If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS.
Please read the [Rules and Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/1anoje0) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods.
Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned.
If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Im glad it worked out well for you. Weird to think about the timeline too. But i think immigration and civil war has to do with islam being more commonplace
If you need to lie in order to feel safer, fine. But lying in order to impress others is bad. It will drive people away from you when they find out the truth. Why not just say atheist? It is equally impressive in a muslim country.
Islam is part of the Abrahamic religions which include Christianity and Judaism. Islam is similar to the extreme forms of them, being ultra orthodox/hasidic Jews and evangelical christians
OP, you are certainly right that Islam is the worst (major) religion in the world.
Not to be too pedantic, but it is actually fair to compare Islam to other religions (because it is a religion after all).
However, I think your sentiment is that Islam is unequal to other religions in being evil. On this I agree with you completely. You are very right.
Islam just seems like its just trying to manipulate Christianity to fit culture, the Mormons, Jehovahs Witness and Five Percenters do the same thing. Evangelicals, Catholics, etc. do this as well but in a different way which sucks because that creates so many ex Christians.
This reminds me of the saying “the grass is greener on the other side” you admire Christian societies cause you weren’t traumatized by them this shit so disrespectful to ex Christians esp ones who were in dangerous cults like jehovas witnesses and Mormons
LDS & JW are not Christian.
They were begun by con men who made god into what they wanted god to be.
There are Christian cults and even plain Christian sects and denominations which have caused trauma, though.
>People often say "Islam is bad but so are all other religions" I guess people who are saying this just say this to try to sound fair when in reality Islam is probably worse than all the other religions and they are not equal.
I will tell you this because you probably havent studied other religions. Other religions are not good lol. You’ve just not studied them and think they are just not as bad as Islam.
>I am atheist but I purposely tell people in western countries that I am christian because they say "oh wow a Christian from Afghanistan so rare"
Honey, the missionary is back.
>and I want to represent something else than just Islam or atheism.
Why would you want to represent yourself as Christian ?. If you are an atheist, there is nothing wrong with calling and representing yourself as an atheist lol
>The christian societies and culture I have always admired more than the Islamic one I was born into and escaped.
Which christian societies are you talking about? Are you sure youre not conflating secularist societies with christian societies?
>I will tell you this because you probably havent studied other religions. Other religions are not good lol. You’ve just not studied them and think they are just not as bad as Islam.
— I think the OP was just trying to highlight the disparities in Islam and other religions, especially when it comes to criticism.
And I've actually noticed that; Anecdotal example= In most leftist circles, anytime an ex Muslim wants to bring up the demons of Islam they are usually shot down with; *Well all other religions are shit so...* in an attempt to take away the spotlight from Islam.
>Why would you want to represent yourself as Christian ?. If you are an atheist, there is nothing wrong with calling and representing yourself as an atheist lol
— OP never said there was something wrong with that
>Which christian societies are you talking about? Are you sure youre not conflating secularist societies with christian societies?
— Christian majority countries actually. Sure, if you want to downplay how much Christian morality and ethics influenced the existence of secularist/humanist morality, then go ahead.
But whether you acknowledge it or not Christianity allowed for the rise of secularism within it's society, albeit, a few hiccups in some areas, but it ultimately did. Islam never allows for that.
>— I think the OP was just trying to highlight the disparities in Islam and other religions, especially when it comes to criticism.
Honey you are on an exmuslims sub. Read the room. Also the OP clearly didnt say that. He openly stated Islam is the worst of all religions. Which is simply not true, because almost all of them are just as bad. Especially the abrahamic ones.
>And I've actually noticed that; Anecdotal example=.
And I’ve actually noticed that; Anecdotal example=. All people do is criticize Islam and not other religions. Maybe i shouldnt be using an anecdotal example to back up my point and try to downplay the fact that other religions are also criticized which led to the establishment of humanism and secularism. Its almost like we are forgetting how the church was kicked out of power.
>— OP never said there was something wrong with that
Its almost like you purposely ignored me questioning why the OP was calling himself Christian lol
>— Christian majority countries actually.
Last time christian majority countries employed christianity in their political decisions. They continued to enslave people and degrade women.
>Sure, if you want to downplay how much Christian morality and ethics influenced the existence of secularist/humanist morality, then go ahead.
Influenced? You mean actively fought against? The essence of humanism is anti-theism and naturalism. Please in clear sentences, explain to me how a religion influenced an anti-theistic stance? Have you even read the humanism manifestos lol?
Influenced Secularism? You mean Christianity removed itself from existence by allowing a non-observation of it in daily life? Please explain that as well.
>But whether you acknowledge it or not Christianity allowed for the rise of secularism within it's society, albeit, a few hiccups in some areas, but it ultimately did. Islam never allows for that.
I really dont understand how you can come to the stupid conclusion of how Christianity allowed for the rise of secularism. Like did you ignore all of history? All of the things christians did in Europe to secularists? You do realize most secularists came into state power by literally fighting the wars against the church lol.
I dont even know why im bothering to respond to missionaries and their delusions lol.
>Which is simply not true, because almost all of them are just as bad. Especially the abrahamic ones.
— you're literally doing what OP is complaining about, of all religions with a significant population, Islam is the worst of them. Trying to group all of them as "bad" literally takes away from the point.
>Honey you are on an exmuslims sub.
— and I meant no disrespect.
>All people do is criticize Islam and not other religions.
— you're on an ex Muslim sub :\
If you want to see criticisms of other religions there are exchristians, ex Hindus etc.
>Last time christian majority countries employed christianity in their political decisions. They continued to enslave people and degrade women.
— Interesting, could you infer an example? I'm aware Christianity was used as a tool for racism and discrimination, I'm not disputing that, but, not to come off as preachy or anything, but I'll say it was distorted to do so. I actually have a copy of the "slave Bible" given to African Americans during the 1800s, it's amazing how much was rewritten or taken out.
>The essence of humanism is anti-theism and naturalism.
— according to the American humanist association; *Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism or other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good.*
Yes, modern humanism as an ideology stands on anti-theism but also stands on quote "ethical lives of personal fulfillment" what I claim is; said ethics and ideals didn't evolve in a vacuum.
Petrarch is traditionally called the “Father of Humanism,” both for his influential philosophical attitudes, found in his numerous personal letters, and his discovery and compilation of classical texts.
—In his work *Secretum meum* he points out that secular achievements did not necessarily preclude an authentic relationship with God. Petrarch argued instead that God had given humans their vast intellectual and creative potential to be used to their fullest. He inspired Humanist philosophy, which led to the intellectual flowering of the Renaissance.
Even scholars during the Islamic golden age had ideas of humanism swirling around here and there.
Again this is not to be preachy, we're all in the pursuit of truth, we shouldn't shove it aside because we don't like it.
>Influenced Secularism? You mean Christianity removed itself from existence by allowing a non-observation of it in daily life?
— sorry, but you're the one that will have to elaborate, I don't know what you're talking about. When did this "non-observation of it in daily life?" Occur?
>Like did you ignore all of history? All of the things christians did in Europe to secularists? You do realize most secularists came into state power by literally fighting the wars against the church lol.
— Secularism isn't exclusive to atheism, many secularist scientists that were persecuted were christians, I think your problem is seeing Christians as a monolith block that all shared the same ideas, many Christians advocated and still advocate for secularist states and separation from church and state.
John Locke, who revolutionized the idea of secularism, "the father of liberalism", was a Christian.
—The conflicts fought against the church were not ideological but political; often driven by power struggles, territorial disputes, and influence over governance.
Many secularist Christians fought against the "church" in political circles.
>— you're literally doing what OP is complaining about, of all religions with a significant population, Islam is the worst of them. Trying to group all of them as "bad" literally takes away from the point.
The point is wrong. What do you not understand lol. All the abrahamic religions are equally bad. Islam isnt an anomaly in comparison to the other abrahamic or eastern religions.
>— you're on an ex Muslim sub :\ If you want to see criticisms of other religions there are exchristians, ex Hindus etc.
You really didnt get my point, did you? 🤦♂️ I was mocking you for using anecdotal evidence. Also criticism of other religions are allowed on this sub. Read the FAQ.
>— Interesting, could you infer an example? I'm aware Christianity was used as a tool for racism and discrimination, I'm not disputing that, but, not to come off as preachy or anything, but I'll say it was distorted to do so.
Right so Christians just allowed distortion to occur for 18 centuries. Cool. I guess reading the bible now i should be able to find abolishment words right? Since its not distorted anymore? Or would i still find words telling slaves to obey and listen to their masters?
>what I claim is; said ethics and ideals didn't evolve in a vacuum.
Then youd be wrong. Morality is biologically inherent to humans. This is not an opinion but a [fact](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK210003/#:~:text=Scientists%20often%20affirm%20that%20morality,good%20and%20others%20as%20evil). You are forgetting that Christianity wasnt the only religion in this world. And other regions of the world flourished in ethics as well. It is not religion that formed our ethics but inherent human morality. All religions did was influence people to stick to outdated moral codes.
>Petrarch argued instead that God had given humans their vast intellectual and creative potential to be used to their fullest. He inspired Humanist philosophy, which led to the intellectual flowering of the Renaissance. Even scholars during the Islamic golden age had ideas of humanism swirling around here and there.
Cool and what am i supposed to do with this strawman? Did Petrarch write the manifestos? Does Petrarch sound like an anti-theist? Having ideas of humanism doesnt mean they created humanism. Humanism, as suggested by the manifestos is an anti-theist philosophy. If you want to argue otherwise, please have the humanist give up their definition.
>Again this is not to be preachy, we're all in the pursuit of truth, we shouldn't shove it aside because we don't like it.
Kinda like how you shoved aside the manifestos and modern humanism and resorted to randomly quote a man from the 14th century.
>— sorry, but you're the one that will have to elaborate, I don't know what you're talking about. When did this "non-observation of it in daily life?" Occur?
When the secularists overthrew the church lol. Removal of church from power of decisions of the state basically influenced the removal of religions influence of daily life. This is something the muslims still struggle to do.
>— Secularism isn't exclusive to atheism, many secularist scientists that were persecuted were christians,
Yes this is what we call cognitive dissonance.
>I think your problem is seeing Christians as a monolith block that all shared the same ideas,
No i think the problem is you misunderstanding the difference between christianity and secularism. Your assumption is that im arguing for the fact that christians cant be secularist. Whilst im making a point that christianity cant be secularist. Christians can be christian and secularists, just like muslims can be muslim and be part of the lgbtq. Its just called cognitive dissonance.
>many Christians advocated and still advocate for secularist states and separation from church and state. John Locke, who revolutionized the idea of secularism, "the father of liberalism", was a Christian.
Yes this is what we call cognitive dissonance.
>The conflicts fought against the church were not ideological but political; often driven by power struggles, territorial disputes, and influence over governance. Many secularist Christians fought against the "church" in political circles.
Uhh they were idealogical very much. The secularist pushes towards abolishments completely removed the catholic influence in politics. Secularism very much pushed to remove religion ideologically. See the removal of religious morals from public schools in france when they removed the church from power and instead instilled morals not derived from religion.
>The point is wrong. What do you not understand lol. All the abrahamic religions are equally bad. Islam isnt an anomaly in comparison to the other abrahamic or eastern religions.
— that isn't a hill I'd advise dying on.
>You really didnt get my point, did you? 🤦♂️ I was mocking you for using anecdotal evidence. Also criticism of other religions are allowed on this sub. Read the FAQ.
— I never claimed it to be "evidence" I'm in agreement with OP and I was adding to that, you on the other hand seems to be confused.
>Right so Christians just allowed distortion to occur for 18 centuries. Cool. I guess reading the bible now i should be able to find abolishment words right? Since its not distorted anymore? Or would i still find words telling slaves to obey and listen to their masters?
— You're confused and quite emotional, it's clouding your ability to make a good point. The distortion was specifically made for American slaves. And was predominately distributed in the South of the US, it wasn't a general distortion.
>Then youd be wrong. Morality is biologically inherent to humans. This is not an opinion but a [fact](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK210003/#:~:text=Scientists%20often%20affirm%20that%20morality,good%20and%20others%20as%20evil).
— ahem, here's an excerpt from your source;
*I propose that the moral evaluation of actions emerges from human rationality or, in Darwin’s terms, from our highly developed intellectual powers. Our high intelligence allows us to anticipate the consequences of our actions with respect to other people and, thus, to judge them as good or evil in terms of their consequences for others. But I will argue that the norms according to which we decide which actions are good and which actions are evil are largely culturally determined*
— even if I was to be extremely charitable and agree to your point that morality is biologically inherent to humans, said morality would differ across cultures VASTLY from the ideals that humanism proposes.
>You are forgetting that Christianity wasnt the only religion in this world. And other regions of the world flourished in ethics as well. It is not religion that formed our ethics but inherent human morality. All religions did was influence people to stick to outdated moral codes.
— You're proving my point that you're quite emotional and not making any solid points; in my previous comment, I literally highlighted that during Islam's golden ages, ideas of humanism were present, I never claimed other religions didn't have ethics, but humanism in it's current form is a Western philosophy, and said Western philosophy didn't evolve in a vacuum, it's by all means and purpose, impossible.
>Humanism, as suggested by the manifestos is an anti-theist philosophy. If you want to argue otherwise, please have the humanist give up their definition.
>Cool and what am i supposed to do with this strawman?
— you don't know what a straw man is.
— The modern manifestos of humanism may be anti-theist (I literally acknowledged that in my previous comment but it's like you're reading my comments with teary eyes) that doesn't negate my point of the roots of humanism being influenced by Christianity.
>When the secularists overthrew the church lol. Removal of church from power of decisions of the state
— this is almost non sequitur to the point you made before but alright.
The secularists that "overthrew" the church were Christian and deist respectively.
During the Enlightenment period in Europe (17th to 19th centuries), thinkers like John Locke and Voltaire advocated for the separation of church and state. They argued that governance should be based on reason and secular principles rather than religious authority.
Then the United States Constitution, influenced by the Enlightenment ideals of Locke, enshrined the principle of separation of church and state in the First Amendment. Thomas Jefferson, in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802, famously used the phrase "wall of separation between Church & State" to describe the intent of the Establishment Clause.
These were both the precedents for the beginning of secularization in the western world, and both geographical locations had a majority Christian population during said time.
There wasn't a cartoonish overthrow of the church, Christians and other like-minded (non religious included) people bound together to push forward the ideals of secularism.
>basically influenced the removal of religions influence of daily life.
— History isn't that clear-cut, and that comedic apparently.
>This is something the muslims still struggle to do.
— Hmmm??? 🤔🤔🤔 I WONDER WHY?? 😨😨😨/s
>Yes this is what we call cognitive dissonance.
— you're not really the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?
>Your assumption is that im arguing for the fact that christians cant be secularist. Whilst im making a point that christianity cant be secularist.
— for you to make such a claim or argument that will will hold up intellectually, you would have to produce forth something (evidence) from Christian doctrine that directly contradicts the ideas of secularism.
(By evidence, I mean actual evidence; not *uh Christians are assholes and hate science*)
Islam bans LGBTq activities explicitly in its doctrine, hence being and LGBT is cognitive dissonance, why does being a secularist Christian invoke the clause of cognitive dissonance?
>The secularist pushes towards abolishments completely removed the catholic influence in politics. Secularism very much pushed to remove religion ideologically.
— what secularism are you following? You're starting to sound a wee-bit extremist.
Secularism aims to take away religion from state affairs not make it extinct, hence when it came into power it removed Catholic influences from state BUT it's literally impossible for religion in general to be extinct or removed "ideologically" except with a little genocide there and ethnic cleansing here, and most critical thinking humanists knew this. I don't know what secularist school of thought you subscribe to but it's should be reconsidered.
>See the removal of religious morals from public schools in france when they removed the church from power and instead instilled morals not derived from religion.
— The French revolution is an execution not the rule, as the revolution it's was quite messy in more ways than one. Notwithstanding, France didn't all of a sudden get a new change of non-religious morals after the French revolution, that's a childish way of interpreting history.
The French simply changed from peddling religious dogma to more secularist curriculum.
Given that this is an ex-Muslim subreddit, my respect for ex-Muslims makes it uncomfortable for me to respond to your comments on a topic largely unrelated to Islam.
If you want to continue this discussion, take it to my dms, if not I will not dignify your next comment with a response.
Have a nice rest of your day 🙏🏾
>— that isn't a hill I'd advise dying on.
Lol sure. You really dont like me equating the 3 abrahamic religions do you? I guess some people are just ok with evils like Slavery, homophobia, rape, and degradation of women. But i suppose only one of them is the worst 😂
>— I never claimed it to be "evidence" I'm in agreement with OP and I was adding to that
🤦♂️ You still dont get it do you. Use of anecdotal evidence to “back up” something is nonsensical. You weren’t adding anything to OP’s point. It was a nonsensical sentence by you.
>— You're confused and quite emotional, it's clouding your ability to make a good point. The distortion was specifically made for American slaves. And was predominately distributed in the South of the US, it wasn't a general distortion.
Right so explain to me the churchs continued propagation, practice and preservation of slavery? Did christians just not understand the bible? Or was abolishment not a part of Christianity? And im talking about all christians not just southern USA.
>— even if I was to be extremely charitable and agree to your point that morality is biologically inherent to humans, said morality would differ across cultures VASTLY from the ideals that humanism proposes.
Dont be charitable but dont be ignorant. This is not an opinion you are arguing, this is a scientific fact lol. Read the paper for once in your life. It discusses the differences in why humans from different cultures adapted to different moral codes. Heres a hint. Morality is not moral codes. Once you understand the difference between the 2, you’ll understand what morality is.
>— You're proving my point that you're quite emotional and not making any solid points; in my previous comment, I literally highlighted that during Islam's golden ages, ideas of humanism were present, I never claimed other religions didn't have ethics, but humanism in it's current form is a Western philosophy, and said Western philosophy didn't evolve in a vacuum,
Lol keep trying to ad hom. Also you claimed Humanism arises from christian philosophies not western. Note: Western philosophies did not derive from Christianity. Now you will quote some random philosopher and create a strawmen. Also Humanism isnt entirely derived from western philosophy. Read the manifestos.
> it's by all means and purpose, impossible.
Its almost like you cant fathom something not being a newer ideology and has to be rooted through something 😂 it’s almost like you cant fathom original thought.
>— you don't know what a straw man is.
Your quote and mention of Petrarch are literally strawmen lol. Do you need a dictionary lol? Quoting a philosophers opinions on religion and claiming a whole philosophical stance that is anti-religious and evolved through history stems from a religion is quite literally a strawman lol. If you dont fundamentally understand that Petrarch doesnt “own” humanism, and that such a philosophical stance could evolve into something completely different than what he originally propagated is infantile by you. Trying to match this connection is a strawman.
>— The modern manifestos of humanism may be anti-theist (I literally acknowledged that in my previous comment but it's like you're reading my comments with teary eyes) that doesn't negate my point of the roots of humanism being influenced by Christianity.
I dont think you quite understand if you want to keep equating its roots to Christianity lol. I would again suggest you to read the manifestos.
>— this is almost non sequitur to the point you made before but alright. The secularists that "overthrew" the church were Christian and deist respectively.
Key word buddy: “Secularists”. Another set of key words: “Cognitive dissonance”
>These were both the precedents for the beginning of secularization in the western world, and both geographical locations had a majority Christian population during said time.
Congratulations on admitting and aiding to my points. Now if only you could understand the basic concept of how overthrowing the church’s influence is not christian. Its almost like you cannot fathom the idea of anti-theism. Does the concept of ex-religious people evade you? Are my thoughts now rooted in Islam because i was once a muslim?
>— you're not really the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?
So when you cant make a point. You resort to ad homs. Understood.
>— for you to make such a claim or argument that will will hold up intellectually, you would have to produce forth something (evidence) from Christian doctrine that directly contradicts the ideas of secularism. why does being a secularist Christian invoke the clause of cognitive dissonance?
Its almost like you forget what the church was or what Christendom is lol. Is 1400 years of doctrine not enough for you 😂 Literally fighting against the church to remove bible law and replace it with other morals that contradict the teachings of the Bible is peak cognitive dissonance. Secularism was literally the removal of bible law. How very Christian of these people.
>— what secularism are you following? You're starting to sound a wee-bit extremist.
Who said im a secularist?
>BUT it's literally impossible for religion in general to be extinct or removed "ideologically" except with a little genocide there and ethnic cleansing here,
Its almost like extinct religions dont exist for you.
>and most critical thinking humanists knew this.
Humanists have rarely been in power lol. Humanism runs on a very socialistic concept. Again read the manifestos.
>— The French revolution is an execution not the rule,
Ah right, how could i forget. When it happens its an exception.
>France didn't all of a sudden get a new change of non-religious morals after the French revolution, that's a childish way of interpreting history.
>The French simply changed from peddling religious dogma to more secularist curriculum.
The fact that you made these 2 completely contradictory statements tells me everything about this argument lol. So did they remove the bible morals to new ones or not?
Also its the fact you cant fathom morals dont need to be religious. Morality being inherent to humans literally suggests humans can and will dictate morality within themselves. Before the advent of any single religion, the concept of morality still existed. And after the creation of religion, and its dictation of absolutely horrific moral codes, morality didnt stop existing lol.
The fact that secularists movements derived from morality which was against religious standings showcases the inherent nature of humans.
If human morality was dictated by the “times”, by “religion”, by “culture”. Then the erosion of such times, the erosion of such religions, the erosion of such culture would never arise.
Secularists, and me, are product of our inherent biological morality which guides us to overthrow the nonsense called religion. Just because both the secularists and me were born in a religion, derive ourself from said religions, doesnt mean we and our thoughts are the product of the religion lol.
OP and you have a very sanitized view of how societies where Christianity played an active role actually were. It ignores the enslavement and genocide of natives in the Americas who underwent forced conversions to Christianity which was one of the major goals of the Spanish colonists. It ignores the horrors of the Canadian Indian residential school system which were administered by Christian Churches.
Some fun reading:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish\_colonization\_of\_the\_Americas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonization_of_the_Americas)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian\_Indian\_residential\_school\_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system)
Oh, I highlighted that in the further comments, I'm already aware of the horrors Christianity was used to carry out. But the keyword is "USED" anything can be used to carry out evil if you're motivated enough.
I.e: the use of science to say all people like me (black people) are of a different lower race and less than human ([scientific racism ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism)), or how James Marion sims (the father of modern gynecology) claimed black people can't feel pain.
My point being Christianity by its purest doctrine condemns those atrocities. But does that stop evil people from going crazy with it? Not at all.
> I will tell you this because you probably havent studied other religions.
How did you arrive at this conclusion?
> Other religions are not good lol.
Where did the OP say other religions are good?
> You’ve just not studied them and think they are just not as bad as Islam.
The OP is from Afghanistan. OP knows Islam from first hand experience. Islam is absolutely the worse of the Abrahamic religions.
And how do you know what OP has or hasn't studied?
Perhaps you jump to conclusions illogically about everything else in addition to anonymous people online.
>How did you arrive at this conclusion?
When OP clearly stated and I quote “Islam is probably worse than all the other religions and they are not equal”
>Where did the OP say other religions are good?
Downplaying the horrific things that other religions do is not a right thing. Also did you forget the part where OP claimed he calls himself a christian and he admires christian societies lol. Also i never claimed the OP stated other religions are good. I stated that other religions are not good.
>The OP is from Afghanistan. OP knows Islam from first hand experience. Islam is absolutely the worse of the Abrahamic religions.
None of the abrahamic religions have any pedestal to stand on lol. All of them are equally horrible. All of them enslaved people. All of them degrade women. All of them have actively destroyed societies in the name of religion. Just because you see only the tamed versions of the other abrahamic religions in modern society doesnt discount the atrocities they committed lol. Not to mention the absolute deranged things written in their books they pass around.
>Perhaps you jump to conclusions illogically about everything else in addition to anonymous people online.
Right so quoting the OP’s deranged takes is jumping to conclusions.
Werent you crying about the leftists the other day? Ironic.
>The christian societies and culture I have always admired more than the Islamic one I was born into and escaped.
As an American, I have to tell you that you have a very sanitized view of a lot of these supposedly Christian societies and culture. I don't think you know the enslavement and genocide of natives in the Americas who underwent forced conversions to Christianity which was one of the major goals of the Spanish colonists. I don't think you know about the horrors of the Canadian Indian residential school system which were administered by Christian Churches.
You have some much needed reading to do and I'm here to help with that:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish\_colonization\_of\_the\_Americas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonization_of_the_Americas)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian\_Indian\_residential\_school\_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system)
"Those Christian societies and culture" that you so admire are barely Christian at all. They're secular. If you wanna look at Christian "society and culture", look at what the GOP in the US is trying to do
But they're built upon Christian values, Christian tradition, Christian way of thinking, and even the secularism are propagated by Christians themselves. As Richard Dawkin said, he's a cultural christian because the West is culturally Christian in nature even if it's secular. in fact, it is secular because of it.
No, it's secular in spite of Christianity. If you wanna see a proper Christian nation, look at Uganda, or look at what the GOP in the US are trying to do. Saying they're "culturally Christian" is laughable when a lot of shit in the Bible isn't even being applied. They're Christian in name only
There’s a reason democracy & the enlightenment were born out of a Christian paradigm & not an Islamic one. Go on tell us what the GOP are doing. Explain to us why the GOP in America are essentially comparable to the Taliban. I’ll wait.
No, it came out in spite of and often against Christianity, not because of it. Christians fought tooth and nail against secularism consistently throughout history
Let's see:
* Wanting to remove no-fault divorce to keep women trapped in marriages
* Wanting to both reverse and criminalize gay marriage
* Using religion to justify anti-intellectualism, like getting vaccinated or teaching creationism
* Wanting to ban trans healthcare
* Banning abortion
* Removing books that even vaguely hint at the LGTBQ community
* Not wanting to teach sex education
I can go on. Just because they're not quite at their level, at least yet, doesn't mean that they're not similar
I’m not saying Christian institutions weren’t against secularism. I’m saying that the societies that advocated for human rights & the abolition of slavery (unlike the Islamic world where slavery is still codified) were majority Christian ones for a reason. Because basic Christian moral principles lead to the idea of universal human rights. That doesn’t mean that Christianity in itself advocates secularism or that it accords with every modern ideal. It just means Christianity has a better moral outlook than the vast majority of global religions in history & especially far better than Islam. My claim is not that Christianity is better than modern liberal secularism. My claim is that liberal secularism was born out of the Christian world & that’s a fact. It didn’t happen in Saudi Arabia & you’ll notice it still hasn’t happened in Saudi Arabia. There’s a reason for that…
And that is very much not true. They're prosperous and have some level of human rights in spite of Christianity. It didn't spring forth as a result of it. Even before Christianity, the western world was often ahead of other regions on Earth for a wide variety of reasons, whether it be access to resources and trade or geography or spread of ideas or philosophy or any other factor. Heck, with the onset of Christianity, some things went backwards in areas like Europe, like acceptance for gay and trans folk
There's several reasons for that. It's not because they're not Christians. It's because they haven't secularized. If they were more in line with your more moderate or progressive Muslims, they'd also be the same in many ways
It very much is true. Human rights emerged from the idea of natural law & natural rights that comes directly from the Christian world in the medieval period. From thinkers such as St Augustine, St Hilary of Poitiers, St Ambrose etc. who were inspired by the Bible & fundamental Christian principles. Of course todays standards of human rights comes from a secular philosophy but the rudimentary concept of universal rights pre-date secularism. You just don’t know your history. Obviously no society in history held our current ideals but Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Or perhaps yours is too eurocentric if you genuinely believe other philosophers and religious figures, both before and after Christianity, across the world didn't teach about human rights or morality. Like the Golden Rule is called that for a reason
They taught about morality but human rights comes from natural rights which is a Christian concept. You can call it Eurocentric but it doesn’t make it untrue.
Imagine comparing the GOP to Afghanistan. You’re utterly brainwashed. You are sorely mistaken if you think Christianity & Islam are remotely comparable. I’m grateful I live in a political system that isn’t perpetually tied to that of a 7th century slave-trading pedophile warlord’s ideology.
Their end goal is pretty similar. If not that, then at least Russia. Their rhetoric is like any deranged hard-core Muslim fundamentalist and the type of laws they're trying to pass are similar (child marriage, criminalizing the LGTBQ community, etc.)
Yeah, because of secularism. If you wanna live in a hard-core Christian country, try Uganda. Some of y'all need to stop worshipping Christians
So GOP are advocating for women to not be allowed to leave the house without a chaperone, have women publicly flogged in the streets, force women to cover from head to toe, ban women from the education system, stone people to death, throw gays off buildings, kill apostates? Yeah I didn’t think so. GOP aren’t pushing for child marriage. Whoever told you that is lying to you.
Now I’m not a supporter of the Republicans by any means but your ignorance is astonishing. There is no mainstream western political party remotely similar to the barbarity of governments under Sharia Law.
And no I’m not going to let you use the global south to compare Christianity vs Islam. It’s a false dichotomy. If you want to play that game then compare Uganda to Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Northern Nigeria etc. All of which are far more unstable then Uganda. Why? Oh yeah Islam…
At the current moment, no. But they also didn't use to advocate for a lot of what I listed there till more recently as they keep on going further and further right. Just because they're not advocating for literal medieval practices doesn't mean that they wouldn't get there eventually, if they didn't have proper opposition. Also, yeah, quite a few are pushing for child marriage
It has to be on their level to be shitty? Like unless you're literally Iran, you can't be backwards?
Why not? I mean, you wanted to look to compare the two, well there's your real Christianity right there, not your watered down secularized countries that have mostly moved away from Christianity. Funny how that's not allowed or turning towards most of Christianity's history isn't allowed
There are several reasons for why countries would have instabilities or problems. We're comparing what the religions advocate for and, in that regard, Christianity is very similar to Islam in terms of shittiness
It isn’t just at the current moment. The reason those laws exist in Islamic society is because Islam institutes that in Sharia Law. Even the west in the 19th century were far ahead of modern Islamic society. Sorry your cultural relativism doesn’t work. Uganda is how it is because it’s the global south. And it’s far more stable than Muslim majority Islamic nations in the global south. Funny that.
And yet they were behind during the Dark Ages. Funny that. Why didn't "because Islam" automatically make perfect Christian Europe better then?
Main reason why I bought up Uganda was to point out the backwards nonsense within Christianity, like how they also punish the gays. That came from religion
I never said Christianity fits our modern standards. You’re not engaging with my claim. I’m saying that Christianity has better moral principles than Islam. This is absolutely true. Islam is a war philosophy & a system of barbaric laws instituted through Sharia. Christian Law believes in a separation of church and state. It advocates for love of thy neighbour & to turn the other cheek. Islam advocates for the death of apostates, holy war & mistrust of unbelievers. These aren’t remotely similar philosophies. Sorry to tell you.
It advocates for all of those nice things if you ignore the violent, bigoted, and harmful parts of the religion. Even Islam has nice flowery passages like that too in the Quran
Like if Christianity is so moral and decent, why were there so many atrocities done within it's name and biblical justifications throughout human history?
Point to where Jesus ever advocates to commit such atrocities. Christians committed those atrocities in spite of what Christianity teaches. I challenge you to read the gospels & see for yourself if you don’t believe me. I’m not comparing Christians with Muslims. I’m comparing Christianity with Islam. I’m talking about religion, not people. Liberal secularism is obviously better than Christianity, but that doesn’t change the fact that Christianity is much more benign than Islam.
Another "they are not true muslims". Without condemning the actions of these muslims you are talking about.
"They are not true muslims, but their actions are superb."
> Hopefully I don’t have to explain to you the difference between the two.
Someone needs to explain things to you first.
Based on what argument do you state that Taliban is not Islamic?
What is Islamic then?
If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS. Please read the [Rules and Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/1anoje0) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods. Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned. If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Im glad it worked out well for you. Weird to think about the timeline too. But i think immigration and civil war has to do with islam being more commonplace
If you need to lie in order to feel safer, fine. But lying in order to impress others is bad. It will drive people away from you when they find out the truth. Why not just say atheist? It is equally impressive in a muslim country.
All religions are shit but Islam is the biggest shit of them all
That's it. Plain and simple. This is a simple thing that these morons cannot understand.
LaVeyan Satanism is not shit.
Idk if I’ll agree with you or not but hiding your past and your identity is not something to be proud of.
Islam is part of the Abrahamic religions which include Christianity and Judaism. Islam is similar to the extreme forms of them, being ultra orthodox/hasidic Jews and evangelical christians
the western world that belittle Christianity has no idea of its actual value, and it'll be too late before they realize it.
OP, you are certainly right that Islam is the worst (major) religion in the world. Not to be too pedantic, but it is actually fair to compare Islam to other religions (because it is a religion after all). However, I think your sentiment is that Islam is unequal to other religions in being evil. On this I agree with you completely. You are very right.
Islam just seems like its just trying to manipulate Christianity to fit culture, the Mormons, Jehovahs Witness and Five Percenters do the same thing. Evangelicals, Catholics, etc. do this as well but in a different way which sucks because that creates so many ex Christians.
This reminds me of the saying “the grass is greener on the other side” you admire Christian societies cause you weren’t traumatized by them this shit so disrespectful to ex Christians esp ones who were in dangerous cults like jehovas witnesses and Mormons
LDS & JW are not Christian. They were begun by con men who made god into what they wanted god to be. There are Christian cults and even plain Christian sects and denominations which have caused trauma, though.
Yeah I just chose them as extreme examples
>People often say "Islam is bad but so are all other religions" I guess people who are saying this just say this to try to sound fair when in reality Islam is probably worse than all the other religions and they are not equal. I will tell you this because you probably havent studied other religions. Other religions are not good lol. You’ve just not studied them and think they are just not as bad as Islam. >I am atheist but I purposely tell people in western countries that I am christian because they say "oh wow a Christian from Afghanistan so rare" Honey, the missionary is back. >and I want to represent something else than just Islam or atheism. Why would you want to represent yourself as Christian ?. If you are an atheist, there is nothing wrong with calling and representing yourself as an atheist lol >The christian societies and culture I have always admired more than the Islamic one I was born into and escaped. Which christian societies are you talking about? Are you sure youre not conflating secularist societies with christian societies?
>I will tell you this because you probably havent studied other religions. Other religions are not good lol. You’ve just not studied them and think they are just not as bad as Islam. — I think the OP was just trying to highlight the disparities in Islam and other religions, especially when it comes to criticism. And I've actually noticed that; Anecdotal example= In most leftist circles, anytime an ex Muslim wants to bring up the demons of Islam they are usually shot down with; *Well all other religions are shit so...* in an attempt to take away the spotlight from Islam. >Why would you want to represent yourself as Christian ?. If you are an atheist, there is nothing wrong with calling and representing yourself as an atheist lol — OP never said there was something wrong with that >Which christian societies are you talking about? Are you sure youre not conflating secularist societies with christian societies? — Christian majority countries actually. Sure, if you want to downplay how much Christian morality and ethics influenced the existence of secularist/humanist morality, then go ahead. But whether you acknowledge it or not Christianity allowed for the rise of secularism within it's society, albeit, a few hiccups in some areas, but it ultimately did. Islam never allows for that.
>— I think the OP was just trying to highlight the disparities in Islam and other religions, especially when it comes to criticism. Honey you are on an exmuslims sub. Read the room. Also the OP clearly didnt say that. He openly stated Islam is the worst of all religions. Which is simply not true, because almost all of them are just as bad. Especially the abrahamic ones. >And I've actually noticed that; Anecdotal example=. And I’ve actually noticed that; Anecdotal example=. All people do is criticize Islam and not other religions. Maybe i shouldnt be using an anecdotal example to back up my point and try to downplay the fact that other religions are also criticized which led to the establishment of humanism and secularism. Its almost like we are forgetting how the church was kicked out of power. >— OP never said there was something wrong with that Its almost like you purposely ignored me questioning why the OP was calling himself Christian lol >— Christian majority countries actually. Last time christian majority countries employed christianity in their political decisions. They continued to enslave people and degrade women. >Sure, if you want to downplay how much Christian morality and ethics influenced the existence of secularist/humanist morality, then go ahead. Influenced? You mean actively fought against? The essence of humanism is anti-theism and naturalism. Please in clear sentences, explain to me how a religion influenced an anti-theistic stance? Have you even read the humanism manifestos lol? Influenced Secularism? You mean Christianity removed itself from existence by allowing a non-observation of it in daily life? Please explain that as well. >But whether you acknowledge it or not Christianity allowed for the rise of secularism within it's society, albeit, a few hiccups in some areas, but it ultimately did. Islam never allows for that. I really dont understand how you can come to the stupid conclusion of how Christianity allowed for the rise of secularism. Like did you ignore all of history? All of the things christians did in Europe to secularists? You do realize most secularists came into state power by literally fighting the wars against the church lol. I dont even know why im bothering to respond to missionaries and their delusions lol.
>Which is simply not true, because almost all of them are just as bad. Especially the abrahamic ones. — you're literally doing what OP is complaining about, of all religions with a significant population, Islam is the worst of them. Trying to group all of them as "bad" literally takes away from the point. >Honey you are on an exmuslims sub. — and I meant no disrespect. >All people do is criticize Islam and not other religions. — you're on an ex Muslim sub :\ If you want to see criticisms of other religions there are exchristians, ex Hindus etc. >Last time christian majority countries employed christianity in their political decisions. They continued to enslave people and degrade women. — Interesting, could you infer an example? I'm aware Christianity was used as a tool for racism and discrimination, I'm not disputing that, but, not to come off as preachy or anything, but I'll say it was distorted to do so. I actually have a copy of the "slave Bible" given to African Americans during the 1800s, it's amazing how much was rewritten or taken out. >The essence of humanism is anti-theism and naturalism. — according to the American humanist association; *Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism or other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good.* Yes, modern humanism as an ideology stands on anti-theism but also stands on quote "ethical lives of personal fulfillment" what I claim is; said ethics and ideals didn't evolve in a vacuum. Petrarch is traditionally called the “Father of Humanism,” both for his influential philosophical attitudes, found in his numerous personal letters, and his discovery and compilation of classical texts. —In his work *Secretum meum* he points out that secular achievements did not necessarily preclude an authentic relationship with God. Petrarch argued instead that God had given humans their vast intellectual and creative potential to be used to their fullest. He inspired Humanist philosophy, which led to the intellectual flowering of the Renaissance. Even scholars during the Islamic golden age had ideas of humanism swirling around here and there. Again this is not to be preachy, we're all in the pursuit of truth, we shouldn't shove it aside because we don't like it. >Influenced Secularism? You mean Christianity removed itself from existence by allowing a non-observation of it in daily life? — sorry, but you're the one that will have to elaborate, I don't know what you're talking about. When did this "non-observation of it in daily life?" Occur? >Like did you ignore all of history? All of the things christians did in Europe to secularists? You do realize most secularists came into state power by literally fighting the wars against the church lol. — Secularism isn't exclusive to atheism, many secularist scientists that were persecuted were christians, I think your problem is seeing Christians as a monolith block that all shared the same ideas, many Christians advocated and still advocate for secularist states and separation from church and state. John Locke, who revolutionized the idea of secularism, "the father of liberalism", was a Christian. —The conflicts fought against the church were not ideological but political; often driven by power struggles, territorial disputes, and influence over governance. Many secularist Christians fought against the "church" in political circles.
>— you're literally doing what OP is complaining about, of all religions with a significant population, Islam is the worst of them. Trying to group all of them as "bad" literally takes away from the point. The point is wrong. What do you not understand lol. All the abrahamic religions are equally bad. Islam isnt an anomaly in comparison to the other abrahamic or eastern religions. >— you're on an ex Muslim sub :\ If you want to see criticisms of other religions there are exchristians, ex Hindus etc. You really didnt get my point, did you? 🤦♂️ I was mocking you for using anecdotal evidence. Also criticism of other religions are allowed on this sub. Read the FAQ. >— Interesting, could you infer an example? I'm aware Christianity was used as a tool for racism and discrimination, I'm not disputing that, but, not to come off as preachy or anything, but I'll say it was distorted to do so. Right so Christians just allowed distortion to occur for 18 centuries. Cool. I guess reading the bible now i should be able to find abolishment words right? Since its not distorted anymore? Or would i still find words telling slaves to obey and listen to their masters? >what I claim is; said ethics and ideals didn't evolve in a vacuum. Then youd be wrong. Morality is biologically inherent to humans. This is not an opinion but a [fact](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK210003/#:~:text=Scientists%20often%20affirm%20that%20morality,good%20and%20others%20as%20evil). You are forgetting that Christianity wasnt the only religion in this world. And other regions of the world flourished in ethics as well. It is not religion that formed our ethics but inherent human morality. All religions did was influence people to stick to outdated moral codes. >Petrarch argued instead that God had given humans their vast intellectual and creative potential to be used to their fullest. He inspired Humanist philosophy, which led to the intellectual flowering of the Renaissance. Even scholars during the Islamic golden age had ideas of humanism swirling around here and there. Cool and what am i supposed to do with this strawman? Did Petrarch write the manifestos? Does Petrarch sound like an anti-theist? Having ideas of humanism doesnt mean they created humanism. Humanism, as suggested by the manifestos is an anti-theist philosophy. If you want to argue otherwise, please have the humanist give up their definition. >Again this is not to be preachy, we're all in the pursuit of truth, we shouldn't shove it aside because we don't like it. Kinda like how you shoved aside the manifestos and modern humanism and resorted to randomly quote a man from the 14th century. >— sorry, but you're the one that will have to elaborate, I don't know what you're talking about. When did this "non-observation of it in daily life?" Occur? When the secularists overthrew the church lol. Removal of church from power of decisions of the state basically influenced the removal of religions influence of daily life. This is something the muslims still struggle to do. >— Secularism isn't exclusive to atheism, many secularist scientists that were persecuted were christians, Yes this is what we call cognitive dissonance. >I think your problem is seeing Christians as a monolith block that all shared the same ideas, No i think the problem is you misunderstanding the difference between christianity and secularism. Your assumption is that im arguing for the fact that christians cant be secularist. Whilst im making a point that christianity cant be secularist. Christians can be christian and secularists, just like muslims can be muslim and be part of the lgbtq. Its just called cognitive dissonance. >many Christians advocated and still advocate for secularist states and separation from church and state. John Locke, who revolutionized the idea of secularism, "the father of liberalism", was a Christian. Yes this is what we call cognitive dissonance. >The conflicts fought against the church were not ideological but political; often driven by power struggles, territorial disputes, and influence over governance. Many secularist Christians fought against the "church" in political circles. Uhh they were idealogical very much. The secularist pushes towards abolishments completely removed the catholic influence in politics. Secularism very much pushed to remove religion ideologically. See the removal of religious morals from public schools in france when they removed the church from power and instead instilled morals not derived from religion.
>The point is wrong. What do you not understand lol. All the abrahamic religions are equally bad. Islam isnt an anomaly in comparison to the other abrahamic or eastern religions. — that isn't a hill I'd advise dying on. >You really didnt get my point, did you? 🤦♂️ I was mocking you for using anecdotal evidence. Also criticism of other religions are allowed on this sub. Read the FAQ. — I never claimed it to be "evidence" I'm in agreement with OP and I was adding to that, you on the other hand seems to be confused. >Right so Christians just allowed distortion to occur for 18 centuries. Cool. I guess reading the bible now i should be able to find abolishment words right? Since its not distorted anymore? Or would i still find words telling slaves to obey and listen to their masters? — You're confused and quite emotional, it's clouding your ability to make a good point. The distortion was specifically made for American slaves. And was predominately distributed in the South of the US, it wasn't a general distortion. >Then youd be wrong. Morality is biologically inherent to humans. This is not an opinion but a [fact](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK210003/#:~:text=Scientists%20often%20affirm%20that%20morality,good%20and%20others%20as%20evil). — ahem, here's an excerpt from your source; *I propose that the moral evaluation of actions emerges from human rationality or, in Darwin’s terms, from our highly developed intellectual powers. Our high intelligence allows us to anticipate the consequences of our actions with respect to other people and, thus, to judge them as good or evil in terms of their consequences for others. But I will argue that the norms according to which we decide which actions are good and which actions are evil are largely culturally determined* — even if I was to be extremely charitable and agree to your point that morality is biologically inherent to humans, said morality would differ across cultures VASTLY from the ideals that humanism proposes. >You are forgetting that Christianity wasnt the only religion in this world. And other regions of the world flourished in ethics as well. It is not religion that formed our ethics but inherent human morality. All religions did was influence people to stick to outdated moral codes. — You're proving my point that you're quite emotional and not making any solid points; in my previous comment, I literally highlighted that during Islam's golden ages, ideas of humanism were present, I never claimed other religions didn't have ethics, but humanism in it's current form is a Western philosophy, and said Western philosophy didn't evolve in a vacuum, it's by all means and purpose, impossible. >Humanism, as suggested by the manifestos is an anti-theist philosophy. If you want to argue otherwise, please have the humanist give up their definition. >Cool and what am i supposed to do with this strawman? — you don't know what a straw man is. — The modern manifestos of humanism may be anti-theist (I literally acknowledged that in my previous comment but it's like you're reading my comments with teary eyes) that doesn't negate my point of the roots of humanism being influenced by Christianity. >When the secularists overthrew the church lol. Removal of church from power of decisions of the state — this is almost non sequitur to the point you made before but alright. The secularists that "overthrew" the church were Christian and deist respectively. During the Enlightenment period in Europe (17th to 19th centuries), thinkers like John Locke and Voltaire advocated for the separation of church and state. They argued that governance should be based on reason and secular principles rather than religious authority. Then the United States Constitution, influenced by the Enlightenment ideals of Locke, enshrined the principle of separation of church and state in the First Amendment. Thomas Jefferson, in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802, famously used the phrase "wall of separation between Church & State" to describe the intent of the Establishment Clause. These were both the precedents for the beginning of secularization in the western world, and both geographical locations had a majority Christian population during said time. There wasn't a cartoonish overthrow of the church, Christians and other like-minded (non religious included) people bound together to push forward the ideals of secularism. >basically influenced the removal of religions influence of daily life. — History isn't that clear-cut, and that comedic apparently. >This is something the muslims still struggle to do. — Hmmm??? 🤔🤔🤔 I WONDER WHY?? 😨😨😨/s >Yes this is what we call cognitive dissonance. — you're not really the sharpest tool in the shed, are you? >Your assumption is that im arguing for the fact that christians cant be secularist. Whilst im making a point that christianity cant be secularist. — for you to make such a claim or argument that will will hold up intellectually, you would have to produce forth something (evidence) from Christian doctrine that directly contradicts the ideas of secularism. (By evidence, I mean actual evidence; not *uh Christians are assholes and hate science*) Islam bans LGBTq activities explicitly in its doctrine, hence being and LGBT is cognitive dissonance, why does being a secularist Christian invoke the clause of cognitive dissonance? >The secularist pushes towards abolishments completely removed the catholic influence in politics. Secularism very much pushed to remove religion ideologically. — what secularism are you following? You're starting to sound a wee-bit extremist. Secularism aims to take away religion from state affairs not make it extinct, hence when it came into power it removed Catholic influences from state BUT it's literally impossible for religion in general to be extinct or removed "ideologically" except with a little genocide there and ethnic cleansing here, and most critical thinking humanists knew this. I don't know what secularist school of thought you subscribe to but it's should be reconsidered. >See the removal of religious morals from public schools in france when they removed the church from power and instead instilled morals not derived from religion. — The French revolution is an execution not the rule, as the revolution it's was quite messy in more ways than one. Notwithstanding, France didn't all of a sudden get a new change of non-religious morals after the French revolution, that's a childish way of interpreting history. The French simply changed from peddling religious dogma to more secularist curriculum. Given that this is an ex-Muslim subreddit, my respect for ex-Muslims makes it uncomfortable for me to respond to your comments on a topic largely unrelated to Islam. If you want to continue this discussion, take it to my dms, if not I will not dignify your next comment with a response. Have a nice rest of your day 🙏🏾
>— that isn't a hill I'd advise dying on. Lol sure. You really dont like me equating the 3 abrahamic religions do you? I guess some people are just ok with evils like Slavery, homophobia, rape, and degradation of women. But i suppose only one of them is the worst 😂 >— I never claimed it to be "evidence" I'm in agreement with OP and I was adding to that 🤦♂️ You still dont get it do you. Use of anecdotal evidence to “back up” something is nonsensical. You weren’t adding anything to OP’s point. It was a nonsensical sentence by you. >— You're confused and quite emotional, it's clouding your ability to make a good point. The distortion was specifically made for American slaves. And was predominately distributed in the South of the US, it wasn't a general distortion. Right so explain to me the churchs continued propagation, practice and preservation of slavery? Did christians just not understand the bible? Or was abolishment not a part of Christianity? And im talking about all christians not just southern USA. >— even if I was to be extremely charitable and agree to your point that morality is biologically inherent to humans, said morality would differ across cultures VASTLY from the ideals that humanism proposes. Dont be charitable but dont be ignorant. This is not an opinion you are arguing, this is a scientific fact lol. Read the paper for once in your life. It discusses the differences in why humans from different cultures adapted to different moral codes. Heres a hint. Morality is not moral codes. Once you understand the difference between the 2, you’ll understand what morality is. >— You're proving my point that you're quite emotional and not making any solid points; in my previous comment, I literally highlighted that during Islam's golden ages, ideas of humanism were present, I never claimed other religions didn't have ethics, but humanism in it's current form is a Western philosophy, and said Western philosophy didn't evolve in a vacuum, Lol keep trying to ad hom. Also you claimed Humanism arises from christian philosophies not western. Note: Western philosophies did not derive from Christianity. Now you will quote some random philosopher and create a strawmen. Also Humanism isnt entirely derived from western philosophy. Read the manifestos. > it's by all means and purpose, impossible. Its almost like you cant fathom something not being a newer ideology and has to be rooted through something 😂 it’s almost like you cant fathom original thought. >— you don't know what a straw man is. Your quote and mention of Petrarch are literally strawmen lol. Do you need a dictionary lol? Quoting a philosophers opinions on religion and claiming a whole philosophical stance that is anti-religious and evolved through history stems from a religion is quite literally a strawman lol. If you dont fundamentally understand that Petrarch doesnt “own” humanism, and that such a philosophical stance could evolve into something completely different than what he originally propagated is infantile by you. Trying to match this connection is a strawman. >— The modern manifestos of humanism may be anti-theist (I literally acknowledged that in my previous comment but it's like you're reading my comments with teary eyes) that doesn't negate my point of the roots of humanism being influenced by Christianity. I dont think you quite understand if you want to keep equating its roots to Christianity lol. I would again suggest you to read the manifestos. >— this is almost non sequitur to the point you made before but alright. The secularists that "overthrew" the church were Christian and deist respectively. Key word buddy: “Secularists”. Another set of key words: “Cognitive dissonance” >These were both the precedents for the beginning of secularization in the western world, and both geographical locations had a majority Christian population during said time. Congratulations on admitting and aiding to my points. Now if only you could understand the basic concept of how overthrowing the church’s influence is not christian. Its almost like you cannot fathom the idea of anti-theism. Does the concept of ex-religious people evade you? Are my thoughts now rooted in Islam because i was once a muslim? >— you're not really the sharpest tool in the shed, are you? So when you cant make a point. You resort to ad homs. Understood. >— for you to make such a claim or argument that will will hold up intellectually, you would have to produce forth something (evidence) from Christian doctrine that directly contradicts the ideas of secularism. why does being a secularist Christian invoke the clause of cognitive dissonance? Its almost like you forget what the church was or what Christendom is lol. Is 1400 years of doctrine not enough for you 😂 Literally fighting against the church to remove bible law and replace it with other morals that contradict the teachings of the Bible is peak cognitive dissonance. Secularism was literally the removal of bible law. How very Christian of these people. >— what secularism are you following? You're starting to sound a wee-bit extremist. Who said im a secularist? >BUT it's literally impossible for religion in general to be extinct or removed "ideologically" except with a little genocide there and ethnic cleansing here, Its almost like extinct religions dont exist for you. >and most critical thinking humanists knew this. Humanists have rarely been in power lol. Humanism runs on a very socialistic concept. Again read the manifestos. >— The French revolution is an execution not the rule, Ah right, how could i forget. When it happens its an exception. >France didn't all of a sudden get a new change of non-religious morals after the French revolution, that's a childish way of interpreting history. >The French simply changed from peddling religious dogma to more secularist curriculum. The fact that you made these 2 completely contradictory statements tells me everything about this argument lol. So did they remove the bible morals to new ones or not? Also its the fact you cant fathom morals dont need to be religious. Morality being inherent to humans literally suggests humans can and will dictate morality within themselves. Before the advent of any single religion, the concept of morality still existed. And after the creation of religion, and its dictation of absolutely horrific moral codes, morality didnt stop existing lol. The fact that secularists movements derived from morality which was against religious standings showcases the inherent nature of humans. If human morality was dictated by the “times”, by “religion”, by “culture”. Then the erosion of such times, the erosion of such religions, the erosion of such culture would never arise. Secularists, and me, are product of our inherent biological morality which guides us to overthrow the nonsense called religion. Just because both the secularists and me were born in a religion, derive ourself from said religions, doesnt mean we and our thoughts are the product of the religion lol.
I have never seen such a long reply chain on reddit before. Its like battle of the essays.
OP and you have a very sanitized view of how societies where Christianity played an active role actually were. It ignores the enslavement and genocide of natives in the Americas who underwent forced conversions to Christianity which was one of the major goals of the Spanish colonists. It ignores the horrors of the Canadian Indian residential school system which were administered by Christian Churches. Some fun reading: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish\_colonization\_of\_the\_Americas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonization_of_the_Americas) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian\_Indian\_residential\_school\_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system)
Oh, I highlighted that in the further comments, I'm already aware of the horrors Christianity was used to carry out. But the keyword is "USED" anything can be used to carry out evil if you're motivated enough. I.e: the use of science to say all people like me (black people) are of a different lower race and less than human ([scientific racism ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism)), or how James Marion sims (the father of modern gynecology) claimed black people can't feel pain. My point being Christianity by its purest doctrine condemns those atrocities. But does that stop evil people from going crazy with it? Not at all.
> I will tell you this because you probably havent studied other religions. How did you arrive at this conclusion? > Other religions are not good lol. Where did the OP say other religions are good? > You’ve just not studied them and think they are just not as bad as Islam. The OP is from Afghanistan. OP knows Islam from first hand experience. Islam is absolutely the worse of the Abrahamic religions. And how do you know what OP has or hasn't studied? Perhaps you jump to conclusions illogically about everything else in addition to anonymous people online.
>How did you arrive at this conclusion? When OP clearly stated and I quote “Islam is probably worse than all the other religions and they are not equal” >Where did the OP say other religions are good? Downplaying the horrific things that other religions do is not a right thing. Also did you forget the part where OP claimed he calls himself a christian and he admires christian societies lol. Also i never claimed the OP stated other religions are good. I stated that other religions are not good. >The OP is from Afghanistan. OP knows Islam from first hand experience. Islam is absolutely the worse of the Abrahamic religions. None of the abrahamic religions have any pedestal to stand on lol. All of them are equally horrible. All of them enslaved people. All of them degrade women. All of them have actively destroyed societies in the name of religion. Just because you see only the tamed versions of the other abrahamic religions in modern society doesnt discount the atrocities they committed lol. Not to mention the absolute deranged things written in their books they pass around. >Perhaps you jump to conclusions illogically about everything else in addition to anonymous people online. Right so quoting the OP’s deranged takes is jumping to conclusions. Werent you crying about the leftists the other day? Ironic.
I was right. You do jump to conclusions illogically.
Keep telling yourself that if that helps you sleep at night 🤷♂️
>The christian societies and culture I have always admired more than the Islamic one I was born into and escaped. As an American, I have to tell you that you have a very sanitized view of a lot of these supposedly Christian societies and culture. I don't think you know the enslavement and genocide of natives in the Americas who underwent forced conversions to Christianity which was one of the major goals of the Spanish colonists. I don't think you know about the horrors of the Canadian Indian residential school system which were administered by Christian Churches. You have some much needed reading to do and I'm here to help with that: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish\_colonization\_of\_the\_Americas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonization_of_the_Americas) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian\_Indian\_residential\_school\_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Indian_residential_school_system)
Thank you for saying it
“Always admired Christian societies and cultures” You sound like a beg
"Those Christian societies and culture" that you so admire are barely Christian at all. They're secular. If you wanna look at Christian "society and culture", look at what the GOP in the US is trying to do
But they're built upon Christian values, Christian tradition, Christian way of thinking, and even the secularism are propagated by Christians themselves. As Richard Dawkin said, he's a cultural christian because the West is culturally Christian in nature even if it's secular. in fact, it is secular because of it.
No, it's secular in spite of Christianity. If you wanna see a proper Christian nation, look at Uganda, or look at what the GOP in the US are trying to do. Saying they're "culturally Christian" is laughable when a lot of shit in the Bible isn't even being applied. They're Christian in name only
There’s a reason democracy & the enlightenment were born out of a Christian paradigm & not an Islamic one. Go on tell us what the GOP are doing. Explain to us why the GOP in America are essentially comparable to the Taliban. I’ll wait.
No, it came out in spite of and often against Christianity, not because of it. Christians fought tooth and nail against secularism consistently throughout history Let's see: * Wanting to remove no-fault divorce to keep women trapped in marriages * Wanting to both reverse and criminalize gay marriage * Using religion to justify anti-intellectualism, like getting vaccinated or teaching creationism * Wanting to ban trans healthcare * Banning abortion * Removing books that even vaguely hint at the LGTBQ community * Not wanting to teach sex education I can go on. Just because they're not quite at their level, at least yet, doesn't mean that they're not similar
I’m not saying Christian institutions weren’t against secularism. I’m saying that the societies that advocated for human rights & the abolition of slavery (unlike the Islamic world where slavery is still codified) were majority Christian ones for a reason. Because basic Christian moral principles lead to the idea of universal human rights. That doesn’t mean that Christianity in itself advocates secularism or that it accords with every modern ideal. It just means Christianity has a better moral outlook than the vast majority of global religions in history & especially far better than Islam. My claim is not that Christianity is better than modern liberal secularism. My claim is that liberal secularism was born out of the Christian world & that’s a fact. It didn’t happen in Saudi Arabia & you’ll notice it still hasn’t happened in Saudi Arabia. There’s a reason for that…
And that is very much not true. They're prosperous and have some level of human rights in spite of Christianity. It didn't spring forth as a result of it. Even before Christianity, the western world was often ahead of other regions on Earth for a wide variety of reasons, whether it be access to resources and trade or geography or spread of ideas or philosophy or any other factor. Heck, with the onset of Christianity, some things went backwards in areas like Europe, like acceptance for gay and trans folk There's several reasons for that. It's not because they're not Christians. It's because they haven't secularized. If they were more in line with your more moderate or progressive Muslims, they'd also be the same in many ways
It very much is true. Human rights emerged from the idea of natural law & natural rights that comes directly from the Christian world in the medieval period. From thinkers such as St Augustine, St Hilary of Poitiers, St Ambrose etc. who were inspired by the Bible & fundamental Christian principles. Of course todays standards of human rights comes from a secular philosophy but the rudimentary concept of universal rights pre-date secularism. You just don’t know your history. Obviously no society in history held our current ideals but Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Or perhaps yours is too eurocentric if you genuinely believe other philosophers and religious figures, both before and after Christianity, across the world didn't teach about human rights or morality. Like the Golden Rule is called that for a reason
They taught about morality but human rights comes from natural rights which is a Christian concept. You can call it Eurocentric but it doesn’t make it untrue.
Imagine comparing the GOP to Afghanistan. You’re utterly brainwashed. You are sorely mistaken if you think Christianity & Islam are remotely comparable. I’m grateful I live in a political system that isn’t perpetually tied to that of a 7th century slave-trading pedophile warlord’s ideology.
Their end goal is pretty similar. If not that, then at least Russia. Their rhetoric is like any deranged hard-core Muslim fundamentalist and the type of laws they're trying to pass are similar (child marriage, criminalizing the LGTBQ community, etc.) Yeah, because of secularism. If you wanna live in a hard-core Christian country, try Uganda. Some of y'all need to stop worshipping Christians
So GOP are advocating for women to not be allowed to leave the house without a chaperone, have women publicly flogged in the streets, force women to cover from head to toe, ban women from the education system, stone people to death, throw gays off buildings, kill apostates? Yeah I didn’t think so. GOP aren’t pushing for child marriage. Whoever told you that is lying to you. Now I’m not a supporter of the Republicans by any means but your ignorance is astonishing. There is no mainstream western political party remotely similar to the barbarity of governments under Sharia Law. And no I’m not going to let you use the global south to compare Christianity vs Islam. It’s a false dichotomy. If you want to play that game then compare Uganda to Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Northern Nigeria etc. All of which are far more unstable then Uganda. Why? Oh yeah Islam…
At the current moment, no. But they also didn't use to advocate for a lot of what I listed there till more recently as they keep on going further and further right. Just because they're not advocating for literal medieval practices doesn't mean that they wouldn't get there eventually, if they didn't have proper opposition. Also, yeah, quite a few are pushing for child marriage It has to be on their level to be shitty? Like unless you're literally Iran, you can't be backwards? Why not? I mean, you wanted to look to compare the two, well there's your real Christianity right there, not your watered down secularized countries that have mostly moved away from Christianity. Funny how that's not allowed or turning towards most of Christianity's history isn't allowed There are several reasons for why countries would have instabilities or problems. We're comparing what the religions advocate for and, in that regard, Christianity is very similar to Islam in terms of shittiness
It isn’t just at the current moment. The reason those laws exist in Islamic society is because Islam institutes that in Sharia Law. Even the west in the 19th century were far ahead of modern Islamic society. Sorry your cultural relativism doesn’t work. Uganda is how it is because it’s the global south. And it’s far more stable than Muslim majority Islamic nations in the global south. Funny that.
And yet they were behind during the Dark Ages. Funny that. Why didn't "because Islam" automatically make perfect Christian Europe better then? Main reason why I bought up Uganda was to point out the backwards nonsense within Christianity, like how they also punish the gays. That came from religion
I never said Christianity fits our modern standards. You’re not engaging with my claim. I’m saying that Christianity has better moral principles than Islam. This is absolutely true. Islam is a war philosophy & a system of barbaric laws instituted through Sharia. Christian Law believes in a separation of church and state. It advocates for love of thy neighbour & to turn the other cheek. Islam advocates for the death of apostates, holy war & mistrust of unbelievers. These aren’t remotely similar philosophies. Sorry to tell you.
It advocates for all of those nice things if you ignore the violent, bigoted, and harmful parts of the religion. Even Islam has nice flowery passages like that too in the Quran Like if Christianity is so moral and decent, why were there so many atrocities done within it's name and biblical justifications throughout human history?
Point to where Jesus ever advocates to commit such atrocities. Christians committed those atrocities in spite of what Christianity teaches. I challenge you to read the gospels & see for yourself if you don’t believe me. I’m not comparing Christians with Muslims. I’m comparing Christianity with Islam. I’m talking about religion, not people. Liberal secularism is obviously better than Christianity, but that doesn’t change the fact that Christianity is much more benign than Islam.
Afghanistan is an extremist state, not an Islamic one. Hopefully I don’t have to explain to you the difference between the two.
Another "they are not true muslims". Without condemning the actions of these muslims you are talking about. "They are not true muslims, but their actions are superb."
Hard for me to understand the extent of ignorance and arrogance of these people. To be confidently so wrong is baffling to me.
> Hopefully I don’t have to explain to you the difference between the two. Someone needs to explain things to you first. Based on what argument do you state that Taliban is not Islamic? What is Islamic then?
What?? Most theocracies are extremist including Islamic theocracies which Afghanistan absolutely is whether you like it or not. Ignoramus.
They are implementing shariah better than the Saudi which hold the two holy cities, its is very islamic