom in Islam.

Of course, the majority of muslims, like any other group of human beings, aspire to live their peaceful lives, etc. The difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism, apart from its youth, is that it is founded upon a character and his book that are highly impervious to the effects of secularization. While the Bible is an edited compilation of transcripts written by several authors over centuries, the Qur'an was written by one warrior general in the space of his lifetime; questioning any part of the book's infallibility puts the whole faith in question, a risky thing when you read what the book in question has to say about non-believers. (I could go on, but really, Harris says it so much better than me in "The End of Faith" ...for free!).

But you want evidence, so here are a few things to ponder, in relation to what the Qur'an, and thus Islam, has to say about the topics in question. (Keeping in mind that Mohamed did not invent the barbarities that the book contains; they were contemporaneous, he simply enshrined them as the "infallible" word of God. Also: Mohamed's life, as transcribed in the Hadith, is considered a role model).

Honour killing: women considered property of men (see s.4:34) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_hon
orkilling_2.html
Honour killing: adulterers should be killed anyway, no?
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/07/24/2003180222

Because of sharia law's stance on adultery, it remains a crime in several Islamic countries
(sharia law is for the most part copied from the Torah/OT; in Islam, adultery is one of the worst sins/crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina_(Arabic) ):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Criminal_penalties

Also, denouncing rape can get you jailed... for adultery:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7943698

homosexuality: illegal in 75/195 countries; 32/48 Muslim countries. In 8 countries it is punishable by death... under sharia law, of course (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE, Sudan, Nigeria, la Mauritania and Somalia).

Condoning slavery: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_slavery#Slavery_
in_the_contemporary_Muslim_world

forced marriage of minors: what Islamic doctrine/scholars say: http://muslim-quotes.netfirms.com/childbrides.html
women protest age limit laws: http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88589
more statistics on child brides (once again, the problem did not stem from Islam, but is upheld by it... Mo+Aisha): http://marriage.about.com/od/arrangedmarriages/a/childbride.htm

Apostasy and human rights: http://www.iheu.org/node/1541

Of the 126 designated terrorist organisations, 73 (60%) are religious, 65 (51%) are Islamic extremists. To compare, the second highest ranking terrorist-fueling ideology, communism, has only 21 (17%) groups. Jihad anyone?

Government report on link between Koranic schools and terrorism: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21654.pdf

Of the 17 "Significant Ongoing Armed Conflicts of 2010", only 5 are not marked by religious ideologies (only 2 if communism is counted as a religious ideology). Eleven of these conflicts involve Islamists, who are either trying to instate an Islamic theocracy (in accordance with the teachings of the Qur'an), or they are fighting Muslim governments that are considered not "Muslim" enough.

Man has a fallen nature and sin causes peoples hearts and minds to become deranged.

Jerimiah 17:9

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

Mark 7:21-22

For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.

Romans 3:10

As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one;

It only took one sin to cause creation to fall so it isnt a small thing. Anyone who won't turn from their evil deserves what they get.

A collection of verses from the Qur'an about unbelievers

A person's beliefs about life (and afterlife) have a huge effect on how they live and perceive the value of other people's lives; it is nothing like blaming school shootings on violent video games, unless you assume that the shooters actually believed they lived inside a videogame.

The Qur'an, Islam's founding text, makes it quite clear that
a) The unbeliever will burn in hellfire forever (e.g. 4:56)
(nothing new here, M's recycling the holy texts already in existence)
and b) the unbeliever must be killed if he does not accept Islam (4:89), either by God or "or at our hands" (9:52); only Islam can exist on earth (2:193).
See this article on the history of Jihad and martyrdom in Islam.

Of course, the majority of muslims, like any other group of human beings, aspire to live their peaceful lives, etc. The difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism, apart from its youth, is that it is founded upon a character and his book that are highly impervious to the effects of secularization. While the Bible is an edited compilation of transcripts written by several authors over centuries, the Qur'an was written by one warrior general in the space of his lifetime; questioning any part of the book's infallibility puts the whole faith in question, a risky thing when you read what the book in question has to say about non-believers. (I could go on, but really, Harris says it so much better than me in "The End of Faith" ...for free!).

But you want evidence, so here are a few things to ponder, in relation to what the Qur'an, and thus Islam, has to say about the topics in question. (Keeping in mind that Mohamed did not invent the barbarities that the book contains; they were contemporaneous, he simply enshrined them as the "infallible" word of God. Also: Mohamed's life, as transcribed in the Hadith, is considered a role model).

Honour killing: women considered property of men (see s.4:34) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling_2.html
Honour killing: adulterers should be killed anyway, no?
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/07/24/2003180222

Because of sharia law's stance on adultery, it remains a crime in several Islamic countries
(sharia law is for the most part copied from the Torah/OT; in Islam, adultery is one of the worst sins/crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina_(Arabic) ):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Criminal_penalties

Also, denouncing rape can get you jailed... for adultery:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7943698

homosexuality: illegal in 75/195 countries; 32/48 Muslim countries. In 8 countries it is punishable by death... under sharia law, of course (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE, Sudan, Nigeria, la Mauritania and Somalia).

Condoning slavery: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_slavery#Slavery_in_the_contemporary_Muslim_world

forced marriage of minors: what Islamic doctrine/scholars say: http://muslim-quotes.netfirms.com/childbrides.html
women protest age limit laws: http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88589
more statistics on child brides (once again, the problem did not stem from Islam, but is upheld by it... Mo+Aisha): http://marriage.about.com/od/arrangedmarriages/a/childbride.htm

Apostasy and human rights: http://www.iheu.org/node/1541

Of the 126 designated terrorist organisations, 73 (60%) are religious, 65 (51%) are Islamic extremists. To compare, the second highest ranking terrorist-fueling ideology, communism, has only 21 (17%) groups. Jihad anyone?

Government report on link between Koranic schools and terrorism: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21654.pdf

Of the 17 "Significant Ongoing Armed Conflicts of 2010", only 5 are not marked by religious ideologies (only 2 if communism is counted as a religious ideology). Eleven of these conflicts involve Islamists, who are either trying to instate an Islamic theocracy (in accordance with the teachings of the Qur'an), or they are fighting Muslim governments that are considered not "Muslim" enough.

edit: html's not working, so this looks like crap. sorry, i'm too tired to rearrange right now.


>> ^SDGundamX:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hpqp" title="member since July 25th, 2009" class="profilelink">hpqp
You repeated his speaking points and provided no evidence to support them and then insinuated that I know nothing of Islam's teachings to boot. You've clearly learned from your teachers (Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens) quite well.
Show me some evidence please that shows that Islamic followers are more likely to cause harm to fellow human beings than others. By evidence I mean an empirical study that controls for other factors that include but are not limited to: education, income, regional cultural factors (other than religion), and local political systems (or lack thereof as the case may be, for example in countries such as Somalia).
And no, you didn't correct that for me. It doesn't matter their stated reasons for committing the violence. People who resort to violence do so for a complex array of reasons. I dispute the notion that people commit violence soley "because of their religion" any more than school shootings occur "because kids play violent video games."

>> ^legacy0100:

...wtf is this bullshit. This man is spewing diarrhea out of his mouth. He is basing his argument solely on what little he knows about his own little world. I highly doubt this man has ever done any professional research over these matters, not even data collection. He's just conjuring up a theory solely based on what he has read and heard over the news media sitting in his own living room.
What he said towards the end really bothered me the most. "some religions have never had these extremists", what sources does he have?


You, sir or madam, are the one who apparently knows little to nothing about both Islam and Sam Harris. May I suggest you read "The End of Faith", or any of Harris' excellent (and researched) books, before "spewing diarrhea"-like criticisms without knowing what you're talking about.

As for Islam, look up one or many of the following effects of Islam in the world today: honour killing, fgm, suicide attacks, stoning, hate crimes, hate speech, punishments for "adultery", etc...

@bareboards2: yes, "at this moment" is a key phrase; when Christianity had Islam's age it was still all about the Inquisition and inter-faith massacres (oh, and witch-burning). But there can be no "redemption" for any religion whose core fundamentals are flawed, there can only be a watering down of its craziness with secular morality.

On the false problem of fundamentalists: http://videosift.com/video/The-problem-is-not-fundamentalists-but-the-fundamentals

Adultery is punished by public flogging (Surah 2:42)


Downvote for the girl in the first minutes saying there is no beating of women.

(snip of BRP profane rant)

Well - if that plunge into logic doesn't lay out the sides then nothing really will.

Look - this isn't difficult. Judaism banned homosexuality under judeic law. Now - those who are not religious would argue that such a standard was established by evil men. Those who believe that God exists & has a plan for his children would accept that these rules ("Commandments" if you will) were established to help the mortal family to know the ins and outs of what God expects his children to do or not do for their own happiness.

So homosexuality was wrong both under Judaic law, and Judaic moral belief. This is not in question except by people who are trying to reverse-engineer history in order to justify their own world views. Christ did not come along and say, "That was wrong". Quite to the contrary. Christ doubled down. Judaic law commmanded people to not commit sexual sin. Christ didn't say, "It's OK now as long as you love each other..." Nuh-uh. Christ said, "He who LOOKETH upon another woman and hath committed adultery in his heart." The lesson is clear. Judeaic law was trying to command & control people with "don't do this" rules. Christ was trying to teach people to not even THINK about doing the wrong thing.

What does that say about homosexuality? People who think Christ or God would be "OK" with it are lying to themselves. Sexual sin is sin and needs to be forsaken. Period. That never changed. Christ told the adulteress, "Go thy way and SIN NO MORE". He did not say, "Go thy way and I don't care what you do as long as you love them."

So yes - like ANY moral sin - you can love the sinner and hate the sin and labor to correct it. It doesn't make you a bigot. It doesn't mean you're a hater. It means you see people who need help, and you try to help them.

As far as this chick goes - phht. If she's even LDS (which isn't a given), her argument is full of holes and we've got an actual LDS guy who says she's full of bologna with her claims of "being cast out". Is such a thing possible? You'd have to ask the guys in SLC about that and not this chick. As far as the Mormon church's opposition to Prop 8? I saw that more as a means to prevent a lousy law from happening. The gay community needs to come up with a plan that addresses their wants (equal rights) without stepping on the definition of marriage and protections for those who hold to a traditional view. When that happens they'll find they have a better shot compared to these half-@$$ed bum-rush votes on lousy, flawed legislation.

While rape exists everywhere there are men, and singling out Arabs as being naturally inclined towards rape is wrong, there is no other culture on earth that, upon telling the police that she has been raped by her brother-in-law, a woman then is charged with adultery and stoned to death by her own community... or at the very least has her nose and lips cut off.

Humans can be pretty horrible to each other, but modern Islam is pretty much the front-runner for atrocities against women.
>> ^tsquire1:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture
To look at this situation and say, "see! The Arabs are naturally inclined towards rape or violent treatment of women is ludicrous. You are attributing a social phenomenon with a half-assed biological determinant analysis. Such an analysis lends itself readily to racism, as you are saying that this particular 'type' of human being has a natural inclination towards a specific behavior. Condensed, you are saying, "Arabs are all X". You get where this logic leads to?
We have to see this in the context of history, economics, class, gender, etc. We have to see the way that men treat women as a result of continued struggle to equate Woman with Human, i.e. on par with Man. We have to understand the series of transformations Egypt, as well as the entire world have gone through, i.e. the progression of class struggle to reach this current moment. To ignore all of this an simply say it is because they are Arab is, emphasized, half-assed and racist.
What about the treatment of women in Western society? http://www.childrensmediaproject.org/photos/woman-in-cage.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_
disparity_in_the_United_States
"in 2004, women's wages were 76.5% of men's wages"
There comes a point where you are presented with such consistent and abhorrent disregard for human life that we are left to say that this entire system and world we have inherited is wrong on a fundamental level.

Whether thrown in an oven or massacred by bombs and artillery what is the difference ?
And yes, I do believe as many Muslims have been slaughtered over their history as the Jews (if not more).

Also, ALL orthodox religions are CRAZY ! Christian, Jew or Muslim. Please stop cherry picking extreme events to paint Muslims as crazy, all religions are guilty of it. I can't be bothered to troll the internet for tragic instances of religious freaks killing each other, but it's all there. Just look at orthodox Jews in Israel if you want to see the oppression of women. I don't see the west stepping in to 'help' them.

Also, the west is mostly to blame for the lack of progress in the middle east. Every time an organized modern government appears, we bomb it back into the stone age or setup a dictator to take them out.
The west does not want progress in the middle east. Just look at Israel / Palestine.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^billpayer:
This talk is pathetic.
The Hudson institute is a bunch or war mongering fascists set up by Herman Kahn (sociopath) and RAND corp (ie. US Military Industrial Complex).
Scum like these have been building up Islamophobia for decades.
Muslims are in-arguably the new Jews and are the subjects of persecution all over the globe.

Interesting, and where are the getting tossed into ovens by the tens of thousands? Where do women still get stoned for showing their faces? While no doubt, the subject or some western bigotry, the comparison to them to Jews is just patently absurd. Even African Americans pre-60s had it harder then Muslims today. Are there separate Muslims bathrooms, no.
This talk is not pathetic. Was it pathetic the Catholic Church was, and still is, the subject of malice over the recent fiasco, no. Western bigotry over Muslim ideals is inevitable, because as they currently are incompatible. They don't have to be, but that is the current state of them. A man can beat his wife for not putting out. A women can be stoned for adultery, and adultery can be so loosely defined as being alone with another man that is not your husband.
This does cause undue stress on Muslims that do not practice these ideals, they are the true victims. But they still don't have it as bad as AA did in America, the Jews in German, or the women in Muslim countries do today.

>> ^billpayer:

This talk is pathetic.
The Hudson institute is a bunch or war mongering fascists set up by Herman Kahn (sociopath) and RAND corp (ie. US Military Industrial Complex).
Scum like these have been building up Islamophobia for decades.
Muslims are in-arguably the new Jews and are the subjects of persecution all over the globe.


Interesting, and where are the getting tossed into ovens by the tens of thousands? Where do women still get stoned for showing their faces? While no doubt, the subject or some western bigotry, the comparison to them to Jews is just patently absurd. Even African Americans pre-60s had it harder then Muslims today. Are there separate Muslims bathrooms, no.

This talk is not pathetic. Was it pathetic the Catholic Church was, and still is, the subject of malice over the recent fiasco, no. Western bigotry over Muslim ideals is inevitable, because as they currently are incompatible. They don't have to be, but that is the current state of them. A man can beat his wife for not putting out. A women can be stoned for adultery, and adultery can be so loosely defined as being alone with another man that is not your husband.

This does cause undue stress on Muslims that do not practice these ideals, they are the true victims. But they still don't have it as bad as AA did in America, the Jews in German, or the women in Muslim countries do today.

Hi @BicycleRepairMan! Since we’re discussing the 10 commandments, I thought I’d do us a favor and actually post them here for us to look at so it’s easier to discuss. Note that there are two versions, the ones from Exodus and the ones from Deuteronomy, so I’ve posted both versions (as printed on Wikipedia):

Exodus

2 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;
3 Do not have any other gods before me.
4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,
6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
7 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
8 Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
9 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
10 But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns.
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and consecrated it.
12 Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.
13 You shall not murder.
14 You shall not commit adultery.
15 You shall not steal.
16 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
17 You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Deuteronomy

6 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;
7 you shall have no other gods before me.
8 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
9 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me,
10 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
11 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
12 Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you.
13 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
14 But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, or your son or your daughter, or your male or female slave, or your ox or your donkey, or any of your livestock, or the resident alien in your towns, so that your male and female slave may rest as well as you.
15 Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day.
16 Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you, so that your days may be long and that it may go well with you in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.
17 You shall not murder.
18 Neither shall you commit adultery.
19 Neither shall you steal.
20 Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor.
21 Neither shall you covet your neighbor’s wife. Neither shall you desire your neighbor’s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

I do not see anywhere in either version of the Ten Commandments any “command” about not thinking about or interpreting these commandments. The first 3 (as defined by the Catholic church—it’s actually 5-6 lines in the Biblical text) that you refer to tell the Israelites who have just fled Egypt to worship only the one god, Yahweh. You interpreted that to mean that it says that all people in the world must become Christians and followed that with the further interpretation that Christians can’t think about the commandments and must follow them to the letter even when it would be irrational to do so. My original point stands—that’s not what they actually say. There is no need to excuse or explain away the original text, because there’s nothing explicitly written there that supports your interpretation.

That being said, to some extent Hitchens’ interpretation of the Ten Commandments as including thought crimes matches that of the orthodox Catholic interpretation of the Ten Commandments. However, you yourself pointed out that most Christians—including Catholics—don’t interpret it that way personally. And that’s the weakness with Hitchens’ argument. He’s not arguing against religion here, he’s arguing against one particular interpretation of a particular religious ruleset (the Ten Commandments) of a particular religious sect (orthodox Catholicism). His interpretation, it turns out, is not even held by the majority of the worshipers of that particular religion (Christianity as a whole). Which begs the question of why he’s even going off about it (the thought crime thing) in the first place? His claim is that the Ten Commandments are a terrible place to get your morality from, yet his argument is actually not against the Commandments themselves but against the unthinking interpretation of some religious adherents. I don't find that to be a very rational or convincing argument against the Commandments themselves.

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^hpqp:
>> ^Ryjkyj:
There are still some logical arguments for male circumcision, not the least of which is the health factor, not for men but for women. If bacteria builds up on the end of the penis it doesn't necessarily affect a man. But even a little can become a problem for a vagina when introduced during sex. Think of that what you will, I would still call it a logical argument however.
To date, I've never heard a non-religious/non-misogynist-based argument for female circumcision.

Simple hygiene makes this argument completely void.

This is correct - but not only that, are humans really so flippantly egotistical that they see the culmination of millions of years of evolution, think 'i can improve that rofl'? Besides which, i suggest that if you're sleeping with a man who hasn't cleaned his foreskin properly you've got a few more problems than bacteria buildup.
I can't watch this video, i can't bear to see anyone, but especially women getting abused.
However i might suggest you change the "A modicum of self control on the part of men?" in the video description. It comes off as being misandrous and ignorant. If the man can have self control, so can the woman. If it's rape, asking for someone to issue some self control over their urge to rape seems very strange.


The "modicum of self-control on the part of men" is referring to the breast ironing, which is to destroy women's sexual attractiveness so men do not feel like having sex with them (consensually or not!). In general, though, all women oppressing techniques, especially in relation to sexuality (burkas, stoning/beating for adultery, etc.), are related to the misogynous view which blames women for being the sole cause of that great evil called sex, for which men have no responsibility.

And the bitch thinks she's being tortured. Quick, someone bring me a a water board and some water.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/lindsay-lohan-defends-her_n_638913.html
From the article:
Later Lindsay vented about "cruel" and "inhuman" punishment. Over several rambling tweets she quoted from the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

It is clearly stated in Article 5 of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights that...., "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." this was taken from an article by Erik Luna.. "November 1 marked the 15th anniversary of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. But there were no celebrations, parades, or other festivities in honor of this punishment scheme created by Congress and the U.S. Sentencing Commission... Instead, the day passed like most others during the last 15 years: Scores of federal defendants sentenced under a constitutionally perverted system that saps moral judgment through its mechanical rules."

In a surprising twist, Lindsay linked to a Newsweek story about Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the Iranian mother of two who may be stoned to death for adultery, and asked her followers to retweet. It's unclear whether she meant to lump her 90-day jail sentence with the inhuman punishment Ashtiani faces.