Shorbe

“Once the oil runs out, the Islamic world is going to be collectively as important … as Vanuatu or Surinam, ie. not at all.”

Shorbe there is one angle you’ve missed:
Vanuatu & Surinam do not have populations of 30-60million growing at 3-5% pa --many ME countries do.
Vanuatu & Surinam do not have religious & secular leaders who preach a brand of national socialism which tells their peoples that they are Gods chosen & have a right to inherit the world - many ME countries do.

And most important of all -we in Australia have the Democrats, Refugee lobby Groups & Human Rights Judges & Lawyers who are all too willing to open their hearts & other peoples wallets & our national borders to all & sundry

And what do you think the above mix will produce?
The coming renaissance of Islam - in the west

TR wrote "Where did you get that idea from Sam? Or more to the point, do you have proper empirical evidence for that?"

Hey tr...you are not seeing the full picture here...if a population believes that the seat of the soul is in a persons head region ie it is a current belief that developed over the ages...unless you have 'scientific evidence' to prove otherwise you cant shift that view...further you are trying to flip the onus to other side...ie those who believe this must prove it with science when the belief began when lot of people still thinking the earth was flat and would argue black and blue for it...this road leads to confrontational exchanges like what went to heaven and returned after Jesus died leaving his body on the cross...I hope I got my point across...I take the approach of respect beliefs and watch the acts that result from it to assess and disbelieve/believe...

Science has tried to find proof of soul, like experiments on people dying of tb/or leprosy (i think) placed on a very accurate weighing scale and at exact time of death lost 21grams...do an internet search to read more on this...

So its an area where science has not caught up to all the 'evidence' to prove or disprove...hence the fundamental question 'does god exist' is answered by each of us on pure faith...either way...and one group is very wrong...

Sam
Ps~21grams is a s#*+ load of energy...hiroshima was result of only 600miligrams of fission into energy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Boy ...e=mc2(and c is the speed of light...which the fasted speed known to man and square that gives an ever bigger incomprehensible figure...so the 'm'ie mass to produce enormous energy does not need to be big...

Horus: Like I've said though, their religion is a failed ideology. It simply doesn't work as a tool for human progress. Those over there will have to sort that out. Those over here will have to realise pretty damned quickly that every other migrant group is not only overtaking them, but lapping them, and adjust their game accordingly. I don't believe in exporting our way of life to these clowns (if they're too stupid or lazy to figure it out for themselves, I don't want to hold their hand), nor do I want to enforce it upon those who are here. However, I also don't think we should keep propping this black hole of a world view up with our money, either here or abroad. Let it try to stand on its own two feet without our money for five seconds and watch the whole thing come tumbling down.

Our current obsession with this arse-backwards world view is as much motivated by how dangerous they are as by how dangerous certain people (on both the left and right) are here. Basically, I think we give Islam far too much credit, and that's because there are massive vested interests (both within Islam, but also within elements of both our left, right and media) who need to talk the whole thing up. I think we need to just laugh at these idiots every time they get worked up, and if it goes further, arrest the offenders. The problem lies with our approach to them (since everyone knows they're a joke).

The rational approach would be to ask how much money and effort we waste on worrying about these fools and wonder if we could pour that into more worthwhile projects that would save more lives and/or improve the general quality of life here. Surely the equivalent funding and attention into alternative energy sources or dealing with preventable obesity/lifestyle related diseases would pay greater dividends, to think of but two examples.

Still think a lot of our OLO's need to engage in a thorough knowledge of history as also do most Muslims.

Until it is done one side will forever be about to destroy the other.

Further, for our own people, an important thing to get across is that true science and commonsense are closely related.

Also it is a fact that we can have religion as well as science, but as with politics it must take second place.

Another historical fact, is that it was the English philosopher John Locke, who wrote what is known as the monumental treatise called An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, which is simply a recipe proving how faith without reason is all too often misguided.

In Google you will find that Locke's philosophy not only brought on the English Glorious Revolution of 1688, which rendered Royalty in second place to democracy, but also was first used as the principle for the American Constitution.

Finally, a sensible study of Western history, aided also by certain religous compromises right now from both sides, one feels sure could greatly ease the present global tensions.

An interesting series of postings, which I have enjoyed reading.

The most gentle dismissal of religion, that I have come across, is in the
conversation between Pierre-Simon Laplace and Napoleon the first.

“Napoleon: You have written this huge book on the system of the world without once mentioning the author of the universe.
Laplace: Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis.
Later when told by Napoleon about the incident, Lagrange commented: Ah, but that is a fine hypothesis. It explains so many things.
Quoted in A De Morgan Budget of Paradoxes.”*

Previous posts on this site have underlined some of the more serious consequences to religion and religious thinking. For example, there is a tendency for religious persons to adopt philosophies of fundamentalism and intolerance. I agree with many of the statements.

I think it also true to state that not all warlike and terrorist conflict between religious groups is due to differences of doctrine. Religion and its symbols provide a rallying point in tribal conflict. For instance in the Northern Ireland troubles, or between Sunni and Shia Islam, the fight is between two tribes over material matters. One tribe is perceived to have power, resources, wealth which is denied to the other. Even in Australia deals and business advantages are granted by one member of a religious or ethnic group to another member of the group, to the detriment of outsiders. Religious identity may serve as a surrogate “battle flag.”

I remain an unreformed and unrepentant Dawkinite.

* http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Quotations/Laplace.html

Strange that 'non religous peace loving people' are happy to endorse the murder of millions of unborn children each year. They then claim they don't need any need moral guidance. Unbelievable!