Why so many people say "Muslims are terrorists" Should we say that?

[TECSHARE]

The bible has it's own fair share of violence, genocide, immorality etc. As the quran if you'd dig deep into it. I think the difference is that there are a lot of apologists and leaders who interpret the bible differently scrubbing out all the bad things there while muslim leaders are somewhat purists, sticking exactly to their holybook quite literally.

This whataboutism has been brought up already about 5 times. The difference is Christianity has gone through a reformation process where the church and the state have been split into separate entities. Islam has not gone through this reformation process.

[Spendulus]

.... As the quran if you'd dig deep into it. I think the difference is that there are a lot of apologists and leaders who interpret the bible differently scrubbing out all the bad things there while muslim leaders are somewhat purists, sticking exactly to their holybook quite literally.

Maybe it is you that should dig a bit deeper?

[Rinso]

Muslims have been responsible for some 31,500 terror attacks since 9/11.

www.thereligionofpeace.com


Right, the OP thought he'd be clever and made up what is called the "straw man" logical fallacy.

your brain already washed by media sir. all i know about truly muslim is they teaching love to people who ever they are, whatever they are like christian

[BADecker]

If you think that some parts of the Koran and Hadiths were "replaced by wrong sentences intentionally," how do you know which ones? Maybe the ones you/they say are the "wrong" ones, are really the only right ones, and all the "good" ones are the wrong ones.

If you have to judge which parts of Islam are right and which ones are wrong, maybe there are as many different versions of Islam as there are Muslims.

This is chaos. You are talking about a religion of chaos. If Muslims are violent at times, because they accept the violent parts of the Koran as the true parts, Islam really means to think and do whatever you like.

This makes Islam way worse of a religion than has been described in this thread so far. And you are the one who is showing it to be this way.

The bible has it's own fair share of violence, genocide, immorality etc. As the quran if you'd dig deep into it. I think the difference is that there are a lot of apologists and leaders who interpret the bible differently scrubbing out all the bad things there while muslim leaders are somewhat purists, sticking exactly to their holybook quite literally.

But the Bible isn't what is being talked about in this thread. Since you don't answer the question about Islam, my info, above, stands.

The New Testament of the Bible is the Bible writing that all people should be following today. It has no violence ordered for any Bible people to do from its writing to the present. The only NT violence to be done will be done by Jesus God, Himself, at the end, at the time of the judgment.

[Spendulus]

Muslims have been responsible for some 31,500 terror attacks since 9/11.

www.thereligionofpeace.com


Right, the OP thought he'd be clever and made up what is called the "straw man" logical fallacy.

your brain already washed by media sir. all i know about truly muslim is they teaching love to people who ever they are, whatever they are like christian

The count now is 34,385 terror attacks. They are each individually documented on the link provided.

[BADecker]

^^^ It's listed on the left side. Just scroll down a little. You can click the links and find the details about each one. https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

[Malsetid]

If you think that some parts of the Koran and Hadiths were "replaced by wrong sentences intentionally," how do you know which ones? Maybe the ones you/they say are the "wrong" ones, are really the only right ones, and all the "good" ones are the wrong ones.

If you have to judge which parts of Islam are right and which ones are wrong, maybe there are as many different versions of Islam as there are Muslims.

This is chaos. You are talking about a religion of chaos. If Muslims are violent at times, because they accept the violent parts of the Koran as the true parts, Islam really means to think and do whatever you like.

This makes Islam way worse of a religion than has been described in this thread so far. And you are the one who is showing it to be this way.

The bible has it's own fair share of violence, genocide, immorality etc. As the quran if you'd dig deep into it. I think the difference is that there are a lot of apologists and leaders who interpret the bible differently scrubbing out all the bad things there while muslim leaders are somewhat purists, sticking exactly to their holybook quite literally.

But the Bible isn't what is being talked about in this thread. Since you don't answer the question about Islam, my info, above, stands.

The New Testament of the Bible is the Bible writing that all people should be following today. It has no violence ordered for any Bible people to do from its writing to the present. The only NT violence to be done will be done by Jesus God, Himself, at the end, at the time of the judgment.

Well i'm just saying that singling out islam as a religion of violence isn't quite fair since other religions have their own contributions on violence. The muslims who advocate killing and violence are like christians who take the old testament texts heavier than the new testament. There are muslims who condone such radical actions and they're probably the ones who prefer to view the more moral aspects of the quran. Same as you prefering to view the new testament as the part of the bible we should live by.

[Saf1211]

^^^ I like what you say, especially the "fellow human being" part. Islam teaches that people who are not Muslims are not the fellow human beings of Muslims. Rather, they can be lied to and tricked and eventually executed if they won't convert.

Thank you for your wonderful insight into this.

Is it any statement on the Quaran states that,if someone won't agree to convert into Islams they have to excecute them?
Then why all those arabic countries have non muslim citizens.

https://quran.com/9/5
"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Some Muslims are good DESPITE their religion and will not kill another human being regardless of what ALLAH (or any other imaginary God) 'said' in the HOLY book.

I didn't know what Quran says,all I know is how the modern days muslims from my neighborhood reacts and they are good in my knowledge so don't call all Muslims as terrorist is my arguement.

How do you know those people are Muslims? Maybe they are only saying that they are Muslims, but really are not.

Why would they say that they are Muslims when they aren't? Because like you, they haven't read all of the Koran and Hadiths. Like you they don't realize that they aren't Muslims but are being deceived into thinkiong that they are Muslims.

True Muslims are people who follow Islam. And Islam says that Muslims have to be blatantly and dynamically violent at times. Islam says that when Muslims are not violent, it is for converting non-Muslims to Islam, or it is to deceive non-Muslims.

Further, What is a peaceful Muslim going to do when his clerics tell him that now is the time that he has to act violently and kill the infidels? Is he going to disobey thereby endangering himself and his whole family from the punishment that comes to backsliding Muslims? Probably not! More than likely he will suddenly learn how to become violent.

So, stop saying that Muslims aren't violent. If they aren't, they aren't Muslims.

If someone consdered to be an complete muslim they have five duty to complete which are kalima,five times prayer,pasting in Ramadhan,help the people in need and finally Hajj so they are following it so I call them as muslims.
Even I asked about the statment you guys mentioned with some of my muslim friends why they need to be violent if they have to be muslim but they said that some parts of Quran were replaced by wrong sentences intentionally and show to others as they were bad guys.

If you think that some parts of the Koran and Hadiths were "replaced by wrong sentences intentionally," how do you know which ones? Maybe the ones you/they say are the "wrong" ones, are really the only right ones, and all the "good" ones are the wrong ones.

If you have to judge which parts of Islam are right and which ones are wrong, maybe there are as many different versions of Islam as there are Muslims.

This is chaos. You are talking about a religion of chaos. If Muslims are violent at times, because they accept the violent parts of the Koran as the true parts, Islam really means to think and do whatever you like.

This makes Islam way worse of a religion than has been described in this thread so far. And you are the one who is showing it to be this way.

The bible has it's own fair share of violence, genocide, immorality etc. As the quran if you'd dig deep into it. I think the difference is that there are a lot of apologists and leaders who interpret the bible differently scrubbing out all the bad things there while muslim leaders are somewhat purists, sticking exactly to their holybook quite literally.

Theres just bad people that interpret in a bad way.

Compare to BTC for example. BTC isn't responsible for Money Laundering the person that uses it is. But anytime someone is convicted of a crime and BTC is involved whats the first thing said BTC is use for MONEY Laundering.

In the case of Islam as a religion any bad that occurs is used to justify the adversity interpreted in the Quran as bad. What my point is in anything you can make a statement sound good or bad. so my suggestion there are over 1.5 billion worldwide and a small minority of these do absolutely stupid things that even there religion does not permit so lets tarnish the whole 1.5 BILIION.

[TECSHARE]

The muslims who advocate killing and violence are like christians who take the old testament texts heavier than the new testament.

Do I have to start a count of how much this logical fallacy of tu quoque is used? We have been over this. Christianity has been through a serious reform process separating the state from the religion, Islam has not.

Theres just bad people that interpret in a bad way.

Compare to BTC for example. BTC isn't responsible for Money Laundering the person that uses it is. But anytime someone is convicted of a crime and BTC is involved whats the first thing said BTC is use for MONEY Laundering.

In the case of Islam as a religion any bad that occurs is used to justify the adversity interpreted in the Quran as bad. What my point is in anything you can make a statement sound good or bad. so my suggestion there are over 1.5 billion worldwide and a small minority of these do absolutely stupid things that even there religion does not permit so lets tarnish the whole 1.5 BILIION.

Bitcoin is not a political system, it is literally just data sitting on inanimate objects. Islam consists of people who make up entire countries with aspirations for a global caliphate. I am glad you brought up the fact that there are 1.5 billion Muslims, because in Western nations they get special treatment as minorities, but they are by no means a minority of any kind.

Additionally the fact that Islam is so large is EVEN MORE of an argument that it should be reformed because the impact is that much larger. The fact is Islam refuses to reform itself, so it is extremely hypocritical of Muslims to cry about criticisms of Islam if they refuse to control their own people for whatever reasons.

Until Islam reforms itself and stops seeking domination and submission of non-Muslims through violence or other wise THERE WILL ALWAYS be conflict and collective blame regardless of how many innocent individuals there are. I suggest if you don't like it you look to your Muslim brothers and sisters and find ways to change Islam, because if you don't, outsiders will, and at that point they aren't going to care much about your opinions on the matter. Those that live by the sword die by the sword, and those that stand idly by while their own shed blood are not innocent.

[af_newbie]

^^^ I like what you say, especially the "fellow human being" part. Islam teaches that people who are not Muslims are not the fellow human beings of Muslims. Rather, they can be lied to and tricked and eventually executed if they won't convert.

Thank you for your wonderful insight into this.

Is it any statement on the Quaran states that,if someone won't agree to convert into Islams they have to excecute them?
Then why all those arabic countries have non muslim citizens.

https://quran.com/9/5
"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Some Muslims are good DESPITE their religion and will not kill another human being regardless of what ALLAH (or any other imaginary God) 'said' in the HOLY book.

I didn't know what Quran says,all I know is how the modern days muslims from my neighborhood reacts and they are good in my knowledge so don't call all Muslims as terrorist is my arguement.

How do you know those people are Muslims? Maybe they are only saying that they are Muslims, but really are not.

Why would they say that they are Muslims when they aren't? Because like you, they haven't read all of the Koran and Hadiths. Like you they don't realize that they aren't Muslims but are being deceived into thinkiong that they are Muslims.

True Muslims are people who follow Islam. And Islam says that Muslims have to be blatantly and dynamically violent at times. Islam says that when Muslims are not violent, it is for converting non-Muslims to Islam, or it is to deceive non-Muslims.

Further, What is a peaceful Muslim going to do when his clerics tell him that now is the time that he has to act violently and kill the infidels? Is he going to disobey thereby endangering himself and his whole family from the punishment that comes to backsliding Muslims? Probably not! More than likely he will suddenly learn how to become violent.

So, stop saying that Muslims aren't violent. If they aren't, they aren't Muslims.

If someone consdered to be an complete muslim they have five duty to complete which are kalima,five times prayer,pasting in Ramadhan,help the people in need and finally Hajj so they are following it so I call them as muslims.
Even I asked about the statment you guys mentioned with some of my muslim friends why they need to be violent if they have to be muslim but they said that some parts of Quran were replaced by wrong sentences intentionally and show to others as they were bad guys.

If you think that some parts of the Koran and Hadiths were "replaced by wrong sentences intentionally," how do you know which ones? Maybe the ones you/they say are the "wrong" ones, are really the only right ones, and all the "good" ones are the wrong ones.

If you have to judge which parts of Islam are right and which ones are wrong, maybe there are as many different versions of Islam as there are Muslims.

This is chaos. You are talking about a religion of chaos. If Muslims are violent at times, because they accept the violent parts of the Koran as the true parts, Islam really means to think and do whatever you like.

This makes Islam way worse of a religion than has been described in this thread so far. And you are the one who is showing it to be this way.

The bible has it's own fair share of violence, genocide, immorality etc. As the quran if you'd dig deep into it. I think the difference is that there are a lot of apologists and leaders who interpret the bible differently scrubbing out all the bad things there while muslim leaders are somewhat purists, sticking exactly to their holybook quite literally.

Theres just bad people that interpret in a bad way.

Compare to BTC for example. BTC isn't responsible for Money Laundering the person that uses it is. But anytime someone is convicted of a crime and BTC is involved whats the first thing said BTC is use for MONEY Laundering.

In the case of Islam as a religion any bad that occurs is used to justify the adversity interpreted in the Quran as bad. What my point is in anything you can make a statement sound good or bad. so my suggestion there are over 1.5 billion worldwide and a small minority of these do absolutely stupid things that even there religion does not permit so lets tarnish the whole 1.5 BILIION.

Why don't you first start by admitting that Islam is a supremacist ideology?  And stop playing this "we are the victim" game.

Is it wrong to own slaves?  Is it wrong to stone adulterers?  Is it wrong to kill homosexuals, Jews, atheists?
Was Allah wrong when he recommended these punishments?

I think you have quite a bit of work to do BEFORE you start looking OUTSIDE of your own political system aka Islam.

Hint:  You can start by saying that Allah did not really mean it, and gave those laws only to people in the 6th century.

[BADecker]

Well i'm just saying that singling out islam as a religion of violence isn't quite fair since other religions have their own contributions on violence. The muslims who advocate killing and violence are like christians who take the old testament texts heavier than the new testament. There are muslims who condone such radical actions and they're probably the ones who prefer to view the more moral aspects of the quran. Same as you prefering to view the new testament as the part of the bible we should live by.

Well, Islam is approximately the only religion that currently singles out good things for its own people, the Muslims, and bad things (including violence) against anybody else who won't become a Muslim.

What is a Christian? A Christian is anybody who obeys the things that are taught in the New Testament of the Bible. If a person doesn't obey, he's not a Christian, no matter how many times he says he's a Christian. The N.T. doesn't even suggest to use violence against anybody. So, people who say they are Christians yet use violence against other people, aren't really Christians.

Same thing goes for a Muslim. If a person says he's a Muslim, but doesn't obey the writings of Islam, he's not really a Muslim, no matter how many times he says he's a Muslim. Muslim writings don't only say that Muslims have permission to use violence against people of other religions/governments. Muslim writings order Muslims to use violence against people of other religions/governments. And the writings even show the times and the ways to do it. So, people who say they are Muslims yet DON'T use violence against other people, aren't really Muslims.

[Spendulus]

.....
Why don't you first start by admitting that Islam is a supremacist ideology?  And stop playing this "we are the victim" game.

Is it wrong to own slaves?  Is it wrong to stone adulterers?  Is it wrong to kill homosexuals, Jews, atheists?
Was Allah wrong when he recommended these punishments?

I think you have quite a bit of work to do BEFORE you start looking OUTSIDE of your own political system aka Islam.

Hint:  You can start by saying that Allah did not really mean it, and gave those laws only to people in the 6th century.

There have been numerous Muslim apologists do this, by noting such things as "such and such an order in the Quran to kill infidels" applied only to a particular issue or battle during the life of their Prophet.

Regardless, I do prefer the Christian montage, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

[af_newbie]

.....
Why don't you first start by admitting that Islam is a supremacist ideology?  And stop playing this "we are the victim" game.

Is it wrong to own slaves?  Is it wrong to stone adulterers?  Is it wrong to kill homosexuals, Jews, atheists?
Was Allah wrong when he recommended these punishments?

I think you have quite a bit of work to do BEFORE you start looking OUTSIDE of your own political system aka Islam.

Hint:  You can start by saying that Allah did not really mean it, and gave those laws only to people in the 6th century.

There have been numerous Muslim apologists do this, by noting such things as "such and such an order in the Quran to kill infidels" applied only to a particular issue or battle during the life of their Prophet.

Regardless, I do prefer the Christian montage, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

It would be easier to reform this system in the age of ignorance.  You would just say that the angels came to the Caliph and told him to amend the Quran and everyone would accept it.

Today, we have cameras, audio, and infrared recording equipment so no one would believe such claims.  So moderate Muslims are in a bit of pickle.  On one hand, they cannot undermine the authority of Allah and risk of being killed and on the other, they do not want to look like the ignorant, sadistic idiots of the 6th century who assembled this book (20-30 years after Muhammad died).

[Spendulus]

.....
Why don't you first start by admitting that Islam is a supremacist ideology?  And stop playing this "we are the victim" game.

Is it wrong to own slaves?  Is it wrong to stone adulterers?  Is it wrong to kill homosexuals, Jews, atheists?
Was Allah wrong when he recommended these punishments?

I think you have quite a bit of work to do BEFORE you start looking OUTSIDE of your own political system aka Islam.

Hint:  You can start by saying that Allah did not really mean it, and gave those laws only to people in the 6th century.

There have been numerous Muslim apologists do this, by noting such things as "such and such an order in the Quran to kill infidels" applied only to a particular issue or battle during the life of their Prophet.

Regardless, I do prefer the Christian montage, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

It would be easier to reform this system in the age of ignorance.  You would just say that the angels came to the Caliph and told him to amend the Quran and everyone would accept it.

Today, we have cameras, audio, and infrared recording equipment so no one would believe such claims.  So moderate Muslims are in a bit of pickle.  On one hand, they cannot undermine the authority of Allah and risk of being killed and on the other, they do not want to look like the ignorant, sadistic idiots of the 6th century who assembled this book (20-30 years after Muhammad died).

It may come as a shock to you, in this age of cameras, audio and infrared, but this is as much an age of ignorance as any other age might have been.

[af_newbie]

.....
Why don't you first start by admitting that Islam is a supremacist ideology?  And stop playing this "we are the victim" game.

Is it wrong to own slaves?  Is it wrong to stone adulterers?  Is it wrong to kill homosexuals, Jews, atheists?
Was Allah wrong when he recommended these punishments?

I think you have quite a bit of work to do BEFORE you start looking OUTSIDE of your own political system aka Islam.

Hint:  You can start by saying that Allah did not really mean it, and gave those laws only to people in the 6th century.

There have been numerous Muslim apologists do this, by noting such things as "such and such an order in the Quran to kill infidels" applied only to a particular issue or battle during the life of their Prophet.

Regardless, I do prefer the Christian montage, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

It would be easier to reform this system in the age of ignorance.  You would just say that the angels came to the Caliph and told him to amend the Quran and everyone would accept it.

Today, we have cameras, audio, and infrared recording equipment so no one would believe such claims.  So moderate Muslims are in a bit of pickle.  On one hand, they cannot undermine the authority of Allah and risk of being killed and on the other, they do not want to look like the ignorant, sadistic idiots of the 6th century who assembled this book (20-30 years after Muhammad died).

It may come as a shock to you, in this age of cameras, audio and infrared, but this is as much an age of ignorance as any other age might have been.

This brain disease (aka religion) affects us all, poor, rich, smart or dumb.  The only solution is a complete eradication, to the last scripture and last preacher.  Each affected person is a victim in a way.

The only difference between now and back then is that back then, 100% believed in this shit/superstition/witchcraft, etc, today about 80-85% of people still cling on to such irrational beliefs.  

Obviously, we have a long way to go to eradicate this plague.

[TECSHARE]

This brain disease (aka religion) affects us all, poor, rich, smart or dumb.  The only solution is a complete eradication, to the last scripture and last preacher.  Each affected person is a victim in a way.

The only difference between now and back then is that back then, 100% believed in this shit/superstition/witchcraft, etc, today about 80-85% of people still cling on to such irrational beliefs.  

Obviously, we have a long way to go to eradicate this plague.

This is where I have to push back. This is not a solution, and attempting to do so will create significantly more bloodshed and pain on all sides from all religious backgrounds as well as the secular world. Banning any religion is never going to be a solution, as history shows. Furthermore atheism itself is just another system of belief based upon just as much evidence, none.

Religion serves many constructive purposes, also many destructive purposes. As any organization, it is vulnerable to infiltration and subversion for destructive purposes, it doesn't have to even be a religion. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be restrained and checked, but I find it quite simplistic, childish, and counterproductive to attempt to just blanket ban religion as a whole.

However this is getting quite far off topic and belongs more in the atheism thread you are quite fond of, which I specifically avoid because as I stated atheism is just another form of religion, and you can't reason with religious zealots convinced of their correctitude, be they theist or atheist.

[af_newbie]

This brain disease (aka religion) affects us all, poor, rich, smart or dumb.  The only solution is a complete eradication, to the last scripture and last preacher.  Each affected person is a victim in a way.

The only difference between now and back then is that back then, 100% believed in this shit/superstition/witchcraft, etc, today about 80-85% of people still cling on to such irrational beliefs.  

Obviously, we have a long way to go to eradicate this plague.

This is where I have to push back. This is not a solution, and attempting to do so will create significantly more bloodshed and pain on all sides from all religious backgrounds as well as the secular world. Banning any religion is never going to be a solution, as history shows. Furthermore atheism itself is just another system of belief based upon just as much evidence, none.

Religion serves many constructive purposes, also many destructive purposes. As any organization, it is vulnerable to infiltration and subversion for destructive purposes, it doesn't have to even be a religion. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be restrained and checked, but I find it quite simplistic, childish, and counterproductive to attempt to just blanket ban religion as a whole.

However this is getting quite far off topic and belongs more in the atheism thread you are quite fond of, which I specifically avoid because as I stated atheism is just another form of religion, and you can't reason with religious zealots convinced of their correctitude, be they theist or atheist.

So do Nazism and Fascism.  Or the use of cocaine (it was used to treat a common cold in the past).

If you have any logical arguments for theism, let's hear it.  I would be glad to rip your arguments to pieces.

[TECSHARE]

However this is getting quite far off topic and belongs more in the atheism thread you are quite fond of, which I specifically avoid because as I stated atheism is just another form of religion, and you can't reason with religious zealots convinced of their correctitude, be they theist or atheist.

So do Nazism and Fascism.  Or the use of cocaine (it was used to treat a common cold in the past).

If you have any logical arguments for theism, let's hear it.  I would be glad to rip your arguments to pieces

No thanks, enjoy your self proclaimed correctitide of your choice belief system.

[BADecker]

Well i'm just saying that singling out islam as a religion of violence isn't quite fair since other religions have their own contributions on violence. The muslims who advocate killing and violence are like christians who take the old testament texts heavier than the new testament. There are muslims who condone such radical actions and they're probably the ones who prefer to view the more moral aspects of the quran. Same as you prefering to view the new testament as the part of the bible we should live by.

Violence from the Islam religion is the most important violence against the true religion of peace, Christianity. Why? Because it is worded right in their Islam writings that Muslims are supposed to follow.

Why Islam? Check the chart.

List of religious populations - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

Religion	Adherents	Percentage
Christianity	2.4 billion[3]	33%
Islam	1.8 billion[3]	24.1%
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist	1.2 billion	16%
Hinduism	1.15 billion	15%
Buddhism	521 million	7%
Chinese traditional religion[c]	394 million	5.50%
Ethnic religions excluding some in separate categories	300 million	4.19%
African traditional religions	100 million[5]	1.40%
Sikhism	30 million	0.32%
Spiritism	15 million	0.21%
Judaism	14.4 million[6]	0.20%
Bahá'í	7.0 million	0.10%
Jainism	4.2 million	0.06%
Shinto	4.0 million	0.06%
Cao Dai	4.0 million	0.06%
Zoroastrianism	2.6 million	0.04%
Tenrikyo	2.0 million	0.02%
Neo-Paganism	1.0 million	0.01%
Unitarian Universalism	0.8 million	0.01%
Rastafari	0.6 million	0.01%
total	7.167 billion	100%

Look at the size of violent Islam. If Islam wants to be bad, good people should take notice.

[Spendulus]

....
This brain disease (aka religion) affects us all, poor, rich, smart or dumb.  The only solution is a complete eradication, to the last scripture and last preacher.  Each affected person is a victim in a way.

The only difference between now and back then is that back then, 100% believed in this shit/superstition/witchcraft, etc, today about 80-85% of people still cling on to such irrational beliefs.  

Obviously, we have a long way to go to eradicate this plague.

I don't agree with this but am very familiar with the arguments, being pretty much an atheist. The details don't fit in this thread.

But let me just say that if you did "eradicate this plague," then you have to face what comes next. And as that is the uncontrollable product of a type of revolution, it's likely it would be worse. There are many historical examples of this.