November 21st, 2011
07:59 AM ET

British Muslims optimistic and proud, survey finds

By Richard Allen Greene, CNN

British Muslims are more proud to be British than the population as a whole, and they are significantly more optimistic about the country's future, a new study released Monday reveals.

Religious people in general are more proud to be British than those who call themselves atheists or non-believers, the survey by the think tanks Demos said.

Nearly nine out of 10 Anglicans and Jews, and more than eight out of 10 Muslims said they were "proud to be a British citizen."

Just under eight out of 10 people agreed with the statement nationwide.

"Overall British Muslims are more likely to be both patriotic and optimistic about Britain than are the white British community," says the report, "A Place for Pride."

The head of the Muslim Council of Britain welcomed the findings.

"The message is that we are not Muslim OR British but are British AND Muslim," Farooq Murad told CNN Monday.

"British Muslims have been playing their part in Britain for many generations now, despite being all-too-often condemned to the sidelines by attention-grabbing headlines," he said.

Most of his co-religionists "simply want to get on with their lives, to work and raise families just as everyone else, and to contribute to the continued prosperity of this great island of ours," he said.

The study suggests that, far from there being a conflict between ethnic identity and national pride, the two may reinforce each other.

"People who are proud of their ethnic group - be that white British or black and minority ethnic - are far more likely to say they are proud to be a British citizen," said authors Max Wind-Cowie and Thomas Gregory.

One British Muslim told Demos that being a member of a minority had made him think more about being Muslim.

"I was always having to explain what a Muslim is and what we believe and why I wasn't eating," said the respondent, who is not named in the report. "It was annoying sometimes but it made me confident talking about who I am. And it meant I could express that without having to go over the top or wear something special to prove it."

Demos was looking "to find out what made people proud of modern Britain and why politicians fail to articulate a convincing vision of this," said Beatrice Karol Burks of the think tank.

One survey respondent captured the particular diffidence of British pride in their country.

"It's almost like if you tried to make Britain more patriotic... you'd be being sort of unpatriotic because it would be so un-British," said the unnamed respondent.

More than 50% of British people say they are "very proud" to be citizens of their country, a different survey found in 2008 - higher than Germany, France or Italy, but lower than Norway.

Shakespeare was the icon that British people were proudest of in the Demos survey, slightly ahead of the armed forces and Union Jack flag.

The study was funded by the Pears Foundation, a Jewish family foundation "concerned with positive identity and citizenship."

Demos commissioned pollster YouGov to survey 2,086 British citizens online between May 4 and 9.

- Newsdesk editor, The CNN Wire

Filed under: Islam • Muslim • United Kingdom

soundoff (229 Responses)
  1. Bribarian

    multiculturalism is ruining europe

    November 21, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
    • Real_World

      and so is the Debt... HA!

      November 21, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
  2. gravitate

    Hear that white British citizens...? You are being replaced by musl1ms and foreigners... Your govt no longer needs you...

    November 21, 2011 at 3:08 pm |
    • Normon

      "Your govt no longer needs you..."
      Are you glad for the company?

      November 21, 2011 at 3:16 pm |
    • AGuest9

      Why, do only the foreigners pay taxes?

      November 21, 2011 at 4:05 pm |
  3. tes

    They are optimistic because their culture is slowly and but surely taking over the UK. "White British community" as this article puts it, are pessimistic because their culture is diminishing. Its been a long time since Elizabeth and Victoria.

    November 21, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
    • White British Patriot

      Come on, really, honestly, you can't be serious?

      November 21, 2011 at 3:11 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I hope tes is wrong. I think mr. patriot here should state his case to the contrary, rather than trying to dismiss this point.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:41 pm |
    • CW

      Actually, Jonas Brothers, proof needs to be offered that *this* is why British Muslims are happy. Anything less than that is simply conjecture (and terrible conjecture at that).

      November 21, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
    • Cedar Rapids

      Correct, its been a long time since Elizabeth, well done.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
    • BG

      @ White British Patriot

      It seems that you have a terminal case of cranial-rectal inversion. Sadly, you only have about 5 years left to live, after which time you'll crap yourself out and hose yourself down a conveniently-located muslim toilet. Don't forget to bring your three stones to wipe with (dirt for wiping with is always available, but it's not cheap), and for Allah's sake, don't touch your penis with your right hand. (If you're unfortunate enough to be a female, you're relegated to using an open field... Ah, the benefits of the lovely English countryside. Mind the gardens, now, and don't forget to wash you feet on the way out.

      "Clods of dirt, sixpence and a bob, fresh clods for your filthy behind...."

      November 22, 2011 at 7:07 am |
  4. the_dude

    Every major leader in Europe believe multi-culturalism has failed. This is all going down like it is supposed to. Bring on the zombie apocyclypse.

    November 21, 2011 at 2:45 pm |
    • ZombiesArePeopleTooJustDeadOnes

      Personally, I am quite optimistic about bbbbrrrraaaiiiiiiinnnnnssssss.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:06 pm |
    • ZombiesArePeople2.0

      Try Brain Farm its kewl.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
  5. The future queen

    Why wouldn't I be optimistic, that litlle girl looks like she will be future Queen of the land.
    Goodbye Liz!

    November 21, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • HauteCouture

      Atleast we will be saved the torture of watching Princess B's strutting those hideous hats to be replaced with those lovely burkas!

      November 21, 2011 at 2:50 pm |
    • HotCouture

      Now available!
      The latest in Under Birqua air conditioning units. Just strap this convenient battery operated unit around your waist for all-day comfort in the hottest of summers.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:11 pm |
    • AC365

      Thanks sleazy salesman, will need those AC's units along with our elaborate garment'e -it gets very hot in Arizona.
      The design specification to include that they don't make the skirts buoyant and it doesn't blow the skirts off . It would be a shame to reveal those 'thunder' thighs.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:21 pm |
  6. che

    Is that the country of Richard Dawkin?
    Or the question should be, it maybe bescause this is the country of Richard Dawkin ...

    November 21, 2011 at 2:39 pm |
    • Sam Harris

      First comes Richard Dawkins, then comes the trojan horse...

      November 21, 2011 at 7:03 pm |
  7. moon god

    the story conveniently ignored other polls: how many muslims believe sharia needs to replace uk laws ?

    November 21, 2011 at 2:37 pm |

      That question is so absurd. Just because a person has religious laws, does not mean that he want that implemented politically. Your religion tells you how to lead your life.

      How would you answer this; Do you want the 10 commandments to be part of the US law? Would you recommend biblical punishments as part of legal system for, lets say, adultery or sodomy? Would you want to 'turn the other cheek' as part of punishment for Assault? or recommend polygamy (which is illegal in the US).

      November 21, 2011 at 2:46 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I smell a redirect to christianity, but not a response to the concerning poll.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:31 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      The time when you can dismiss a concern over some Christianity distraction is gone. That will not work any longer.

      Support sharia, deny it, or be undecided. You don't get to dodge the topic.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:33 pm |
  8. Oodoodanoo

    That's Britain?

    November 21, 2011 at 2:28 pm |
  9. RajKumar

    There is not a single day goes by without a pandering article of Islam or Muslims. Can you at least publish one Hindu article per 10 Muslim articles? Thanks for your understanding Crescent News Network.

    November 21, 2011 at 2:09 pm |
    • American Patriot

      Muslims are the second largest minority group in Britain. Hindus aren't. Simple as that.

      Whiners everywhere, I tell ya.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:16 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I tend to agree. There are so many Hindus, but they just don't clamor for attention as much as Muslims it seems. Why do we need to give Muslims the reassurance that they are ok. Shouldn't they have that within themselves?

      November 21, 2011 at 2:19 pm |
    • The British Ensign

      Jonas Brothers, that probably has something to do with the fact that their nationalism/patriotism/loyalty is called into question FAR more often than Hindus or any other religious group in Britain. This largely stems from terrorism.

      Studies like this are imperative in ensuring that the collective fabric of the unity that preserves British society is not unravelled.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      "American Patriot", I'm an American and I see Raj as raising a valid point. We take for granted that you are an American (patriot even) because of your name. But I can assure you that I am not the Jonas Brothers.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
    • American Patriot

      Jonas Brothers, my name is merely a name and it does not speak volumes about my character, although most people would infer from my comments (if they've ever read them) and my name that I am indeed what my name suggests.

      Raj does not raise a valid point in that I've never seen people claiming that British Hindus are a part of some anti-British conspiracy to take over the world. Muslims have been in that position, and therefore deserve a study with results such as this.

      Now, to be clear, I don't care what you think of me or my political views; my point still stands.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Any guesses as to why there are conspiracy theories about Muslims, but not Hindus? Actions speak louder than words. And we get a lot of "talk" from Muslim apologists.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:41 pm |
    • Real_World

      I have the answer to this. No one cares about the Hindus!!! You guys are the most insignificant race on the planet. If Hindus sat in a space ship and left to the moon today, the only ones that would notice are the cows that are treated like royalty in India. Now go find to a corner and wheep...

      November 21, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
  10. Tom

    Hahahahahahaha, gotta love the liberal press, "white people bad, muslims and other people of color perfect", said while beating chest.

    November 21, 2011 at 1:36 pm |
    • TheTruthFairy

      Hahahahahahaha, gotta love the conservative trolls, " muslims and other people of color bad, white people perfect", said while shot-gunning an Old Milwaukee, and sucking on a Marlborough.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:01 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Optimistic of what? The prospect of toppling Western civilization?

      November 21, 2011 at 2:08 pm |
    • The British Ensign

      Yanks like you give all of them a bad name. Back to your trailer park!

      November 21, 2011 at 2:18 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      The British Ensign, how do we know you're British? There are a lot of propagandists on the Internet. The name field is only a suggestion - I'm not the Jonas Brothers.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
    • The British Ensign

      You don't know I'm British, and I'm fine with that.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:27 pm |
  11. sisi

    These people do not feel patriotic towards anything other than their in destroying anything or anyone that does not priase their God.

    November 21, 2011 at 1:23 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      They also eat their bread with the butter side DOWN! Clearly, they're evil.

      November 21, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
    • The Real Tom Paine

      You know, I'm really tired of you talking about Christians this way: some of my best friends are Christians.

      November 21, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
    • Mohamed ((proud to be an American Muslim))

      If what you believe is realistic, then we all are doomed considering the fact that there are more than 1.5 billion muslims living on earth. I would say to better educate yourself and accept people like me rather than stereotyping a whole religion which is exactly what the rotten apples of Islam do. We are all the same in the eyes of God regardless of religion and my dear brother or sister, I love you whether you agree with me or you do not.

      November 21, 2011 at 1:59 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Why would we be doomed? 1.5 billion is not a majority.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
    • Mohamed ((proud to be an American Muslim))

      Oh come on, you buzz killed my comment :)... you are missing the point. I was saying 1.5 billion is a big number.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:14 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I have to be honest. It's the first time I've seen a Muslim say "I love you whether you agree with me or not." That's new to me. Usually they tend to duck that topic.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I see someone dragged Christianity into this. Par for the course.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
    • Mohamed ((proud to be an American Muslim))

      well, you gotta admit with the hostile environment that targets the good and bad of them and puts them all in the same category, it gets pretty tense so they "duck" on the emotional part when defending themselves. Myself, I dream of world where the bad guy is the only person who is accountable for his actions and not all of his family, don't you agree?

      November 21, 2011 at 2:51 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I would agree with that. Probably most people would too, if not for the perception of the family being unwilling to admit he was a bad guy. If that changes, we have a good shot at world peace.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:28 pm |
    • AGuest9

      I know a lot of christians like that, too.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
    • Arjun

      Not everyone is bad. But good muslims dont speak up. Even if some speakup others dont trust them. So it is the responsibility of the good muslims to educate bad muslims and outsiders.
      A small set of muslims called terrorists can not be sustained without the support of considerable amount of non-terrorist muslims.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
    • Real_World

      Arjun, while we are on the topic. Can we talk about all of those poor christians being slaughtered in India or is that too off topic. Tell me, do you condem that behavior? I mean, are you going around fighting for their rights or are you mute because it's not happening to Hindu's?

      November 21, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  12. John C.

    'British Muslims proud not to be eating sand.'

    November 21, 2011 at 11:54 am |
    • Huh?


      November 21, 2011 at 11:59 am |
    • hippypoet

      not eating sand.... because they are not in the desert ... duh!

      November 21, 2011 at 12:06 pm |
    • The British Ensign

      I think most people would rather eat sand than most British cuisine! Ever heard of BLACK PUDDING? If not, I don't think you want to.


      November 21, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Now the proud "Brit" is bashing his own cuisine. Smells fishy.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
    • Cedar Rapids

      Because he bashes black pudding? You dont know many Brits do you?

      November 21, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
  13. Hels

    I'm a British Jew, and I'm very proud to be British. Patriotism is not a popular thing in the UK – it is very un-British.

    In fact I am at my most patriotic when I was living in the US. While I am very fond of Americans, I do find their kind of patriotism isn't 'my cup of tea' – to many Brits its seen as nauseous and over the top. They find it very suprising to see most American homes with US flags – you only get that here when there's international football ("soccer") on... and even then its that part of the UK you support.

    Its part of British culture to be modest, to down play things, theres a nobleness to it, and we have a self-deprecating humour, we appreciate our flaws, but we are proud of our country really...it's our stiff upper lip and all that!

    November 21, 2011 at 11:39 am |
    • VampireJack

      The main problem with the natives of Britain "not" being proud of our heritage is that we are constantly told our culture is inferior to the others that have come to our lands, and that we should be ashamed of colonialism. We are repeatedly told to be ashamed of black slavery (although, conveniently it's never mentioned that Africans were enslaving Europeans LONG before we got involved in it.....but, obviously it's only the white man with this guilt...).
      If we have the audacity to fly the flag of St George we are told we are racist, and it's offensive to non white English. Meaning Muslims. Seems that the Sikhs, Jews and Hindus (amongst others) don't find it offensive.
      We are told that we shouldn't celebrate Christmas due it it being offensive to other religions. Namely Islam.
      We are constantly told that we have achieved nothing in the world. Even though historically it was Britain that built the modern world....
      The brain washing of the youth has begun – and is working.

      Oh, and we are told that Church attendances are down on 25 years ago.
      Well, once upon a time the supermarkets, and other industries, didn't open on a Sunday so there were more people who could go to Church if they wanted to. I know many who would go to Church on a Sunday, but they are forced to work on that day.

      I'm an Englishman. And I'm proud of my heritage and would my forefathers achieved. One of the greatest things was BUILDING THE USA as it is today. That's right, the people who built that great nation were Brits.

      November 21, 2011 at 11:58 am |
    • VampireJack

      Damnit CNN.
      Why won't you let us edit our previous posts when we notice spelling/word errors from typing too fast on a caffeine buzz?
      DAMN YOU!

      November 21, 2011 at 12:01 pm |
    • RS

      You should edit your ranting comment before you post it. Just an FYI 😉

      November 21, 2011 at 12:22 pm |
    • VampireJack

      You should edit your ranting comment before you post it. Just an FYI

      Then it wouldn't be a rant anymore!
      It would be well thought out and logical!

      November 21, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • Conn

      I cannot tell you how many British homes, hotels, etc. I've been in that DO have a photo of the queen.

      November 21, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
    • NorCalMojo

      Brits hate patriotism. The leading intellectuals worship France and think anyone who waves a flag is in the BNP.

      Patriots are called 'little Britons" and it's almost synonymous with our use of "white trash".

      November 21, 2011 at 1:43 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Soooooo... what's the need to spontaneously bring up Americans for their style of patriotism. How about you do it your way and we'll do it ours.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:12 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I hear you Vampire Jack. The same sort of "movement" is underway in the US. To belittle our accomplishments and try to claim insult at our patriotism. I don't think it will get as far here. We have too many stubborn patriots. But we are with you in the fight against rewriting history to save face for the developing world. Sorry folks, you really finished last in the race and there's no nice way of saying it.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:15 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      That being said, it doesn't matter. As long as you join us in the modern world the results of the race do not matter.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
    • Cedar Rapids

      Who tells us our culture is inferior? I call BS on that one. And we committed acts during colonialism that we should be ashamed of, without a doubt.
      The flag of St George has been stolen by the far right as a symbol of racism and it needs to be regained back from them if we want it to stand for what it used to stand for.
      And you need to stop this whole...namely muslims, namely islam nonsense......if people say not to specifically concentrate on xmas its because of far more than simply islam no matter how much you want to blame them.

      The difference is the way Brits show patriotism as well. The US want to go round chanting "we're number 1" at the drop of a hat. Brits are more reserved, we don't need to shout about it and any display is considered vulgar, but our patriotism is no less.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
    • NHTK - 111

      Hels and Vamp,
      I enjoyed your chat. I'm also from across the big blue Pond... Been here a while.... American pride and style of patriotism is not my cup of tea either. I find t obnoxiously boastful. Americans lack humility, which is a safeguard to those who poses it... If I could, I'd rather be in Europe. But my destiny lead me here...
      I miss the beautiful European Alps...

      November 21, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  14. J.W

    What is the difference between english and british? I am sure someone on here knows.

    November 21, 2011 at 11:28 am |
    • Potsie

      Being English means being from England. Being British refers to someone who is someone from the British Isles. So, a Scot considers himself/herself British as well as Scottish.

      November 21, 2011 at 11:34 am |
    • Hels

      To be British is to be from Great Britain (so you could be from England, Scotland, Wales etc). Great Britain and Northern Ireland make up the UK.
      To be English is to specifically come from England.

      November 21, 2011 at 11:41 am |
  15. Katherine

    Muslim Brits aren‘t even real Brits. The white folk is! That has a tradition and its‘ own culture.

    November 21, 2011 at 10:38 am |
    • littlebigman

      "the white folk is!"?...Now the white racist speaks the truth...you just cann't win with these white racists, no matter how patriotic you want to be

      November 21, 2011 at 1:46 pm |
    • NorCalMojo


      How is that different from the "All white people are illegal aliens" argument that is obligatory to any debate about illegal immigration?

      Do you call them out for the racism, too?

      November 21, 2011 at 2:21 pm |
    • American Patriot

      NorCalMojo, the only people I've ever heard use that argument ARE illegal aliens themselves. Other than that, that's a straw-man argument.

      The British Empire is historically a global one, and it therefore includes MANY, MANY ethnicities, ranging from Omani, to Fuji, to Indian.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:29 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Sorry, can't use the Native American thing on Europeans. Nice try though. Europe actually is their native land. Sorry, white people actually have a heritage too. Although for some reason it's incredibly not ok to talk about it. But totally ok to talk about every other ethnicity.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
    • NorCalMojo

      I'm just pointing out the double standard that has derailed ethnic relations for the past few decades.

      I don't agree with Katherine's sentiment, I'm just pointing out it would be seen as perfectly acceptable if she lived anywhere except the Western World.

      Xenophobia is considered a virtue in most of the Islamic world. Keeping "western crusaders out" is the foundation of the entire Jihad movement.

      Until we start measuring cultures with the same ruler, we should expect the impasse to continue.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:47 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      I believe Katherine is a straw man argument anyway. "White folk" is an americanism, and doesn't make sense in a British context. I believe "Katherine" is trying to derail the issue by assigning some of the concerns views they do not necessarily have (beating on a straw man).

      November 21, 2011 at 3:39 pm |
    • Real_World

      Hey Cathy, don't worry about the small details. You will learn more when you get to the 4th grade.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
  16. Ella Landau Tasseron

    When muslims condemn these quotes from their prophet, we will be 1 step closer to peace :
    (1)"Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. protection tax); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:– "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."

    [Sahih Bukhari 4:53:386]

    (2)I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.
    [Sahih Muslim 19:4366]

    (3)"I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us"[Sahih Bukhari 1:8:387]

    (4)"Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." The messenger of Allah replied, "I do not find such a deed."
    [Sahih Bukhari 4:52:44]


    November 21, 2011 at 10:35 am |
    • Normon

      John Hemer asserts that the two primary approaches that Christian teaching uses to deal with "the problem of violence in the Old Testament" are:
      Concentrate more on the many passages where God is depicted as loving – much of Isaiah, Hosea, Micah, Deuteronomy.
      Explain how the idea of God as a violent punishing war monger is all part of the historical and cultural conditioning of the author and that we can ignore it in good faith, especially in the light of the New Testament.
      In opposition to these two approaches, Hemer argues that to ignore or explain away the violence found in the Old Testament is a mistake. He asserts that "Violence is not peripheral to the Bible it is central, in many ways it is the issue, because of course it is the human problem." He concludes by saying that "The Bible is in fact the story of the slow, painstaking and sometimes faltering escape from the idea of a God who is violent to a God who is love and has absolutely nothing to do with violence."[4]


      November 21, 2011 at 11:33 am |
    • tores

      misconceptions anyway->wikiislam.net/wiki/Misconceptions_about_Jihad

      November 21, 2011 at 1:16 pm |
  17. Sid

    10 out of 10 religious believers are deluded.

    Allah doesn't exist. Neither does the Christian god. Get over it and get an education including some basic science, if you really want to make any progress.

    November 21, 2011 at 9:44 am |
    • Wake Up

      Dear Sid, please understand that atheism is a relatively new religion that had no ground amongst the fathers of mathematics and science. Isaac Newton was a theologian for crying out loud!! Your ignorance on this matter is astounding. Stop being brainwashed and turn to Jesus!

      November 21, 2011 at 10:29 am |
    • Fordham Jock

      @Wake Up
      Prove it.

      November 21, 2011 at 10:31 am |
    • VampireJack

      Science doesnt exist!
      Well, it constantly changes to suit the particular scientists of the day......
      Scientists believe that the Universe came into existence in a split second – but have NO PROOF OF THIS, but still believe it.
      Scientists believe that evolution is fact. Even though there is enough evidence to disprove it, much like there is to prove it.
      We don't know for certain. But Scientists believe it as fact anyway.
      Nothing is faster than light is what Einstein cliamed. And it was TRUE for decades.. No wait, that BELIEF could have just been disproved. Science changes as we find new evidence.
      So yeah, just because YOU don't believe in a god don't make the claim that 10 out of 10 who DO are wrong, just because it's YOUR belief system. YOU could be in for a suprise. Or maybe not. I don't know. You don't know.

      I myself believe there MAY be a God. But I don't believe in so called prophets, be it mohammed, jesus, moses.
      But I accept I could be wrong so wouldn't make the claim that they were all false.

      November 21, 2011 at 10:33 am |
    • hippypoet

      @wake up....lol, your dumb and completely lacking understanding... you are like the child that finds out a new thing and believes it without exaimination or explaination behind said findings! Isaac Newton was indeed a believer in god, just like Galileo was, and darwin...all these people's lives are at the whim of the Vatician who never let anyone forget it! They have not have truly believed anything but what can be proven or perhaps totally bought into the god crap, it can never be answered- when someone says you believe or die, only so many with the strength of will would stand and say against it... but these peopel were well studied so i say they did what they had to to live and keep doing the science they loved and believed in more then god! Isaac Newton NEVER once claims that gravity was god's will to keep us on the ground did he? To understand the man you need first to understand the man's parents, the world in which he came from, and the peopls who he kept around him. Anything less and you are playing with yourself. People can not be sumed up so quickly. Nor should they! You could call me a theologian, even thou i do not believe at all... i study the bible and biblical texts, i know them very well, and still i do not believe.... that i hope will speak volumes one day!

      November 21, 2011 at 10:43 am |
    • tallulah13

      @Wake Up

      Atheism, which is not a religion, simply the belief that there is no gods, has doubtless always existed. However, voicing that claim in societies dominated by religion has generally been dangerous to one's social standing, ability to earn a living or even life. How many people did the church kill or punish for heresy? Consider Giordano Bruno, the monk who was burned at the stake for the dreadful heresy of saying the sun was a star, and that stars were like suns.

      Perhaps you are the one who needs to "wake up" and realize that there is no proof that your god, or that any god, has ever existed. There is no proof of a soul or an afterlife. Use evidence as your starting point for deciding what to believe, instead of looking at the empty bribe of heaven that churches hold out to followers like candy to children.

      November 21, 2011 at 11:06 am |
    • Sid

      Thanks, hippypoet and tallulah13 and others who responded to Wake Up before I could.
      Further to their posts, Wake Up, why would I believe in your Jesus, when no one has ever been able to present evidence that he was in any way a god? Not only that, but the bible that Christianity is based on is just so full of errors and absurd statements, that you'd have to be pretty gullible to believe the stuff in there. And you'd have to pick and choose which parts to believe, since various parts contradict each other.

      So get over your religion already and stop trying to shove it at me.

      November 21, 2011 at 11:27 am |
    • Nonimus Van Helsing

      First, science doesn't deal in proofs, that's court rooms and mathematics.

      I'm not certain what you mean by, "the Universe came into existence in a split second," but if you are talking about the Big Bang theory then there is plenty of evidence starting with the Cosmic Background Radiation.

      There is also plenty of evidence for the Theory of Evolution and no evidence at all that contradicts evolution. Please, present said evidence if you disagree.

      I'm also not certain what you referring to by, "nothing is faster than light...," but I think Einstein's Theories only disallowed anything accelerating past the speed of light, technically this still allows something faster than light as long as it never moved slower than light. In addition, if you are referring to recent news of supposed faster than light particles, you might want to read more carefully. I don't think any scientist claims to have discovered such particles, yet, just that they might have, but there needed to be more tests. Additional testing by other scientists was covered in the following article: "Study rejects 'faster than light' particle finding" (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/20/us-science-neutrinos-idUSTRE7AJ0ZX20111120)

      November 21, 2011 at 11:56 am |
    • ThinkForYourself

      Well, it constantly changes to suit the particular scientists of the day......
      -No. It chagnes based upon evidence. Something that religions tend not to do. As we discover new things, our knowledge of the universe grows. This is a good thing.

      Scientists believe that the Universe came into existence in a split second – but have NO PROOF OF THIS, but still believe it.
      -Google 'Virtual Particles' and become try to become informed. The mathematics also support this – unless you don't believe in that either.

      Scientists believe that evolution is fact. Even though there is enough evidence to disprove it, much like there is to prove it.
      -That is an outright lie. Please present ANY "evidence" claiming that evolution isn't valid. Gravity has more holes than that theory of evolution, but I bet if you drop something, it falls down.

      We don't know for certain. But Scientists believe it as fact anyway.
      -It called evidence. And it gets reviewed, repeated, and validated multiple times by mulitple people before it even begins to gain acceptance. This is sixth grade science knowledge.

      Nothing is faster than light is what Einstein cliamed. And it was TRUE for decades.. No wait, that BELIEF could have just been disproved. Science changes as we find new evidence.
      -Actually, the theory of relativity does allow for faster than light travel. You realize that Einstein disproved Newton's laws, right? And quantum mechanics flipped everything on its head, right? But I guess you expect science to have all of the answers about everything. Or maybe it should change at all and we should continue to think the earth is flat and use leaches to fight infections.

      November 21, 2011 at 12:06 pm |
    • TruthPrevails

      "Wake Up
      Dear Sid, please understand that atheism is a relatively new religion that had no ground amongst the fathers of mathematics and science. Isaac Newton was a theologian for crying out loud!! Your ignorance on this matter is astounding. Stop being brainwashed and turn to Jesus!"

      Dear WakeUp: Atheism is NOT a religion first of all. It is simply a disbelief in any deity (ie, god). Isaac Newton might have been all of those things but he was also born 369 years ago in a time when it was unheard of to state a disbelief in a deity for fear of death.
      You speak of Sid's ignorance but fail to see your own...you proved it by saying Atheism is a religion. You say he is brainwashed but fail to see the error in that...he is not making claims that can't be demonstrated to be factual (ie; there is a god). You tell him to turn to jesus...you are referring to the apparent son of the apparent virgin who apparently arose from the dead 3 days after his apparent father had him killed..right?

      Pot meet kettle!!

      November 21, 2011 at 1:25 pm |
    • RonK

      I always read these kinds of views with amazement sometimes while other times i view them as utterly disgusting because the existence of God is and should not be a subject of argument. Ignorant people get basic knowledge of science and they believe it is a basis to dispute the existence of a Supreme being. Man was made the "King-object" of all creation in which God prided himself and crowned it by giving us total dominion over all other things. This dominion He bestowed upon man is to a very large extent: Science; to give us a better understanding of all things around us and how to put them to use.

      Actually, there is so much to write and I don't think I can spell them all out here. I have things to do but one thing I can leave to you is "Love, Hatred, Anger, Sorrow" and all kinds of emotions that we feel as humans leads towards God. Let me take a second to elaborate: They tell you there is something called the "spirit" residing in a man because our physical condition does not change with these emotions though the rate of blood flow and impulses may respond to them (you should take notice that the changes such as rate of blood flow and nerve impulses that may occur are as a response to the emotions we are feeling and not the other way round) but rather the spirit which we can not lay fingers on, which is "un-explainable" that feels these emotions.

      What I mean to say is there are so many things we cannot explain physically and science can only at best explain how our bodies may respond to them but not how they form. God deals with the spirit and any man who for the point of argument asks you to give a physical proof to God is the most intellectually paralyzed person as well as the most ignorant and naive.

      There are more points to lay but unfortunately less time for me.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
    • RonK

      @Truth Prevails. I am reading your last comment attacking "Wake Up" as ignorant and the only thing that shines through out your dark sided delivery is a big light of your own ignorance. You wrote everything in reference to Jesus with "apparent". You call out the Newtons and Darwins when mentioning science as part of the human history whose existence can not be disputed. They were human beings and no matter how one decides to disagree with what they represented, no one can dispute they once lived. SO IS JESUS CHRIST. Jesus Christ lived as a human being and is part of human history. As a matter of fact, the system of dating solely revolves around this "apparent".

      You know, you claim to be open-minded and ask questions without just jumping on the "religion wagon" but your closed mindedness shows how you just jumped on a "wagon of atheism" without asking questions. You are just one of the closed-minded backlash of 21st century who pride themselves in disputing God to prove their open-mindedness and shield their ignorance.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      " view them as utterly disgusting because the existence of God is and should not be a subject of argument"

      I guess you find Thomas Jefferson repugnant. I guess you can't get out of your own little closed view of the world. I feel sorry for you.

      November 21, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
    • Nonimus

      "They tell you there is something called the 'spirit' residing in a man..."
      I don't know who the "they" are that you are referring to, but whether mankind has a spirit or not is very debatable since there is no evidence of this "spirit". Emotions are most likely caused by a combination of chemical, hormonal, and neurological activity.
      There are indeed many things that are unexplained currently, however, that does not mean they won't be explained in the future just like lightening, geology, weather, etc. have been explained to a large extent, and that also does not mean that God is responsible for the unexplained.
      Also, Jesus may or may not have been a real person, but his divine and/or prophetic nature is pure hearsay and speculation. Issac Newton on the other hand, has his own writings to bear witness for him, not to mention mulitple corroborating historical sources. It's really not a accurate to say that Jesus and Issac Newton are equally evidenced in history.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:03 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      "What I mean to say is there are so many things we cannot explain physically and science can only at best explain how our bodies may respond to them but not how they form."

      Since the beginning of recorded history we have seen man attribute a deity to processes that he did not understand – the rising of the sun, floods, disease, etc. Time after time, science has shown us that no deity has ever been required. Why, then, do you think that a lack of understanding of some process means that god must have a hand in the matter?
      It's intellectually lazy.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:09 pm |
    • RonK

      @Nominus and Think for Yourself. I am glad to be reading from you guys. For the fact you refer to Jesus as someone who may or may not have existed but says there is "multiple, corroborating' evidence about Darwin spells out i-g-n-o-r-a-n-c-e and naivety. You can argue about what Jesus stands for but arguing his existence is absurd. Like I stated earlier, he has the whole system of remembering days (dating) revolving around his existence (maybe I should explain to you Anno Domini but I would for respect of your intellect; I believe you must be knowledgeable enough to understand).

      You also mention how emotions may be as result of hormonal and neurological activities. Did you read my first comments at all?.. It is like you explaining "one has a heart attack after hearing a shocking news" as the other way round. These combination of hormonal, chemical and neurological activities are as a response to the emotion and not the cause of the emotion. You tout your knowledge of basic science but you are clueless 🙂

      I want you to go through all the biggest atheist list you know and realize the even the least open-minded ones can not dispute Jesus existed. Dispute God all you want because no man will ever show you physical evidence of him. He has no picture and if He did, He wouldn't be God. The Da Vinci code even did not dispute Jesus having existed but only went as far disputing his actions and "inactions". Are you then saying Pontius Pilate and Herod are fictional characters?.. Just go through you research and after you concede there was an actual human being called Jesus Christ, I will follow this up with an evidence of God and heaven as through him. Good Luck and be open-minded.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
    • RonK

      (maybe I should explain to you Anno Domini but I would "not" for respect of your intellect; I believe you must be knowledgeable enough to understand).

      November 21, 2011 at 3:40 pm |
    • Jonas Brothers

      Very bold of you sid. I bet you tell it to the face of Christians. But I bet you won't tell it to the face of Muslims. It's your cowardice to live with, not mine.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:43 pm |
    • TruthPrevails

      @Ronk: When you can provide evidence that jesus or god existed I wil be happy to argue with you but until then you are the one who is ignorant!!! I am open-minded or I wouldn't be an Atheist. Theists are close-minded...they refuse to accept anything that is not in the buybull...any rational minded person can see that it is nothing but fairy tales.
      So please provide proof for jesus...a man that no-one can testify actually ever lived; provide proof for god...a deity that has never been proven to exist.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:55 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      "Like I stated earlier, he has the whole system of remembering days (dating) revolving around his existence "

      Our days of the week are also named for various gods of other mythologies. Doesn't mean they exist also.

      "Are you then saying Pontius Pilate and Herod are fictional characters?"

      There's lots of factual evidence and real places in a Dan Brown book. But I still find Angels and Demons in the fiction category.

      Logic Fail.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:01 pm |
    • Get Real


      The B.C./A.D dating system was the brainchild of a monk named Dionysius in the 6th century. The church was very powerful in those days and controlled many aspects of society... still, his dating system took hundreds of years (nearly 1000) to be inst-ituted world-wide. Many cultures still keep their ancient calendars going on the side.

      Tip: If you find a coin or sculpture stamped with the original date of 222 A.D. or something like that, don't pay over a nickel for it. 🙂

      November 21, 2011 at 4:08 pm |
    • AGuest9

      It sounds like Sid isn't the one who was brain-washed. Newton also nothing to explain quantum mechanics.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
    • RonK

      @TruthPrevails and ThinkforYourself. It is amazing you keep rolling the ball in my court... haha.. Remember in my first comment I mentioned this.. "You are just one of the closed-minded backlash of 21st century who pride themselves in disputing God to prove their open-mindedness and shield their ignorance".. You just have a funny idea claiming atheism makes you smart. Listen, I have lived there before and if you open your mind, you will know a lot ad understand a lot better.

      You think the facts about Jesus Christ's existence are or could be false but not that of Newton. The days in the week as you mention being named after deities is a logic far from the Anno Domini (did you research that?). Let me lay the sharp difference for you: The deity is what people believe but can not be physically proven just as God but Anno Domini (I will explain now because I think you are intellectually paralyzed directly the opposite of what i didn't want to believe for "sportsmanship" 🙂 ) marks something physical which the birth of Jesus Christ. Once again, PHYSICAL!!

      I want you to be fully aware of the Jesus-dimension before I take you through the God-dimension. I have lived through all this "let's embrace atheism to live free minded without hindrance" but it is all garbage if you keep open mind and realize you will defeat yourself all along your life.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
    • Get Real


      The ancient Chinese calendar is solar/lunar based - something truly PHYSICAL! Right now it is the year of the Rabbit - something truly PHYSICAL!

      November 21, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      The latin words 'in the year of our lord' are physical proof of jesus? Wow, that's some crazy messed up logic. And how is that different than naming Thursday for Thor? It lacks just as much proof as your 'evidence' does.

      "You just have a funny idea claiming atheism makes you smart" Who claimed that. Do you think not believing in mermaids makes you smart? Wow.

      "You think the facts about Jesus Christ's existence are or could be false but not that of Newton". Wait, are you saying that I don't doubt Newton's existence? Because, you know, he actually wrote stuff down. As opposed to, you know, people writing stuff about him several decades after he was here. If you're saying that I don't doubt Newton's theories – well then time to get a clue – he theories were proven wrong be Einstein decades ago.

      And here's a big clue – even if Jesus did exist (I happen to think he probably did), there is absolutely ZERO evidence of him being divine.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Since you seem to be claiming Jesus was real based on the Gregorian calender which is based on a calculation of the supposed birth of Jesus which is based on Biblical accounts of that nativity, would you care to explain to us the evidence in the Bible that was used to determine that date?
      Because as I understand it, the Bible itself is unclear, and in some cases self contradictory, on when Jesus was supposed to have been born.

      Here's a piece of the wikipedia article on it (not that Wikipedia is a definitive source but it is a place to start and usually has links to better sources):
      The Gospel of Luke states that Jesus was conceived during the reign of Herod the Great[Luke 1:5] (i.e., before 4 BC) while also stating that Jesus was born when Cyrenius (or Quirinius) was the governor of Syria and carried out the census of the Roman provinces of Syria and Iudaea.[Luke 2:1-3] The Jewish historian Josephus, in his Antiquities of the Jews (ca. AD 93), indicates that Cyrenius/Quirinius' governorship of Syria began in AD 6, and that the census occurred sometime between AD 6—7,[24] which is incompatible with a conception prior to 4 BC. On this point, Blackburn and Holford-Strevens state that "St. Luke raises greater difficulty ... Most critics therefore discard Luke".

      So based on Luke, Christ was born before 3 BC AND after 5 AD, which of course is impossible, so I guess it is saying Jesus was never born.

      November 21, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
    • Nonimus

      p.s. Ever heard of AM, Anno Mundi?

      November 21, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
    • RonK

      @ThinkForYourself, Get Real and co.. 🙂
      "I am open-minded or I wouldn't be an Atheist" from TruthPrevails hence "You just have a funny idea claiming atheism makes you smart".

      I am also amazed how you all think this is just a forum to throw out what you know about Chinese history and all other facts you know even though they all are so out of this argument; i appreciate your effort to prove you are not as intellectually paralyzed as i may think (but mention something relevant to the debate).. 🙂 The fact of the whole ancient Chinese calendar.. how does it conflict with the Anno Domini phenomenon?.. Are you saying the lunar and solar claims around which Chinese calender revolved is not real or what?

      One of you says he may believe Jesus existed.. now we are heading somewhere but I want you to continue your research and come back with "yes, now i believe Jesus existed". After that, I prove God to you. If you are ready to deny what history has jotted down through uncountable number of historians as in Jesus Christ, then I don't know what you will do with God. It will be much more difficult but I will prove it.. Let's hop over the "Jesus hurdle" first.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
    • Nonimus

      I find this tedious. You claim Jesus really existed. Provide verifiable evidence and I'll listen.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
    • ThinkForYourself

      ""I am open-minded or I wouldn't be an Atheist" from TruthPrevails hence "You just have a funny idea claiming atheism makes you smart"."
      -@RonK since your logic skills are a little bit lacking, let me help you out. 'atheism makes you smart' is not the same as 'being smart makes you an atheist'. Not that I agree necessarily with either.

      "I am also amazed how you all think this is just a forum to throw out what you know about Chinese history and all other facts you know even though they all are so out of this argument;"
      -Just because you choose to ignore those comments because they expose the utter ridiculous of your own doesn't mean they're not germane to this conversation. You're blinders are on far too right.

      "After that, I prove God to you. If you are ready to deny what history has jotted down through uncountable number of historians as in Jesus Christ, then I don't know what you will do with God. It will be much more difficult but I will prove it.. Let's hop over the "Jesus hurdle" first."
      -ugh. How 'bout this – just go ahead and prove he exists. As.sume that I think jesus exists – though I pretty much just said exactly that. And 'uncountable' number of historians? Would those be historians that were using the bible for a reference, or actual historians of the time? If that's the case, then there's probably one – maybe a dozen if you're requirements for what is contemporary and what is a historian are completely lax.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Also, before you ask for evidence of Darwin and Newton...
      Here, talk to Westminster Abbey for a DNA analysis:



      November 21, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
    • RonK

      It is a shame it is almost midnight in Europe and I can't hold on. I need to go to bed soon but what I am wondering is how many people born even 120 years ago do not have conflicting dates of birth (not to say your claims are accurate but i don't have the energy to go deep into it explaining to you the discrepancies in that). Marco Rubio's parents migrated from Cuba to America just around half a century ago and he can't even get the date right in modern world America.

      You are being disingenuous..

      November 21, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Yes I am being disingenuous because you are claiming a dating method, the Gregorian calendar, as evidence of the actual event. That is absurd.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
    • Sid

      @Jonas Brothers, read above again. I just did tell it to the muslims too. Now there's egg dripping down your fat, cowardly face.

      So shove your comment up your ass and lick it, you cowardly ass-hole. Eat sh!t.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
    • RonK

      @Nonimus and co
      I really think I must leave now because you don't even understand how an argument is moulded and framed. You are now giving me links to Newton and Darwin- Gosh!!.. who am i arguing with?.. haha.. i am amazed, honestly!!..

      "-Just because you choose to ignore those comments because they expose the utter ridiculous of your own doesn't mean they're not germane to this conversation. You're blinders are on far too right".. How does the Chinese calender expose any holes in the principle of Anno Domini?..

      And I want you to give me a firm "yes" to Jesus after your research before I start proving God. I will do a vain job proving God to someone who can not even accept human history. Simple as that. And also, Proving God will not be a mutually exclusive issue from proving Jesus. It is a very intertwined in so many ways except one is easier to prove because it is part of the physical human experience.

      November 21, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Maybe you had better leave.... To quote YOU:

      "You think the facts about Jesus Christ's existence are or could be false but not that of Newton. "

      November 21, 2011 at 4:22 pm | Report abuse |

      @Nominus and Think for Yourself. I am glad to be reading from you guys. For the fact you refer to Jesus as someone who may or may not have existed but says there is "multiple, corroborating' evidence about Darwin spells out i-g-n-o-r-a-n-c-e and naivety.

      November 21, 2011 at 3:36 pm | Report abuse |

      November 21, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
    • RonK

      I don't mean this in a disrespectful way but I bet you are not over 15 years old because if you are, then you have a questionable intellect (no disrespect). Was the best deductions or interpretations you made out of my quote that I dispute the existence of Newton and Darwin?.. What it was meant to do is to tell you that Jesus Christ is captured in history just as Darwin and Newton are and just as Darwin and Newton are not fictional figures, same applies to Jesus. who are you?.. can you understand anything?

      I wonder how to prove anything to you if simple statements cannot be digested to absorb their real essence. Or maybe you are just blocking your mind for argument sake..

      November 21, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
    • Nonimus

      How do I explain this to you?
      You made claims about the historicity of Jesus and part of that claim was comparing the evidence for existence of Darwin and Newton to the evidence for the existence of Jesus. To counter your assertion, I have provided links to the burial place of both Darwin and Newton. If Jesus' existence is as verifiable, or as evidenced, as Darwin's and Newton's, as you claimed, then please provide such evidence. If not please, be so kind as to acknowledge that you claim was incorrect or inaccurate.

      November 21, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
    • Nonimus

      I'm leaving now. I'll check back in tomorrow.

      November 21, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
    • TruthPrevails

      @Ronk: Wow, are you ever brainwashed. You have no proof for your god...your personal experience does not count!! To prove there is such a character we need to follow the scientific method and it has been tried over and over and over again to no avail. You're never going to convince me I'm wrong, until I see 100% proof for your fairy tale I have no reason to believe and thankfully that just fall within my right of freedom from religion. So please don't respond, you are a waste of energy...I will never convince you..you're too far gone to change.

      November 21, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Not sure if you are still watching this thread, but thought I would clarify this again, in case there is still some confusion.

      You said, "What it was meant to do is to tell you that Jesus Christ is captured in history just as Darwin and Newton are and just as Darwin and Newton are not fictional figures, same applies to Jesus."

      My point is that Jesus was *not* captured in history "just as Darwin and Newton." There are no contemporaneous accounts of Jesus and there are no writings attributed to Jesus.
      Darwin and Newton both have there own writings, "On the Origin of Species" and "Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica" respectively.
      As to the contemporaneous accounts, I'm sure I could find numerous examples, such as birth, marriage, death records, society and organizational memberships, ships manifests, etc., but perhaps a photograph, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Charles_Darwin_seated_crop.jpg, and a portrait, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GodfreyKneller-IsaacNewton-1689.jpg, would be sufficient, due to the respective artists presumably being in the presence of the subject while they were alive.

      Jesus, on the other hand, has only the New Testament, which was not written by Him or during His lifetime, and a few non-contemporaneous historians reporting third, fourth, and nth-hand accounts and/or speculation.

      Just because a figure or event is purported to have existed in history does not necessarily mean that they actually did. One needs go no further than Atlantis, Ancient Astronauts, or the like to see examples of this. For more recent examples, particularly on the religious front, one needs go no further than the Nation of Islam and the Christian Identi.ty movement, who both claim relation to the "Lost Tribe of Israel", I think, or to the LDS/Mormon claim that Israelites migrated to America thousands(?) of years before Columbus ever found it and the resurrected Jesus visited them there.

      Hope that helps clarify my position.

      November 22, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
  18. hippypoet

    they should be proud, they have the strongest religious beliefs out of any believer i know... they follow what they claim to, something most christians only lie about, and most create cop-outs and find loop holes to not do what they know they should.

    November 21, 2011 at 9:03 am |
    • Gront

      So you're arguing that fundamentalists are more consistent? Who would disagree? Literalists are more likely to be violent, too, since the passages they worship call for the death of others. Is this something you support?

      November 21, 2011 at 9:10 am |
    • hippypoet

      definitly not something i support, but as far as world religions go,there are only a few groups that really practice what they preach – sry, going hippy for the moment –

      Hey now baby, get into my big black car
      Hey now baby, get into my big black car
      I wanna just show you what my politics are.

      I'm a political man and I practice what I preach
      I'm a political man and I practice what I preach
      So don't deny me baby, not while you're in my reach.

      I support the left, tho' I'm leanin', leanin' to the right
      I support the left, tho' I'm leanin' to the right
      But I'm just not there when it's coming to a fight.

      Hey now baby, get into my big black car
      Hey now baby, get into my big black car
      I wanna just show you what my politics are.

      anyway – back on topic... the religious groups are as follows, Buddhists, Yogies of india – not the same as Buddhists, Jewish people – the religion not the culture, Shinto-ists, and finally Muslims.... they all practice what they preach, and do so with p@ssion -not all of them are fundamentalist either! but each group has there nut jobs, as do all walks of life.

      November 21, 2011 at 9:27 am |
    • VampireJack

      Having worked in several Muslim countries, I can tell you, hand on heart that there are just as many "fake" Muslims who cliam to be religous, but really are not, in the Muslim world. It's just like the West in this regard.

      November 21, 2011 at 10:27 am |
    • ThinkForYourself

      @Vampire: Please see: One True Scottsman Fallacy

      November 21, 2011 at 12:09 pm |
    • NorCalMojo

      THIS is how British academics think.

      "Everyone is better than us"

      "our fundies bad, their fundies good" is a pretty twisted (and hilarious) manifestation of the self loathing.

      Too funny

      November 21, 2011 at 2:16 pm |
  19. Gront

    So what's the real reason this Jewish organization came up with a poll that produced this "Proud British Muslims" result?
    Polls are easy to manipulate. And this isn't Britain. How British Muslims feel about bombing the place they're so proud of won't make much difference to anyone in the USA. If they want to do violence in the name of their religion, they will do so regardless of how "proud" they are of being British. Their "god" is more important than respecting the lives of non-believers, British or not.

    November 21, 2011 at 8:49 am |
  20. Reality

    Muslims, Anglicans, Jews et al, save yourselves a lot of time: Part 1,

    (From the studies/books of Armstrong, Rushdie, Hirsi Ali, Richardson and Bayhaqi)

    The Five Steps To Deprogram 1400 Years of Islamic Myths:

    ( –The Steps take less than two minutes to finish- simply amazing, two minutes to bring peace and rationality to over one billion lost souls- Priceless!!!)

    Are you ready?

    Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.

    The First Five of the 77 Branches:

    "1. Belief in Allah"

    aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc. should be added to your self-cleansing neurons.

    "2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."

    Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gi-b G-nab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "crea-tionist".

    "3. To believe in the existence of angels."

    A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/de-vils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hitt-ites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ug-ly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as f–airies and "tin–ker be-lls". Modern de-vils are classified as the de-mons of the de-mented.

    "4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."

    Another major item to delete. There are no books written in the spirit state of Heaven (if there is one) just as there are no angels to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.

    Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the un-educated masses in line. Today we call them for-tune tellers.

    Prophecies are also invali-dated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.

    "5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."

    Mohammed spent thirty days "fasting" (the Ramadan legend) in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingy thingy". Common sense demands a neuron deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic vi-olence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallu-cinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.

    Walk these Five Steps and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!!

    Unfortunately, there are not many Muslim commentators/readers on this blog so the "two-minute" cure is not getting to those who need it. If you have a Muslim friend, send him a copy and help save the world.

    Analogous steps are available at your request for deprogramming the myths of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Paganism..

    November 21, 2011 at 8:18 am |
1 2 3
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.