Dawkins getting slaughtered

The English language, English values, English history, etc.

I will teach my child in the Jewish tradition just as you will teach yours in the British.

Its like me saying why wont you teach your child Zulu?

Thats nonsense, a fundamentalist in the religious context is someone who goes back to the religions fundamentals - it was coined at the beginning of the last century by American christians.

It has nothing to do with unchangable beliefs?!?!? In recent years it has taken on new characteristics but this has nothing to do wih changable beliefs.... Osama is always changing his values ands alligning himself with different people.

To suggest that a fundamentalist stops being fundamentalist when their views change is absurd as it is human nature to revisit ones beliefs and every fundamentalist does this.

I think it's ashame that you don't define yourself as British... as its the British values that shape who you are.

However, there is no escaping the British values which your child is taught, he won eat his enemies like some pygmey tribes, he wont eat dog like koreans, he wont marry a 13 year old like some beduein arabs and wont go on a tribal quest when he gets his first pube.... we teach our children our values.

And my tradition is to teach my child that Hashem is the G-d of he jews and that all other G-d's are false idols.

being english isn't a religion - i'm sure i did RE at school but it we didn't HAVE to. i dropped it in the 3rd year.

traditions aren't religion

religion is a tradition.... you're looking at it the wrong way round.

Of course you have british values, you don't date teenagers, you don't have multiple wives, you're probably against cruelty to animals theres a lot more to being british than supporting the monarchy.

I identify myself as a Jewish Briton as both heritages have sculpted my current mindset... to my knowledge (of what you've present) you have been shaped by British and Christian values.... There isn't a British born adult that hasn't been shaped by British values - even the most segregated and isolated reilgious sects extract some values from their host nation.

fuck off you patronizing prick.

you seem pretty indocrtinated in your ways... i'm not trying to convert you to my beliefs. You tell me that G-d deffinat;y doesn't exist and couldn't of brought about existence - yet you suply no proof other than a hunch.

I'll educate my children in the manner I feel appropriate - just as you'll educate yours in the manner you feel fit... there is more than one way of raising a child you shallow minded bigot.

HOW THE FUCK IS DAWKINS BELIEF RATIONAL?!?!?!?!?

He states there is no G-d.... I am asking for one shred of evidence!!!!!!

You're blinded by your own bigotry.

What evidence is there that tips the balance....

show me one shred of evidence.

lol andy you said the evidence tips the balance.... and above you've affirmed theres absolutly no evidence as to the origins of existence.

if there is no evidence either way and if there is nothing we can observe to determine the conception of existence... then how can you possibly tell me that teaching my child about a G-d is wrong or even inprobable?

You're confusing the probability of this universe with that external to existence, a spagetti monster is a diety conjoured up by modern day athiests.... while no one can prove or disprove its existence it would be an incredible coincidence if it was the action which brought about existence.

Religions are different, they have rich teachings and highly intellectual theories to explain genesis, just as the scientific community have highly educated theories to explain creation.

However, this is where you get confused and make a juvenille assumption based on the observable phenomona of this universe; you stupidly think that because something is so in this universe - then it must be so outside of this universe.

Both you and I have NO idea what brought the universe into existence, there are no degrees of probability (Dawkins may state that Ockham's razor would imply that something simple brought about existence; but Ockham's razor is a product of this universe and the complete opposite may be true when you step outside of this universe - it is also a thoery)... So as there are no degrees of probability you cannot possiblity state that there is evidence for or against.

So the question of origin remains a complete matter of faith; you can place faith as dawkins does in a simple explination, alternatively you can place faith as religions do in a diety.... but from a scientific perspective there is NO bias for either as both theories are as probable.

this is the joys of moving into an international world; but because of our stage in history those foreign morals are interpeted through red, white & blue tinted glasses

there IS no basis for believing or disbelieving the existence of a creator, since, as you say, we cannot step outside space and time to check it out. I personally think it unlikely but that is a matter of faith as you say.

Where it becomes stupid is when religions claim to have received word from this creator about how we are to act, or that he's decided to let us live forever as long as we worship him or some other tosh. They all can't be right. If the jews are right then all the others are wrong even though they are all as passionate in their belief as each other.

And it's when these religions impact on societies that the danger lies.

I know they are sometimes a force for good but often (as in Iraq now) they are a force for evil. The trouble is they sanction irrational faith as a way to organise a society. This is inherently dangerous. total rationality is also dangerous as it doesn't take into account the human spirit but my worry about religion is that it is in danger of reconquering the world and bringing in a new age of theocratic totalitarianism.

We are in agreement then, we are of different faiths

Of course we can't all be right, Judaism may be pie in the sky; but I don't believe this to be the case... However I strongly feel that it is religions roll to provide us with moral guidance, I'd much rather science told me where I came from than provided me witha moral backbone

I think every religion has to be assessed on an individual level; I personally feel there are elements of Islam which are deeply troublesome for the rest of mankind... So it's not as if I'm speaking as a lover of all religions.

However to blame the wrongs of man on religion is naive, Iraq is a great example there are two religions at war sunni & shiia islam... This has nothing to do with the teachings of the religions and everything to do with the tribal power struggle which is taking place in the country.

Religion like any man made* philospohy can be used for good and evil, as it is in mans nature to do both good and evil.

*only 1 can be true, so the rest are man made

but you can't have it both ways. either your jewish morality is right and the others are wrong and should be punished for behaving in an immoral way. or your morality is wrong and the others are right and you should be punished. Isn't that the basis for all religious wars?

Two seconds ago you said you had faith in a diety being unlikely... stick to one answer - it's hard to pass comment if you flip-flop

Really?

Darwinism teaches us that we have no free will, free will is a creation of the religious mind; G-d granted man to do both good and evil... Darwinism teaches that all men are born of a similar nature and it is their environment which sculpts their personality.

A serial killer wasn't born evil, he was the victim of circumstance.... How can you find morality in an environment free of individual blame?

Really which elements of Judaism?

For me the clause which states that a land once governed by muslims can never be governed by infadels is deeply disturbing as it directly effects me... Also the whole dhimma status is deeply troubling.

I've never stated it was, but his has sculpted modern morality on every nation as historically it was the means by which man defined his ethical backbone.

It is only really in Europe, Russia & China where we're moving away from our traditional moral anchor and it could be argued that the worlds most horrific genocides/wars were a direct consequence of this movement away.

What does the formation of the schism have to do with their teachings? It is man's nature to cluster into tribal circles... Arab communities are deeply tribal and their conflicts have nothing to do with the Qur'an... To suggest or imply so indicates a great ignorance on the middle easter pschee.

What the fuck arte you talkin about?

I find the buddhist morality deeply moral and highly admirable.... that doesn't make me a bad jew you clearly haven't got a fucking clue what your talking about when it comes to religion mate