1. Christians disrupt Hindu Prayer at Senate Invocation

Comment #56060 by ChinmayKukade on July 13, 2007 at 2:55 pm

I meant uniquely in the *developed* world..

2. Christians disrupt Hindu Prayer at Senate Invocation

Comment #56059 by ChinmayKukade on July 13, 2007 at 2:54 pm

What is it really about the American political/cultural scenario that makes it, so uniquely in the world, a place where the absurdities and inconsistencies of any and every "faith" are glorified?

3. Christians disrupt Hindu Prayer at Senate Invocation

Comment #56055 by ChinmayKukade on July 13, 2007 at 2:48 pm

Amusing, but the usual staple of Christian intolerance..
Hinduism is really an umbrella term for an endless variety of cultural/religious belief systems - including ATHEISM..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_in_Hinduism

4. Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

Comment #55719 by ChinmayKukade on July 12, 2007 at 4:10 am

Good job, pewkatchoo.

It still baffles me that the fellow can indulge is such over-generous ecumenicism so as to to say hindus(polytheistic) will be with him in heaven, but Dawkins and other atheists? Oh no. Theirs is the fate of the lake of fire and brimstone.. How can people harbour such evil beliefs?

5. Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

Comment #55542 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Here's a truly shocking article in the Calgary Sun:

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Jackson_Paul/2007/06/26/4290796-sun.html

Extract:
"Friends, I fully believe when I die -- if I keep to the straight and narrow -- I will meet my grandparents, parents, sisters and Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu friends in Heaven.

My pet Shih-Tzu puppies, Muffin and Dolly, too.

For sure, though, I will not meet Richard Dawkins there. Not that I'd want to do so.

So here's my little prayer right now, please stand with me alongside Preston, Stock, Bishop Fred Henry, Calgary evangelical Pastor Phil Nordin, and all other believers of many faiths of a Supreme Creator.

We all have it made -- a joyous everlasting life ahead of us."

How can people REALLY believe this?

6. Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

Comment #55541 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 1:27 pm

The Atheist position is simple and elegant: We know very little yet, what we do know is a testment to millenia of labour and creativity from the Greeks to Einstein.
We cannot yet explain the physical origins of the cosmos, but a divine intelligence is an idea that YOU, the theist, with your own brand of theism, whether Abrahamic, polytheistic or otherwise have brought up. The onus is on YOU to justify this belief, not on us to disprove a negative.
Theists ought to be challenged on every count. Why are you a Christian?
Is it an accident of birth?
Is everyone else going to hell?
If so, a fanatical Muslim says the same; why is your word to be beleived over his?
If not, what does the New Testament say? Aren't you being untrue to it?
And what do you say to those who do believe in the literality of the New Testament and that non-christians are going to Hell?
Who's the real Christian? You or them?

The variety of theist responses are so broad that inconsistency is the only consistency - the atheist position is refreshingly lucid and nonvariant.

7. Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

Comment #55533 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 12:49 pm

I like Hitchens' style and his impressive forcefullness - Dr. Dawkins' style is more scientific and accurate, whereas Hitchens appeals to a different type of audience - the plus point being that people who buy God is not Great for entertainment will also end up being educated.

8. Police plea on genital mutilation

Comment #55515 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 11:30 am

Atheists, long accused of being on the "far left" that appeases and is in cahoots with Islamic radicals can perhaps say for themselves that they are what the West really stands for.
All this talk of Judaeo-Christian heritage is nauseating. What are we, really? Are we the Old Test. brutes who stone women and indulge in every horror that our laws and constitutions would today condemn? Or are we better than the stoning, flogging, demented crowds of the Middle East because we chose to trade religion for secularism?

9. Police plea on genital mutilation

Comment #55512 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 11:18 am

As I mentioned, the Religion of Peace has backed away:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L24694871.htm

A Dutch Mosque advocating FGM back in 2004:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001497.php

It is chilling how mosques have almost become the local centres of a state-within-a-state.

10. Police plea on genital mutilation

Comment #55509 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 11:00 am

"Are you crazy? I concurred with a poster on another thread who said that every time the topic of FGM comes up you can expect some men showing up to hijack the thread to talk about their dicks."

Firstly, I'm not a man.
Secondly, this is a forum about religion, also dealing with the topic of how religion is coercive towards children, of which male circumcision is a definite component.
Thirdly, if it is religious dictates you are talking about, male circumcision is a far more absolute and integral component of religious belief(e.g. Yahweh's covenant, without which one is "cut off from his people") that FGM, which was, as you may know, banned in a move supported by the religious establishment in Egypt and is only loosely suggested in the Hadith.

To get back to the topic, the UK really does need to monitor and perhaps even control mosques more
- they are increasingly becoming the centers for each and every movement - religious, cultural, social or political - within the Muslim community.

11. Police plea on genital mutilation

Comment #55503 by ChinmayKukade on July 11, 2007 at 10:32 am

Male Circumcision is certainly just as painful if not as damaging as the female version, especially when performed on babies/young children when the foreskin is still attached to the glans and has to be literally torn apart - my mother is a pediatrician and she has to frequently shift hospitals to where she is not always asked to perform circumcsions.
I believe the respect and medical merit accorded to it arises purely out of the cultural conditioning coming from its religious mandates.
That's not to say it may not have benefits - (no doubt breast removal helps prevent breast cancer!)
but its ACCEPTANCE as something OK and even good - (Jews/Muslims, in a perfect example of circular reasoning, say "circumcision doesn't hurt and it's not cruel" Why? "God would never order anything cruel!")
Not cruel? Take a look at this..

http://picasaweb.google.com/chinubhaikukade/CircumcisionProcedureOrCriminalGenitalMutilation