My family comes from Egypt, a land colonized by Arabs. My father is an exmuslim scholar and exnassirist who spent 1 year in prison after leaving Islam but got saved by the pressures of the Bush Administration and was able to immigrate to Europe shortly after. He has taught me a lot about the dangers of Islam and I want to share this perspective with a western audience.

What I most often see in online discussions about Islam is people criticizing individual verse from Quran or Hadiths such as the ones about child marriage. All of these points are absolutely valid and I love to see them being discussed and Muslims being held accountable.
However, I think most people are missing a much more fundamental question. Islam is, ontologically, incompatible with any other form of government (doesn’t actually matter whether it’s western or not): Shari’a is not simply a personal moral code or a set of guidelines for religious rituals. It is a comprehensive legal and political system designed to regulate every sphere of public and private life.
This fundamental doctrine finds its roots in the concept of Hakimiyya, which is the absolute sovereignty of God over legal and legislative matters. Under this framework, law cannot originate from human will, nor can it be amended by popular vote; it emanates exclusively from divine revelation.

What this means is that a constitutional democracy, such as the American one, cannot exist in Islam because it would be considered blasphemy. Why? Because if you say “We the people want to emanate this law ” you are basically taking the role of Allah in emanating rules which is a major sin (shirk).

So-called "moderate" or "cultural" Muslims certainly exist as individuals who choose to live peacefully in secular societies, but they are operating in direct opposition to the core jurisprudence of their own faith. They are not presenting a reformed version of Islamic theology; they are simply choosing not to practice its political mandates. Calling someone a "moderate Muslim" ignores the fact that the underlying doctrine itself remains completely un-moderated.
Western constitutionalism wasn't achieved simply by asking Christians to be nicer or more tolerant. It required centuries-long intellectual revolution that stripped divine revelation of its direct authority over civil law.
For Islam to ever truly reconcile with democratic constitutions, a similar theological shift would have to happen. Islamic jurisprudence would need to downgrade Sharia from a divine statute book meant for state enforcement to a purely personal, ethical guide. But until orthodox theology officially separates divine morality from human legal authority, the tension won't go away.
That is why political Islam isn't just a minor cultural friction point. if we leave this idea unchecked, its fundamental rejection of human-made law makes it one of the single greatest threats not just to Western democracies, but to free societies everywhere.

I am interested into moving to the south, but I heard they don't take kindly to atheists, and a lot of small towns are super religious to the point of that's all you hear about. Anyone who lives in the rural south, how bad is it? And would you recommend living there? And what states would be better accepting to Atheism than others?

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is insisting to the Walton County Sheriff’s Office that a recent event where it baptized inmates was a grave constitutional violation. 

A Christian Broadcasting Network article reports that the Sheriff’s Office (headquartered  in DeFuniak Springs, Fla.) recently partnered with First Apostolic Church of DeFuniak Springs and New Life Church of Santa Rosa Beach with the apparent purpose of baptizing inmates at Walton County Jail and encouraging them to convert to Christianity. According to the July 15 article, 69 inmates were baptized at Walton County Jail in the coordinated “mass baptisms” organized by the Sheriff’s Office and the two churches. Furthermore, these churches have partnered to hold mass baptisms at other jails before, indicating that the Walton County Sheriff’s Office was aware of the churches’ intentions. The baptisms appeared to have taken place on jail property. Inmates are photographed in the article being baptized by Walton County Sheriff’s Office employees. 

The sheriff’s office public information officer, Corey Dobridnia, told reporters that part of the office’s “mantra” is “trying to make men and women who are incarcerated in our jail better people, and introducing them to the Lord. And then being baptized is sort of a rebirth for them.”

FFRF is demanding that the Walton County Sheriff’s Office immediately put a stop to this unconstitutional promotion of religion.

“By organizing and hosting inmate baptisms, the sheriff’s office is unconstitutionally favoring religion over nonreligion, and Christianity over all other faiths,” FFRF Staff Attorney Sammi Lawrence writes to Sheriff Michael A. Adkinson Jr.

A correctional facility is an inherently coercive environment and inmates and detainees are literally a captive audience. When the Walton County Sheriff’s Office entangles itself with religion and makes it clear that it’s encouraging inmates to convert to Christianity, inmates will no doubt feel pressured to convert and participate in religious activities to be seen as cooperative and well behaved. Inmates and detainees who are aware of the Sheriff’s Office’s promotion of Christianity will not genuinely feel free to refuse to participate in its religious activities. This is constitutionally impermissible. 

Law enforcement must be even-handed and avoid any appearance of bias towards some citizens, and hostility towards others, the FFRF letter emphasizes. Walton County Sheriff’s Office employees can practice their personal religion any way they wish when acting in their personal capacities. However, they are not permitted to use the machinery of government and taxpayer money to promote their personal religion to inmates or the wider community. The Sheriff’s Office’s promotion of religion and conversion to Christianity needlessly marginalizes the 38 percent of Americans who are non-Christians, including the nearly one in three adult Americans who are religiously unaffiliated.

To comply with the First Amendment and to protect the rights of all inmates held in Walton County Jail, FFRF is asking that the sheriff’s office halt inmate baptisms.

“First Amendment violations in incarceration facilities are particularly egregious, given the abuse of a literal captive audience,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor says. “The right to be free from religious coercion is not stripped from a citizen when they are in prison. These baptisms must stop immediately.” 

I just can’t just let this go, honestly this is hilarious to me, how christians were taking to tik tok, making skits on what they will do when they get to heaven, selling possessions, fear mongering all in all, people sold houses, cars, quit jobs and all kinds of delusional things,
not only this but they gave a specific date,
then said nah, it’s a few days later.

And now here it is almost a year later and they are acting like they didn’t believe that bullshit 😂😂

I hear people say "we should respect all beliefs" all the time. Honestly I don't really agree. I think we should respect people, but beliefs should always be okay to question. Some beliefs are harmless, but some also affect politics, education, and even other people's life.

If nobody question religious beliefs just because they are religion, then how bad ideas can ever change? Every idea should be able to take criticism if it's really true.

I never understand why religion always get a special pass. Nobody tell us to respect every political opinion or every conspiracy theory. So why religion should be different?

Maybe I'm missing something. Do you think we should respect all beliefs, or only respect people's right to have those beliefs?

Ok so I'm an agnostic atheist, and whenever I make a post and specify this, people always say "you can't be agnostic and atheist at the same time!!"

Agnostic and atheist are two different binaries!

Atheism vs. Theism is a binary of belief: Do you actively believe a deity exists? Yes or No.

Agnosticism vs. Gnosticism is a binary of knowledge: Can humans definitively prove or know the truth? Yes or No.

Knowledge and belief are different! So if I'm an agnostic atheist, I KNOW that humans cannot prove the existence of a higher power or an ultimate truth (agnostic), but I personally BELIEVE that there is no higher power (atheist)

People have full on arguments over A DICTIONARY DEFINITION

Someone even said " agnostic is when you believe in a god but not a higher power"

A god is a higher power?? That's just a theist.

I genuinely thought this was obvious, but apparently not

Someone at work was seriously injured. At first, there was a worry that they might lose their arm. We finally got word that the damage wasn't as severe as first thought and that the prognosis was good. One of our coworkers said "It's a miracle. God was watching him." I had to bite my tongue to keep from saying "If God was watching him, then why didn't act before his arm was mushed?"

I'm fairly tolerant of religion. I don't like it, but as long as they leave me and others alone I will leave them alone. This is the exception. That kind of statement infuriates me. It's such awful dismissive response to a tragedy.

Thanks for reading my vent!!!

For years, I've been thinking about death constantly, and with each passing day it gets worse. Lately, it has reached the point where my entire day revolves around thinking about death. I don't really do anything with my life anymore besides being afraid of it and obsessing over it.

I know it's almost certain that we will simply cease to exist. Some people try to comfort me by saying that we'll return to the same state we were in before we were born, when we didn't experience anything for billions of years. I understand that, and I know it's true. But before I was born, I had never experienced existence. I had never had thoughts, feelings, happiness, sadness, enjoyment, boredom, hobbies, interests, or memories.

The idea of returning to that same state from before I was born is actually the very reason for my constant terror.

I'm extremely scared, and I believe there are people who have gone through the same thing and eventually managed to overcome it. How did you come to accept that death is your ultimate fate?

Following local residents complaints and a legal threat from the BC Humanist Association, the Council of the District of Tobique Valley (in New Brunswick, Canada) agreed to end the practice of opening local meetings with the Lord's Prayer.

Members of Congress, national secular leaders and advocates joined together in a Capitol Hill reception room Tuesday evening for the third annual Congressional Reason Reception.

The reception celebrated the Congressional Freethought Caucus, reason, constitutional democracy and the growing visibility of nonreligious Americans in public life. The Freedom From Religion Foundation, American Humanist Association and the Secular Coalition for America hosted an evening filled with wit and humor, with leaders of the secular movement and keynote speaker Mary L. Trump.

The reception has served as a celebration of reason and joy in public life, a secular alternative to the dour and sanctimonious National Prayer Breakfast as debates over Christian nationalism, religious exemptions and the separation of church and state continue to shape national politics. Organizers said the event demonstrates that Americans who value secular government are increasingly organized and visible on Capitol Hill. Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., co-chair of the Congressional Freethought Caucus, has quipped that it is “a boozy alternative to the National Prayer Breakfast.”

“Our country was founded on freedom of religion and church-state separation. No wannabe king or theocratic sycophant hellbent on controlling people through religious extremism will change that,” says Huffman. “Folks from all walks of faith — or none at all — came together to celebrate something far more American: a government run by reason, freedom of conscience and the Constitution. That’s what the Reason Reception is all about. No matter how hard Christian nationalists fight to overturn democracy and force their extremism on the American people, we will be here defending church-state separation and our fundamental rights.”

“Every year, some of the most reasonable people I know assemble to highlight the essential role that reason plays in protecting democracy, liberty, progress and justice for all,” says Freethought Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md. “The Congressional Reason Reception celebrates and revives the spirit of Tom Paine and Ben Franklin and our Enlightenment Constitution, which cast off centuries of religious fanaticism and dogma, Holy Crusades, witch trials, Inquisitions and theocratic rule to usher in a new era of self-government, reason and democracy. Congratulations to our honorees, Katherine Stewart and Alison Gill, who are doing fine work to champion reason and common sense in our own time.”

“All you need to do is read the Declaration of Independence to understand that our Founders did not want and did not intend for this to be a religious country,” says Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore. “And now, when you look at what is happening with this administration and with Republican MAGA colleagues, they want this to be a white Christian nation. It is not — and we will not let that happen. With your voices here and across the country, we will stop that from happening. We want the next generation to know that this is a country where you are free to believe in religion or free to not believe in religion.”

“When I first came into Congress eight years ago, someone told me that religion is what politicians talk about when they don’t want to talk about ethics,” says Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill. “And there is a deep truth there. I think the inverse of that is equally true, that if you talk about ethics, people think you’re talking about their religion. And I think there’s a power there. There’s an ability there. What I think you challenge us to do, and what we have to challenge ourselves to do, is to speak about ethics and morality in a way that doesn’t fall back on those religious texts.”

“Trump has learned that to say ‘God’ or ‘gun’ gets you votes,” says Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn. “And as I said in committee today, he is totally irreligious and doesn’t have any idea of Matthew. Being in legislatures and congresses has taught me a lot about religion because so many people use it. … Trump knows nothing about it. He is so obviously areligious. He really should be here with us, the other heathens. But he uses God to get votes, which is a corruption of God. And all about Christian nationalism is a corruption of Christian.”

Mary Trump, the keynote speaker, remarks: “We’ve been on a very dark path for a very long time. So we need to do a better job of explaining to people why allowing religion and government to become intertwined is fatal to the American experiment on the one hand and detrimental to the pursuit of our freedoms on the other. We have the benefit, those of us in this room, of reason, of perspective. A lot of people who have made the choices they’ve made and voted the way they have voted don’t have those luxuries. So we, from the benefit of where we stand, need to extend these people grace because that way I truly believe we can make common cause with people who in the grand scheme of things have suffered as much from their choices as others have. And I think that’s the way forward.”

“The National Prayer Breakfast tells everyone who isn’t the right kind of Christian that they don’t quite count as Americans. We reject that,” says Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. “This country belongs to all of us, believers and nonbelievers alike, and no one needs to bow their head to belong here.”

“Thomas Paine called it ‘the cause of America’: the conviction that free minds, working together through reason, could govern themselves better than any king or church ever had,” says Fish Stark, Executive Director of the American Humanist Association. “Last night’s room, packed with members of Congress and humanists from across the country, was proof that cause is still alive. Now we take it to statehouses, school boards, and every corner of this country, and build the nation Paine imagined: one where reason and compassion govern together, and empathy is not a matter of faith, but of conscience.”

Steven Emmert, executive director, The Secular Coalition for America, says, “This reception is called the Congressional Reason Reception and I think that’s fitting not because reason belongs to secular Americans alone, but because reason belongs in public service.”

The Congressional Reason Reception coincides with the growing strength of the Congressional Freethought Caucus, which now counts 37 members, and reflects a secular movement that continues to gain ground on Capitol Hill.

The evening also recognized recipients of the Age of Reason Award and Common Sense Award for their contributions to advancing secular government and freedom of conscience.

“I don’t need to tell you that 250 years after Thomas Paine helped launch the American Revolution, our democracy is in crisis,” says Katherine Stewart, recipient of the Age of Reason Award. “This is no time for the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot. This is the time to fight like hell for our country and our founding ideals of equality, pluralism, reason, justice, and the rule of law.”

“We need courts that are fair, unbiased, and that will uphold the Constitution, and enforce our rights and protect our democracy — not ignore it to salute their political or Christian Nationalist agenda,” says Alison Gill, recipient of the Common Sense Award. “And the Congressional Freethought Caucus plays an especially important role in showing the harms caused by this Christian nationalist agenda and pushing back against it. So I truly want to thank you all for this award, and I hope that together we will keep making progress to reform the courts and restore our democracy.”

Organizers said the growing attendance at the annual reception and the expanding Congressional Freethought Caucus reflect increasing recognition that Americans of every faith and none deserve equal representation in public life.

Maybe this is not popular opinion, but I always feel many people think any criticism of religion is same as discrimination. For me, those are not the same thing at all.

If someone insult a person because of their religion, of course that's wrong. But if someone ask questions about religious beliefs or point out contradictions, why is that a problem? I think every belief should be okay to criticize.

Sometimes I feel religion always get extra protection. Political opinions, science, philosophy, they all get challenged almost every day. But when religion get questioned, some people act like you already attack them personally.

Maybe I'm missing something here. Where do you think the line is between criticizing religion and attacking religious people?

Sometimes I wonder how many people actually believe, and how many just don't want to lose their family, friends, or community. For some people, leaving religion doesn't only change beliefs. It can change their whole life.

I think that's one reason religion survive for so long. The social cost can be much bigger than the intellectual cost. Even if someone have doubts, they may never say it.

Maybe faith is not always about believing. Sometimes maybe it's about what you could lose.

Do you think social pressure keep more people religious than we realize?

I’m tired. I’m exhausted. I’m past the point of even wanting to be in the same room as those who exhibit religious extremism. I look around, and towards the history books, and everything that has been a direct result of religion. Wars, death, misinformation, corruption, indoctrination. We a species would be much better off without it.

I’m sick of being held back. I’m sick of those who hide behind their book and their supposed rules, encroaching on everyone else.

Now I am a believer in being able to practice your religious freedoms, but the problem is, it’s never done in private. It’s never kept to themselves like the Bible says it should. It’s always picked apart for agendas, it’s never followed through and through.

While I understand that there is the good in the sea of bad, I barely see the good because those who are the loudest, or in power, as usually always the bad.

I live and work a blue collar job in southern America. Today I had a co-worker come up and say” you know what speaking in tongues is? Well, so-and-so was speaking to me in Portuguese and I understood every word. He was telling me that my body is a temple and I shouldn’t smoke.”

The man is so far gone he’s starting to see miracles

I realized this when I was still trying to accept that God isn't real. It straight up cured my OCD. I finally got rid of the fear of being judged, and the fear that my bad thoughts would suddenly become reality. I realized they're just going to stay in my head forever. no one to listen, no one to judge me for them. I no longer had to feel bad for simply thinking.

Per the doctrine of the Trinity Jesus is YHWH, the god of the Old Testament. That means every command, action, behavior and law were all issued by the same entity.

When we read the Old Testament we find out that YHWH/Jesus commanded and condoned almost every major deed we classify today as severe crimes worthy of the death for their perpetrator.

He's guilty of:

Genocide

Deuteronomy 20:16–17: "However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you."

1 Samuel 15:3: "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

Joshua 6:21: "They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys."

War Crimes, human and child trafficking:

Numbers 31:17–18: "Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."

Deuteronomy 20:10–15: "When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subjected to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and engage you in battle... put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves."

Chattel Slavery & Human Property:

Leviticus 25:44–46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life..."

Exodus 21:20–21: Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies of a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave survives a day or two, since the slave is their property."

Mutilation & Collective Punishment:

Deuteronomy 25:11–12: "If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."

Joshua 7:24–25: Then Joshua, together with all Israel, took Achan son of Zerah, the silver, the robe, the gold bar, his sons and daughters, his cattle, donkeys and sheep, his tent and all that he had... Then all Israel stoned him, and after they had stoned the rest, they burned them."

Capital Crimes for religious freedom & tyrannical theocracy and oppression of minorities:

Deuteronomy 13:6–10: "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, 'Let us go and worship other gods'... You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death..."

Leviticus 20:13: If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Numbers 15:32–36: "While the Israelites were in the wilderness, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day... Then the Lord said to Moses, 'The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp.' So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the Lord commanded Moses."

Deuteronomy 21:18–21: "If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him... then all the men of his town are to stone him to death."

I don't think people should get mocked just because they believe in a religion. But I always feel religion get a different treatment compared to almost everything else. If someone say they can talk to aliens or see the future, everyone will ask for proof. But if someone say God talked to them or miracles happened, suddenly asking questions become "disrespectful."

For me this is a weird double standard. I can respect someone's right to believe whatever they want, but that doesn't mean every belief should be protected from criticism. Respecting a person and agreeing with their ideas are not the same thing.

I actually think this make honest discussion harder. Some religious people never get their beliefs challenged, and many atheists just stay quiet because they don't want to be called rude or offensive. Nobody really benefits from that.

Maybe it's different depending where you live. Do you think religion is still treated like a protected topic, or people are becoming more open to questioning it?

For context, I live in India. In the recent days, we have seen one of the largest student protests in Indian history. The protest is about demanding the resignation of the education minister, due to multiple cheating scandals in the country's largest medical exam (NEET). 21 students committed suicide due to this.

The protest is being led by the Cockroach Janta (People's) Party, a satirical party founded a few weeks ago due to comments made by the Indian Chief Justice, calling unemployed youth as cockroaches.

My problem is this. Since the protest started, I've seen many people say that they don't support the CJP because a few people have included Indian Gods' names in posters/slogans.

I really don't understand these people. All the parties in India use religion as a major tool while campaigning for elections. The current govt got elected due to a massive religious campaign of building a temple. Yet I've never seen any of these people speak up against them.

Your God isn't more important than 21 dead children. Such a fucked up mentality.

As an atheist who was once a Christian, the first reason I began to doubt my faith was that I truly noticed how Christianity and church dogmas restrict people from fulfilling their natural needs to the point of absurdity.

Let’s talk about the seven sins — labels the church applied to needs and emotions that are completely natural for a healthy person.

Regarding forbidden emotions (such as pride, envy, wrath, sloth): as a psychology student, I can state that the science I study tells us the following: there are no "good" or "bad" emotions — they are all necessary, and everyone experiences them, because they are part of natural human functioning.

When I achieve success, isn't it natural to feel proud? Or when someone close to us achieves something, don't we feel proud of them? Pride is simply a recognition of the value of your efforts or the efforts of a loved one. It is also a clear indication that we are satisfied with the result. Furthermore, this feeling acts as a reward following our efforts. It signifies that our work was meaningful and motivates us to keep working and improve even further.

When a person feels envy, it indicates that they lack something another person possesses. The problem lies not in the emotion itself, but in how the person reacts to it. Indeed, some people, upon feeling envious, begin to belittle the person who triggered that feeling, project their own insecurities onto them, and downplay their achievements. Others, however, begin working on themselves to acquire what someone else possesses. They do this not to demonstrate superiority over the object of their envy, but because they understand the situation this way: "I envy this person because I lack something they have — something I actually need. How can I remedy this? By working on myself and fulfilling that need."

Wrath is also a normal emotion that needs to be channeled rather than suppressed. When you constantly suppress negative emotions, they build up, eventually leading to an explosion. Besides, isn't it natural for someone with healthy self-esteem and a sense of dignity to feel wrath at someone who has wronged them? And it is far better to vent your wrath on your offender; otherwise, you will take it out on your loved ones.

Sloth is a signal our body sends when it is tired and needs rest. Feeling lazy or unmotivated is often the body’s innate way of preventing burnout, avoiding unnecessary physical exertion, and forcing the nervous system to recover from stress.

Now, regarding the rest of the sins like lust, greed, and gluttony.

Without lust, there would be no reproduction, and humans would die out. The sharp surge in sexual desire during youth is a signal from the body prompting a person to find a partner, enter into a relationship, and start a family. Also, since humans are among the very few creatures capable of having sex for pleasure, for us, lust is about more than just reproduction. When you have sex with someone you love, it enriches the relationship and brings joy to both partners. And even if a person feels lust for more than one person and has multiple partners without feeling love, there is nothing wrong with that, provided it harms no one. Lust is an expression of natural physical need that has the right to be satisfied.

And what is wrong with greed? Isn't it natural for a person to desire material goods, given that they improve one's quality of life? There is nothing wrong with wanting to possess something that ensures prosperity and a good quality of life — not just for yourself, but also for your family, if you have one.

And finally, as for gluttony, it is simply a matter of needing to consume more than the usual amount. Everyone eats as much as they need; if someone feels the urge to eat more, there is usually a reason for it — such as a reaction to stress. Teenagers, too, are prone to overeating because they are growing and developing. Moreover, historically, gluttony was an evolutionary necessity. For early humans, food was scarce, and consuming as many calorie-dense foods as possible when available was vital for survival.

So, in conclusion, I believe that the so-called "seven deadly sins" of the Church are anti-human rules that make a person feel ashamed of NATURAL emotions and needs, which are BIOLOGICALLY INNATE. Following them is a sure path to the degradation of a developed human being.