It seems what we need is a far stronger and fairer UN, not run by a unipolar US, with American appointments

I am sure that this revelation would be news to the majority of Americans who wish the USA would get out of the UN as it is a bottomless pit of corruption and greed. If the UN is a tool of the USA why did the USA suspend payments to the UN in the 1980s if my memory serves.

The reality is nearly the opposite of Bushy's observation.

The implied apology of Live Exports is accepted. Everyone can get carried away sometimes.

Thank you, for acknowledging that you have not actually experienced or abserved any situation that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that Muslims are more family oriented than the remaining collective.

Pericles, you take a swipe at me for not being sure any more whether or not you regard theism as irrational. But, your quotation from my post is very incomplete. My uncertainty was natural enough, as my two quotes from you make very clear. This is why I moved back onto Dawkins et al, because your own position was not clearly evident.

Then you say –

“But for some reason, religious people are puzzled when non-believers say that on the balance of evidence, there is no God. Why are they surprised?”

Who’s surprised? If I were an empiricist, I wouldn’t believe in God. And I would resist any temptation to believe. It would seem extremely silly. And if I were an ill-mannered empiricist, I would say so aloud.

What do you believe, Pericles? I asked you earlier, and you haven’t said.

Great post, George. Mind you, you were sounding a little TOO reasonable and amiable …. until I reached the colour-blind stiletto at the very end :)

Froggie, perhaps you're right: perhaps we're done.

Pax,

Hi Goodthief, sorry to disappoint you but I have one last little thing I would like to present to this debate before signing off. Please have a good read of this web site.

http://www.anthrobase.com/Txt/I/Isaksson_S_01.htm

How is this different from belief in any religion?

And you wonder why agnostics and Atheists require evidence?

bushbred, I think discussions about whether the only alternative West can offer Muslims is one that rejects their belief in God -- on the grounds that it is irrational and/or beyond sensual perception and scientific verification -- is much to the point of Ameer Ali’s article.

Froggie, I must dispappoint you again, my intention was not to DEFEND my faith but to EXPLAIN the rationale behind an educated Christian’s, (Muslim’s, Jew’s) belief in a Reality beyond the material, howewver I do not mind if you saw it as a defence. You are right, some people who believe in God think they have to defend Him (or their faith) by fighting those who do not believe in Him, or believe differently. Similarly, some malevolent people use their “propensity” to believe in the non-existence of a Higher Authority, to whom they would be accountable, to do all sorts of evil things. In both cases the emphasis is on “some”.

I have to confess that I was also indoctrinated, not only into a Christian outlook but also to three languages (that I allegedly spoke at the age of five), into counting apples and bunnies before I have "developed any knowledge or critical thinking" about mathematics, languages, religion etc. However, I am grateful to my parents and the school for having given me these skills at an early age when one is not yet critical, but easily learns new “propensities” as you call them.

I agree that the thread, actually most of the comments here, are interesting. Of course not in the sense that they would lead to conversions but in the sense that they could lead to the widening of the perspective from one’s own position on different world-views and their rationale.

Close, but not quite.

>>Pericles, you take a swipe at me for not being sure any more whether or not you regard theism as irrational<<

No, goodthief, I "took a swipe" at your determination to deconstruct the words I was using to the point where no word, at all, had any value different from any other word.

>>If I were an empiricist, I wouldn’t believe in God. And I would resist any temptation to believe<<

In which case you would make a very poor empiricist.

If God were to make an appearance and substantiate his position as the supreme being and creator of the universe, an empiricist would have absolutely no problem. The experience would take place, knowledge would be created, understanding would occur.

But the real impact would of course be, if he were to make such an appearance, that there would no longer be any need to have faith as a prerequisite to belief, and *poof*, there goes religion. It would no longer have a function or relevance to our lives.

Everyone would be an empiricist.

>>What do you believe, Pericles? I asked you earlier, and you haven’t said<<

I have answered this question a number of times on this forum, but have no problem answering again.

I believe strongly that there are substantially more questions than answers, and that anyone who believes they have the one right answer is, by definition, wrong.

I believe that man created gods, and not vice versa. That man created gods in his own image, or imagination.

I believe that to propose that there is a single unifying force in the cosmos that is in any way, shape or form akin to our own shape or form, is a particularly human conceit. We have enough difficulty dealing with the ever-unfolding knowledge of the universe to even pretend that we can comprehend the forces that created it.

I believe that there is a place for religion in people's lives, but only until we learn to do without its emotional crutch.