my opinion on the koon goshadi month of muslims and other shit-e witchcraft rituals

[feyenoord]

Shahin,

Keyvan does not criticize religion. I have seen many people doing that on this website, which is fine. I have never had trouble with them. However, Keyvan is not doing it based on content. What he does is inciting hatred and in some occasions call for massacre.

You can defending him. However, this has put you in a hypocritical position, along with a weak argument of direct vs indirect insult . I have not seen any bloody civilized post from this guy. So, when people start sparring with him (right, or wrongly as in this occasion) it is his own fault as he has a bad reputation.

 

[shahinc]

Shahin,

Keyvan does not criticize religion. I have seen many people doing that on this website, which is fine. I have never had trouble with them. However, Keyvan is not doing it based on content. What he does is inciting hatred and in some occasions call for massacre.

You can defending him. However, this has put you in a hypocritical position, along with a weak argument of direct vs indirect insult . I have not seen any bloody civilized post from this guy. So, when people start sparring with him (right, or wrongly as in this occasion) it is his own fault as he has a bad reputation.

Feyenoord
What Keyvan did is very debatable and has been the topic of this whole thread and you can see many people here agree that he has the right to express his views.
Now, the Direct vs Indirect argument, be it Weak or Strong, Right or Wrong, has been the norm here when it comes to different social groups and political and ideological affiliations.

Now, if Islam is different then so be it and it needs to be cleared by the MODS here. That is the whole argument.

 

[Messi]

Seeing that you like Chinaski's post and how you disliked Keyvan's original post, can you tell us what is your stand on criticizing a religion ?! I am just curious because based on Chinaski, Keyvan has all the rights int he world to Criticize Islam since he does not believe in anything.

see, as usual u missed the point again, but you go around questioning other peoples reasoning when yours itself is so flawed. did you even read my posts? if so I do not understand what u are asking there. Yes, I am fully behind criticizing religion, Islam or anyother religion, however I am 100% against intolerent bigots who says criticize 1 religion, while they practise religion themselves, I'm also against people who critiocize others religions but get offended and start throwing insults once somebody criticizes their religion, as was clearly the case with you. if you are allowed to say fuck islam, you should be allowe dtos ay fuck bahai, christiniaty, judaism, or any x religion. double standards are not democracy.

 

[Chinaski]

Shahin,

along with a weak argument of direct vs indirect insult .

This was not a weak argument of shahin. Its actually not about direct or indirect but solely about what and who exactly you insult. There are different kinds of insults. You wanna have an example? Here we go: Is it the same when i insult your mother or AC Milan?

The same is happening here. You can insult Islam all day, it should be fine. Keyvan did not insult anyone personally and called no ones name so his post was fine. Now its another story if you like or dislike his tone, his way of expressing bla bla... but its not a reason to start throwing shit at him personally. As a matter of fact he is not banned because of his post but because of his personal insults towards payan. The only unfair thing is, if you ban him, then you should ban payan for even longer for starting to insult him personally. End of

 

[Chinaski]

I am fully behind criticizing religion, Islam or anyother religion, however I am 100% against intolerent bigots who says criticize 1 religion, while they practise religion themselves, I'm also against people who critiocize others religions but get offended and start throwing insults once somebody criticizes their religion

But its not the case with keyvan. The guy is not defending any religion and doesnt practice a religion either. He is not been hypocritical here, he is just walking on the same line that he is known for.

 

[Natural]

But its not the case with keyvan. The guy is not defending any religion and doesnt practice a religion either. He is not been hypocritical here, he is just walking on the same line that he is known for.

He's referring to Shahinc here Chinaski jaan. Shahinc believes in one set of backwards fairy tale stories and mocks others for believing in a different set of backwards fairy tale stories without having a bit sense of irony. and he cries foul when someone criticizes his faith while he has no problem bad mouthing other people's faith.. there's nothing more hypocritical than that. it's too disgusting, but im glad i was able to point it out and display a very accurate example of that for everyone to see.

 

[Messi]

@ Chinaski I wasn't talking about Keyvan, I was talking about shahinc, his double standards are laughable. Keyvan can say fuck islam but at least he has no religion himself and hence doesnt get offended if someone says it to him so he isn't really a hypocrite. Not the case with shahinc, he always promotes islam bashing under the "freedom of speech" pretense but when somebody said fuck his religion (as an example even) he clearly got offended and angry, and he threw in 2 or 3 insults in his post and then after realising how pathetic his whole argument was, he tried to backtrack with some lame argument about direct vs. indirect insults.
Problem here is that people can not debate with a clear head, as soon as they see a topic like this they feel the instant need to pick a side, the way they see it is like this: either say fuck islam and agree with me or get the fuck out you filthy hezzi <<this is just the same hezzi mentyality that has plagued Iran for over 3 decades, just because it's the other way round doesn't make it alright.

 

[Chinaski]

Well i usually dont have a problem with shahins views but if its really the case that he is getting upset about his faith being mocked ( nemidoonam aslan mazhabesh chiye, injoori ke fahmidam bahaaiye?) then i dont understand him either. Specially if you know about the history of bahai religion and how it came up, one really shouldnt throw with stones while sitting in a glas house. Bahais believe in some of the most ridiculous khoraafaati stuff i have ever read about.

Thing is i remember shahin having a lot of respect for a person like Ahmad Kasravi but Kasravi dismanteld the bahai faith like no one before. Maybe shahin can clarify some things before i get into this one. I dont want to forejudge or jump anyone before i know about his stance.

 

[feyenoord]

This was not a weak argument of shahin. Its actually not about direct or indirect but solely about what and who exactly you insult. There are different kinds of insults. You wanna have an example? Here we go: Is it the same when i insult your mother or AC Milan?

The same is happening here. You can insult Islam all day, it should be fine. Keyvan did not insult anyone personally and called no ones name so his post was fine. Now its another story if you like or dislike his tone, his way of expressing bla bla... but its not a reason to start throwing shit at him personally. As a matter of fact he is not banned because of his post but because of his personal insults towards payan. The only unfair thing is, if you ban him, then you should ban payan for even longer for starting to insult him personally. End of

Maybe it is because that Payan does not do this often and KP does it in every few threads???

 

[masoudA]

Here is my take on this,


religion = separation ...... Regardless of what they say. I'm against anything that brings separation between all human, so therefore against religions. There is no need for one to be a good person. Respecting others and living your life as good as you possibly can are very important and proper manners to me. Making a decision about what is good and whats bad is a skill/ability that we all have and once again one does not need a religion to show him, how to chose good from the bad, however we have witness time after time that people have made unrealistic/stupid decisions to harm each other based on their "religious" beliefs.

Exellent Point ZE - and I add: Organized Religions (as we have them today) separate man from man but more importantly man from God!! Which I do believe exists - not in the form advertised by Moslems, Christians,.......but the way Zartosht and Buda described it: The "Global Wisdom".

I also need to say something to those who critic KP on his STYLE of criticizing religion. If you get offended by STYLE or the Continuity of KP's critic, then the problem is in you!! It may be because there is a little akhoond inside you!! We all criticize Khamenei and AN to the max and continuously, but nobody with the exception of their BELIEVERS gets offended!!! The reason KP goes overboard may be because he sees the filth more than we do, or may have been impacted by it more than we have been.

 

[Messi]

Problem here is that people can not debate with a clear head, as soon as they see a topic like this they feel the instant need to pick a side, the way they see it is like this: either say fuck islam and agree with me or get the fuck out you filthy hezzi <<this is just the same hezzi mentyality that has plagued Iran for over 3 decades, just because it's the other way round doesn't make it alright.

...

If you get offended by STYLE or the Continuity of KP's critic, then the problem is in you!! It may be because there is a little akhoond inside you!!

 

[deerouz]

@ Chinaski I wasn't talking about Keyvan, I was talking about shahinc,

Nevertheless you were offended with Keyvan's post and called it anti-democratic, but then applauded Chinaski's post. That was the question. What was the difference between the two posts?

 

[Messi]

Nevertheless you were offended with Keyvan's post and called it anti-democratic, but then applauded Chinaski's post.

How are you relating what I said in my first post to criticizing religion? please tell me that. When did I say anything about not criticizing islam? When was I offended by keyvan's post? did I insult keyvan about it? I was talking on a seperate matter that we (iranians) can not debate something with reason and that we can only relate to extremes, you want to criticise islam or any other religion, fine but you can do it in a humane way without resorting to swearing at its followers and calling them idiots. what did that have to do with what I think of criticizing religion? I am and have always been 100% for criticizing religion, I wouldn't practise any religion in 10000 years.

That was the question. What was the difference between the two posts?

Keyvan's post was criticizing islam which is fair enough, he has been doing it in a while. chinaski's post was in response to how people should not be sensitive about their own religion when they go around saying fuck other's religion. I mean when you practise some religion (which itself is derived from islam itself but lets not get into that) why the fuck would insult others for follwoing a different religion? what is your motive? are you saying your religion is so high and mighty and the other is not.

 

[deerouz]

How are you relating what I said in my first post to criticizing religion? please tell me that. When did I say anything about not criticizing islam? When was I offended by keyvan's post? did I insult keyvan about it? I was talking on a seperate matter that we (iranians) can not debate something with reason and that we can only relate to extremes, you want to criticise islam or any other religion, fine but you can do it in a humane way without resorting to swearing at its followers and calling them idiots. what did that have to do with what I think of criticizing religion? I am and have always been 100% for criticizing religion, I wouldn't practise any religion in 10000 years.

Sorry but I am very, very confused now by the highlighted parts in your post. Are you finally approving Keyvan's post or not approving it? and if not, how come you applaud Chinaski's post that had the same tone toward religion and its followers? I didn't get the answer to my question.

 

[payan]

yeah, 30 someyears come to this country ,never worked , giving people bunch bs . going to concert ,khaye ino oono malidan . poshta sar ham harf zadand .don't even do damn thing for anyone .hesadat, oon yeki cheghadar pool dare ,inyekii keero..mi...
khejalat bekshid .
halal ye ede ham rooze migarand .be shoma che,nemirand khoone mardom ,poshtsar inoo oon harf bezand .
bazam begam.
are man in during sarbazi, dropped my rank from sotvan dovami, to ostavari .
shayed 15,20 nafar.mesel man .eftkharmikonam . hamishe bra hame jangeedam .
az tamam sateltli lite ham khoshahm nemiad .majboori be khatre madarm too khoone hast .ye khorde yavashtar ....

 

[Messi]

Honestly I don't know how to help clear your confusion, but here goes:

Sorry but I am very, very confused now by the highlighted parts in your post. Are you finally approving Keyvan's post or not approving it?

Nope, not approving it at all. Not with the tone and the way he wrote it.

and if not, how come you applaud Chinaski's post that had the same tone toward religion and its followers? I didn't get the answer to my question.

Chinaski's post was raising a different point to me at least. I applauded Chinaskis post not for saying fuck x religion, but because he was saying if you insult peoples beliefs then expect people to insult YOUR beliefs in return, THAT is what I was applauding, since shahinc has a long history of talking so highly of his mighty Bahais'm and yet at the same time shitting on Islam, I find that quite hypocrtitcal hence me applauding Chinaski's post.

But I don't get why you're confused, I'm saing I hate religion myself, I question it all the time but I don't agree with the way keyvan does it. As for Chinaski's post see above ^.

 

[shahinc]

Yes, I am fully behind criticizing religion, Islam or anyother religion, however I am 100% against intolerent bigots who says criticize 1 religion, while they practise religion themselves,
.

I think you are the one who has no idea what he is against or for here. You raised objection to Keyvan's post. Here is a News Flash for you :
He does not practice any religion !!! So based on what you said, He should be free to criticize Islam as much as he wants. I don't know how I can make this more clear for you.

I'm also against people who critiocize others religions but get offended and start throwing insults once somebody criticizes their religion, as was clearly the case with you.

Again, you are Wrong. Ba Harfe Gotbeh Siyah Baroon nemiyad Just because someone criticizes my belief, I don't get mad and upset. If I feel like that person is genuine and has a real question for debate which has happened here before for example with Referee and we did continue it over the PM and ...., then I will engage otherwise, if I feel like the person is ignorant and just wants to get a reaction and start a childish game , then I ignore or just laugh at his stupidity.

I said that from my first post under this thread but it seems like you don't understand or believe it which is fine by me. Because I will keep on criticizing Islam when ever I see fit and you CAN get upset and mad about it as far as I care.

 

[shahinc]

Sorry but I am very, very confused now by the highlighted parts in your post. Are you finally approving Keyvan's post or not approving it? and if not, how come you applaud Chinaski's post that had the same tone toward religion and its followers? I didn't get the answer to my question.

That is my exact question. Keyvan is by definition a person that is defined in Chinaski's post, a person who does not believe in any religion.

 

[lordofmordor]

I would say:

1) Keyvan is right to express himself but obviously it is up to one to decide whether their post does insult others. I think it might be more constructive to attack it without cursing and labeling them and then give detail on why and how it damages them. This way it allows the other side to debate it. ( I say this not disagreeing with what Keyvan posted).

2) I agree with Messi that it about having a religious belief and then attacking another. If one has fallen in the chah and living in the past following a religion, you are criticizing yourself, and rightly so, when you have fallen in the chah yourself with another religion. Worst, you are criticizing another and you dont even know you are in the chah yourself.

At the end of day:

1) There are ones that dont have any religion but are not happy and living a life of misery and dont know why their lives are not fulfilled.
2) There are ones that join or born into a religion of abolutisim such as Islam, Jesus, Muhamad and just follow and not sure why their lives are not fulfilled.
3) There are ones that take one step higher and read budhism, Taoism, and have a better understanding of nature and themselves but still dont feel their lives are fulfilled.
4) There are ones that go a step higher and read all religions without getting stuck to one and learn about all of it, yet their lives dont seem fulfilled.
5) And there are ones that reach the high by meditating and become the godliness that they are. Giving all they learned from teachers, society, parents, etc.. and then be with themselves and alert and then become Lao, Jesus, Moses, Muhamad, Budha. Not because they are prophets but rather because they became their true selves.

 

[Messi]

Here is a News Flash for you :
He does not practice any religion !!! So based on what you said, He should be free to criticize Islam as much as he wants. I don't know how I can make this more clear for you.

Why are you bringing up keyvan? I was criticizing the way he gets his pint acorss not what he believes in, I was questioning YOU:

@ Chinaski I wasn't talking about Keyvan, I was talking about shahinc, his double standards are laughable.Keyvan can say fuck islam but at least he has no religion himself and hence doesnt get offended if someone says it to him so he isn't really a hypocrite. Not the case with shahinc, he always promotes islam bashing under the "freedom of speech" pretense but when somebody said fuck his religion (as an example even) he clearly got offended and angry, and he threw in 2 or 3 insults in his post and then after realising how pathetic his whole argument was, he tried to backtrack with some lame argument about direct vs. indirect insults.

Just because someone criticizes my belief, I don't get mad and upset.

Oh really? this was your response after Natural said f**k Bahai's (as an example at that)...

As a person who grow up with Bahai faith teachings, I take no offence on you saying the above. now here is the best part: Your statement above, says more about you and your state of mind than Bahai and Bahai Faith and its followers.
I probably laugh at your ignorance and actually feel sorry for your state of mind or may ignore you or if I am in a great mood maybe try to have a civilized conversion with you about bahai faith BUT it would be wrong of me to take this personally and insult you.

The above post just makes me laugh every time I read it, I have never seen a person contradict themselves so many times within a single post.

If I feel like that person is genuine and has a real question for debate which has happened here before for example with Referee and we did continue it over the PM and ...., then I will engage otherwise, if I feel like the person is ignorant and just wants to get a reaction and start a childish game , then I ignore or just laugh at his stupidity.

Another cheap shot there, you're clearly trying to call me ignorant and stupid just because you're running out of arguments. Just like your other post with natural. So you feel I want to start a childish argument. If so Then why are you bothering to respond to me?

I said that from my first post under this thread but it seems like you don't understand or believe it which is fine by me.

The post above had so many insults directed at me but you see I don't give a shit. I never questioned your intelligence so the fact that you feel the need to resort to personal insults in most of your posts says more about you than me.

I will keep on criticizing Islam when ever I see fit and you CAN get upset and mad about it as far as I care

LOL. When the fuck did I get upset about you criticizing Islam, I already told you what my original post was about. I disagree with everything in Islam, I always question it but I don't run around calling its followers morons and idiots and much worse like keyvan did. But I also DETEST bigots who say 1 thing and the do another, you know like those people who practise a religion which ironically enough is a derivative of Islam, but at the same time they go around freely calling the followers of Islam idiots and what not, but when someone does it to them they get offended, angry and start insulting the person who criticized their religion.

All I'm saying is if you wan't to go around and piss on people's beliefs, feel free to do so but when they give you a taste of your own medicine don't start crying foul and don't insult them, if you do so fine, but expect the same treatment from them. The way you responded to natural's post shows the EXACT SAME mentality that is prevalent amongst bigot akhonds and narrow minded hardcore followers of religion.