No subscription or hidden extras
Read through the most famous quotes by topic #hood
Religion is a positive thing and in individualistic religion it cannot be so proved but it bears its own proof in universalism. Yes, in individualism it is confined within one individual and the rest of the mankind have got to believe him, whereas in the Universalism, the people realize and they speak. Universalism means the seer of God becomes God and attains Godhood and the proof it bears that He will be seen by thousand others within their bodies and they shall announce it. ↗
I learned about religion the way most children learned about sex, [in the schoolyard]. . . . They terrified me by telling me there was a dead man in the sky watching everything I did and I retaliated by explaining where babies came from. Some of their mothers phoned mine to complain, though I think I was more upset than they were: they didn't believe me but I believed them. ↗
It is recorded in the monastic rules that a monk once performed an abortion on a girl; the Buddha judged his action seriously wrong, which incurred him the highest offense in the monastic rule. A monk committing this kind of wrongful deed must be expelled from the monastic community. The Buddha considered the embryo to be a person like an adult, so the monk who killed the embryo through abortion was judged by Buddhist monastic rules as having committed a crime equal in gravity to killing an adult. In the commentary on the rule stated above, it is stated clearly that killing a human being means destroying human life from the first moment of fertilization to human life outside the womb. So, even though the Buddha himself did not give a clear-cut pronouncement about when personhood occurs, the Buddhist tradition, especially the Theravada tradition, clearly states that personhood starts when the process of fertilization takes place. ↗
I understood and appreciated the miracle of birth, but I did not understand motherhood, nor did I appreciate the oveselling of it. To me it was a choice, one of many options. To others it was what women did. We were supposed to breed. It had been decided for us. Society expected it. Religion demanded it. ↗
I just wish this social institution [religion] wasn't based on what appears to me to be a monumental hoax built on an accumulation of customs and myths directed toward proving something that isn't true. ↗
Later, in my adulthood, I will read the book again, even watch the movie, and understand that I wasn’t equipped, as a child, to make room for arguments that would undermine every single choice made for me, that would shatter the foundations of my very existence. I would see that I had to believe everything I was taught, if only to survive. For a long time I wouldn’t be ready to accept that my worldview could be wrong, but I do not look back with shame at my ignorance. ↗
There are at least two ways to believe in the idea of quality. You can believe there's something ineffable going on within the human mind, or you can believe we just don't understand what quality in a mind is yet, even though we might someday. Either of those opinions allows one to distinguish quantity and quality. In order to confuse quantity and quality, you have to reject both possibilities. The mere possibility of there being something ineffable about personhood is what drives many technologists to reject the notion of quality. They want to live in an airtight reality that resembles an idealized computer program, in which everything is understood and there are no fundamental mysteries. They recoil from even the hint of a potential zone of mystery or an unresolved seam in one's worldview. This desire for absolute order usually leads to tears in human affairs, so there is a historical reason to distrust it. Materialist extremists have long seemed determined to win a race with religious fanatics: Who can do the most damage to the most people? ↗
وضمن هذا السعي إلي الإمساك بالدولة, فإن دعاة الإسلام السياسي لا يختلفون- من جهتهم- عن غيرهم من الذين عملوا, من جهة أخري, تحت رايات الأيديولوجيات التحديثية( الليبرالية والقومية والاشتراكية وغيرها). وأعني من حيث إنهم جميعا يراوحون تحت مظلة ذات الأطروحة التي لا تري للتغيير سبيلا إلا بتسكين الجوانب التقنية الإجرائية من الحداثة فوق ذات البنيات التقليدية المتوارثة للوعي التي تحتفظ للجمهور بوداعته وهدوئه وطاعته. وفقط فإن الاختلاف بينهما يأتي من نوع المفردات التي يستخدمها كل فريق في سعيه إلي الهيمنة علي المجال العام. إذ فيما ظل دعاة الأيديولوجيات الحداثوية يستخدمون المفردات المتداولة في إطار الأيديولوجيات التي يبشرون بها( من قبيل الحرية والديمقراطية والدستور والاشتراكية والطبقة العاملة والقومية وغيرها); والتي لم يقدروا علي السيطرة بها علي المجال العام لعدم امتلاك الجمهور- المقصود التأثير عليه بها- للتراث المعرفي والتاريخي الذي تقف عليه هذه المفردات, فإن دعاة الإسلام السياسي يستخدمون مفردات تنتمي للرأسمال الرمزي الديني للجمهور للسيطرة علي المجال العام( من قبيل الشريعة والحكم بما أنزل الله وتطبيق الحدود وغيرها); وبما سيجعل من دولة الإسلام السياسي, الدولة التنين فعلا ↗
