Religion In A Clubby Hole khurram #70: ``There are 2 perfectly reasonable answers that need to considered,

1. Nothing
2. Nothing``

hmm.........i suppose this keeps things simple.......and one does not need to think furthur.........it answers the, ``why`` of life, i.e. everything is a mere coincidence. I suppose one can follow this approach. Though, to me, in such an approach, life is a very unfair place, for those who are physically or mentally handicapped etc. To me, ``life`` cannot be a roll of dice. But that is a non-scientific debate...........

Let`s get to the scientific side. You did not answer the other questions I asked, about the, ``how.``

- How did the first, ``thing`` get created, if everything has to be created from and by something else, as science tells us? How did the whole mass of everything get created, energy, atoms etc. The initial building blocks.....Science, itself, demands that the answer to this cannot be a simple, ``Nothing.``

- And how did these unorganic building blocks combine to form organic life? Is science, itself, moving towards a solution for this, or is it suggesting that it is impossible.......

Now if you have answers to both of these questions, I`ll convert to whatever you are pushing..............

Religion In A Clubby Hole Dost-mittar #79: ``Upnashidic philosophies and Romair, if born a Sikh, would claim that he likes Sikhism not because he was born in it but because he is genuinely impressed by it after he studied it. The fact is that the brainwashing by parents and the society we grew up in has removed any objectivity we could have in making any such decision, all we are capable at this point is rationalising,``

Speak for yourself. Kindly do not speak for me..........You seem to be making some huge assumptions about people. Do keep in mind that everyone does not think like you. Do also consider the possibility also that, perhaps, people are far more inquisitive than you and some may have even evolved beyond you. A tough concept to internalize, but you should keep it in mind..........

The main point is can one debate any issue and provide answers. People turn toward thought processes that provide answers. Not towards though processes that shut them away from answers................At least that is how I think. I am a technical and scieintific person by education, and have thought through these issues ad-nauseum. So far I have found nothing, including science, that answers everything............

(If you know of something, do let me know. And I promise I will switch to it...........)

That is how one should reach one`s conclusions............One can only do that if one opens up one`s mind a bit and gets out of rigid schools of thought - scientific and religious - and tries to logically work through things and accept any dead ends..............Far too many people, including perhaps you, are stuck in a strait-jacketed type of thinking, which assume that everyone who does not think like them, must be brainwashed.........

Religion In A Clubby Hole chaltahai #66: ``Re: # 66: Who created God?``

I don`t know. That`s my whole point! How exactly does one answer this question about creators? One cannot answer it. Everything, according to science, should have a creator. Yet science, itself, cannot tell us how the initial creation took place. That is the anomoly, the paradox and the Catch-22.

If science is the end-all, at all levels, then it should provide the answer. Or a path to an answer. However, despite how many times I provide this logic to certain people, they never debate it. They just wirte it off..........

One has to be able to realize the limitations of everything - be it religion, science or the human mind as a whole.........Who created God is a question that no amount of logic or science can answer. Infact, science, itself, states that it cannot answer such questions........

This is why people turn to religion. It fills this gap............and if people want them to turn away from religion, they need to answer this question or creation. Instead of yapping away 24 x 7, as if they have all the answers..............

Religion In A Clubby Hole soysauce/Raw_Dust #69: ``Science hasn`t found a way to disprove what isn`t there without offering an alternative. ``

My point wasn`t that science cannot prove what isn`t there. My point was that science demands that something should be there, but cannot provide a reason for why it isn`t there. Science, itself, demands that there be a creator for everything. You can assume creator to be a force or an alien, or a bunch of atoms, if you want, if the concept of God turns you off.

This is the limitation of science and logic............It is, thus, not an all-answering approach. You need to think a bit deeper, and at least accept that science, itself, has limitations. If it doesn`t then do answer the questions I asked. Human mind has limitations also. Not from a religious point of view, but from a scientific point of view. Think about these things. Don`t just limit your thinking to a unchallangeable and rigid system...Forget about God. It is not a question of religion. It is a question of inquisiviteness. If you believe science is the end all of everything, then it should have the answers.

- How did the atoms of which everything is formed come into existence. What does science say?
- Can organic life be created from inorganic life. What does science say?

Religion In A Clubby Hole parthaab #60: ``The point is, if God really does exist, it would be easy to prove, as there would be tangible evidence. What we have instead is standard mass delusion.``

It is not that simple. If it was that simple, everyone would be an athiest, today..........Or a maulvi of some sorts..............

The concept of a Creator is something that is logically, impossible to deny. Logic demands that everything be created by something else. Science demands the same. Things cannot come into existense from nothing. I am not a physicist, but matter has to be created from some other kind of matter. It can be released into energy, etc. But how did the first atom get created? Not to mention, all the atoms, which are converting from one form to another? Or how did the first energy unit get created? Not the Big Bang, but even before the Big Bang........

One can call that Creator God, or Allah or alien from planet X, but the concept has to exist; science and logic demand it.

The second point is that how did nature create organic life from inorganic materials? How did the mitochondria, and nucleas etc. of a single-cell ameoba, join and come into existence? Is it even possible for inorganic materials to form organic materials, in nature? Do we see anything like that happening in our daily lives? If not, then how did it happen, for the first time? All the science I have read seems to be stating, more and more that this just isn`t, ``scientifically`` possible. The old methane gas and electricity experiment is being discredited.............

So if everything, according to science, needs a creator, and nature, according to science, cannot create even a basic single-cell organic unit of life, from inorganic units, then how in the world did all of us come into existence? Science can, itself, only peel this onion back, so far. After which science reaches its limitations, defined by its own rules..............

The above is just the, ``how`` part of existence. If you talk about the, ``why`` part of existence, then science becomes even more useless. Hence, while you are correct that it is, ``scientifically`` imossible to prove the existence of a Creator. It is also a, ``scientific`` fact that science itself demands that there must be a Creator. And that science, itself, is stating that it can never figure out who that Creator is.........

So, there must be a Creator, whose existense we can never prove...........this is why people believe in religion. It fills the gap that exists between the limitations of science and the demands of an inquisitive mind, which wants answers............

to put it simply:

koi tou hai jo, nizam-e-hasti, chala raha hai
wohi khuda hai, wohi khuda hai

Religion In A Clubby Hole Relgions, and the concept of God, are around, and will remain around, until the following two questions can be answered:

- What happens after death
- What is the meaning of life

These two questions are Catch-22 anomolies, i.e. to find out what happens, after death, one has to die. But once one is dead, one cannot report what is happening. Similarly, to find out the meaning of life, and why we were created, one has to exist in a pre-creation state. However, in such a state, where one has not been created yet, one cannot report the results either...........

From a scientific point of view, religion will be around until science can answer the following question:

- How can (and was) organic life be created from inorganic life

This is also turning into a paradox. The more science is advancing, the more it is starting to prove that organic life cannot be created, scientifically, from inorganic life. In this sense, science, is itself, through scientific research, marking the boundaries of its own limitations..........

If people want to get rid of organized (or even disorganized) religion, they would be better off, spending their energies, answering the above questions. If they can find scientific answers to them, religion will disappear on its own. If they cannot, then they are asking human beings to move from one state, where all the answers are not available, to another state where all the answers are not available.............

Religion In A Clubby Hole hamidm mian #35: ``.......why can`t we cure this disease ??????``

Because people keep voting and supporting individuals like George Bush and various religious evangelicals (in various countries), when he (they) offer them the right deals. People are only anti-religion up to a point. They can, easily, be bought off if the price is right. Ask any Pakistani Jamaat-i-Islami maulvi, if he wants a visa to the USA, he will say yes. And ask any anti-religious person in USA, if he wants a tax cut, or an invasion, or something else attractive, and he will say yes also.........

Withdrawing from Iraq: A Disaster Waiting to Happen? It`s a damned if you do, and damned if you don`t situation, for the USA, in Iraq. If they stay, things will remain bad. And if they leave, things could become even worse. Quite a bit like what happened in Afghanistan, when the Soviets invaded..........

From a realpolitik view, if the USA still wants to achieve its original objectives of controlling oil, and establishing a furthur foothold in the area, in my opinion, they only have one option. It will be disastrous for Iraq, but beneficial for the USA:

They need to let the country federate or divide into three parts. The Shia part in the South will be in control of Iran, through Islamic Iraqi party. Sistani, himself, being an Irani Ayatollah. The Sunni part in the middle will remain volatile and filled with violence. Americans will remain hated in both these parts........

However, the northern Kurdish part is where Americans have popularity. Iraqi Kurdistan is basically a semi-country of its own. And is quite peaceful. It has its own flag and its own Peshmarga army. The USA could set base here. Give the Kurds ownership of some of the oil fields on the Sunni border territory. And let the Kurds, unofficially, separate. The USA will, thus, get a foothold in the Middle East, and will get the oil it wanted.........

Turkey has threatened to invade any independent Iraqi Kurdistan. Since Turkey has an independent Kurdish movement in its area, which it has brutally suppressed. It does not want any independent Kurdish country, anywhere. However, the new Turkish govt. has approached its Kurds. And the USA could threaten Turkey with a boycot of its support in EU membership, if Turkey threatened Iraqi Kurdistan..........

My guess this is the strategy the USA will follow now in the area. I read that Israel already has its rep in Iraqi Kurdistan. The USA could eventually vacate Iraq and keep forces only in Kurdistan. And work out a deal for oil with a provincial Kurdish govt, through US and British oil companies, which are still waiting anxiously to sign lucrative oil deals in Iraq............The USA could also get the Kurds to recognize Israel........I think the Kurds maybe the only population in the Middle East, which are relatively pro-USA............

In the process, Iraq will be, for all practical purposes, three countries. With a civil war of sorts going on inside...............The biggest beneficiaries of this whole war will be Kurds and Iranis.............The USA has, basically, lost the Iraq War. Now it is trying to save the Iraqi peace.

My guess is Sunni Iraq will be the next long-term base and recruiting ground for Al-Qaeda, and will like much of Afghanistan remain unstable for the foreseeable future...............And Irani influence in the Middle East will grow significantly...............

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry behram #:``You are incorrect when you suggest .... [... And its currency is tanking....]. Actually, the dollar has appreciated against all major currencies.``

Nope. The dollar has tanked against all major currencies. It may have gone up a tiny bit in from where it had tanked to, in certain intervals. But overall, over the past few years, it has tanked. One can simply look at where it was with respect to the other currencies a few years ago. As I mentioned four years ago US dollar bought 62 cents in Canadian currency. Today it gets you 85 cents.............

Warren Buffet, in his annual letter, stated that for the first time in his life, he has bet against the USA dollar.............

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry I think societies should set up the following system:

- They should be Capitalist, in nature, with low taxes on business.....
- Personal taxes should be as high as required, increasing exponentially, as one gets richer. There should never be a situation, where one guy is a billionaire, while others are homeless
- Education should be carried out in a completely socialist manner. Everyone should have access to any school or university they can get into............

To a great extent, Canada is kind of like this. People may be surprised to know that business taxes, specifically for small businesses, are lower in Ontario than in California. I pay less taxes for my small business here than I would in San Jose

Personal taxes are higher in Canada, but not as high as many people think. The top Canadian tax bracker, after which taxes become consistent, is actually lower than in USA. On the whole, I pay 3-4% more personal taxes here than in California. However, other states with lower state tax than California have even lower taxes....

There is really only one area, where Canada taxes significantly higher. And that is sales tax. It is 15% on everything, except essentials. While in USA it is around 7-8%.......

In return, health care is free in Canada. People here are obsessed with free healthcare. Don`t know why. But what I like is that all university education is cheap, to the point of being free through state loans. McGill, the Harvard of Canada, costs about the same as any normal Canadian state university.......

Canada has been running a budget surplus for years. And will have a budget surplus for the foreseeable future. In addition, the Canadian dollar is predicted to reach 1-1 parity with the USA dollar. It is around 85 cents right now. When I moved here a few years ago, it was at 62 cents...........

USA is not going to just flop over and die. If it did, the whole world would collapse. But it is definitely not set up as well as before, for the long run, at the macroeconomic level. It has budget deficits for the foreseeable future. And its currency is tanking. I have sold everything I could which was in US dollars. And its housing market (the only thing keeping people rich) is going to collapse, like a bubble, anyday............

Most of all, no one in the US govt. seems to be willing to make corrections...........

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry Dost-mittar #143: ``I am hoping that some smart politician would campaign on the pledge of putting a ceiling on corporate compensations, maybe even a maximum ratio between the highest and lowest paid worker in the firm.``

I don`t think is possible or even recommended. The market has to decide this. Or it has to be worldwide. If USA puts up a ceiling on executive salary, and UK does not, then all the top executives will head for the UK.........

I see this daily in the Canadian IT industry. There is such a huge differerence in the skill sets of IT executives in Canada and in the USA that it is not even funny. I would not be exagerating if I were to say that the guys running the IT depts. of top Canadian banks etc. are quite incompetent. I have personally met quite a few CIOs and VPs etc. here. It has gotten to a stage, where I can almost say, as a rule, that unless the executive guy is a desi or arab etc., he will be a goof.

In the USA, it was certainly not like that. I found Americans to be the most competent executives............

It is the same at the senior technical level. There are very few Canadian born (gora) senior software architects, managers etc. who are worth anything. Most of the good ones are first generation immigrants from South Asia, China, Iran etc.........

This is despite the fact that Canada is the most (?) e-nabled large country in the world. It has excellent universities, which, unlike US universities, are all accessible to all finanical levels of the society. Just U of T, alone has 80 Comp Sci Ph.D professors.

Interestingly, I ran into quite a few competent Canadian IT people, in the USA. The reason is simple. Silicon Valley pays quite a bit more than Canada. As do the executive corporate positions in USA. So the top Canadian executive, technologists migrate out to the USA, temporarily, to make a lot of money. This is despite the fact that some huge % of Canadians (over 90% ?) say that they do not want to be any other nationality than Canadian. And Canada has been, on average, the highest ranked country on the UN`s HDI, in the world. It was no. 1 for seven straight years. And Canadian cities are easily ranked the best in North America, and second only to Switzerland in living conditions............

This is the area where the USA excels, over all countries. It provides the most enabling connditions for the top x % (1-5%) of people to succeed and grow and create and become filthy rich and enormously affluent...............However, on average, for the remaining 95%, I would have to say, Canada is better..........

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry ZahraJ #131: ``That`s a realistic and philosophical approach. Sweet. Let`s hope that it will provide some food for thought to the Canadians on board. They may be able to see beyond their cultural mosaics and health care benefits.``

Do you have any practical knowledge of Canada, or are you simply shooting from the hip? How long have you lived in Canada? I spent quite a few of my elementary school years in the USA. And quite a few of my college and professional days in the USA. Yet during all this time, I knew nothing about Canada. Not next to nothing. But simply nothing. And not a single American I met knew anything about Canada..........

Nothing wrong with that.........But one can only comment intelligently on a subject, if one has some knowledge of it. Otherwise, one ends up looking like a fool, amongst people, who do have knowledge of the subject.............So to have any kind of intelligent discussion with you on this subject, one would have to query you on your exposure to the topic you are commenting on.............For starters how much understanding do you have of the cultural mosaic and health benefits in Canada? Does the Canadian govt. pay for my massage if I want one? Can my kids study Urdu and/or Punjabi in schools? Why is it a mosaic to begin with? Why is health care so important in Canada? Who was Aaron Wilson and how is he related to health care in Canada, etc.?

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry I think to get a cosmpolitan view of the world, and to understand different cultures, values, societies, nations etc., one has to actually live in different places. To do that one has to have the courage to move around. It is not easy to do.........Only then can one make comparisons.........

If one has not experienced two different things, and only has experience in one, then one can never reach any definitive conclusion, on what is better and what is worse......Is Lahore better than Karachi, for a particular community........People should go live in Lahore, then go live in Karachi, and then form an opinion, and present it...........Or accept the fact that they are not in a position to form an opinion. Misguided nationalism, based on a lack of knowledge of other places, is exactly that - misguided........

Bite into an apple and bite into a peach, and then try to explain which tastes better. If one has only tasted an apple and only seen a peach from a distance, then one can, at best, scream loudly that the apple tastes better. But one can never say with certainity whether it does or does not...........

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry Dost-mittar #124: ``The big difference though is at the political level. Visible minorities in Canada, especially South Asians...... The result is that we have some very incompetent visible minority members in the Parliament who are no credit either to the community or to their constituents.``

I am not sure if it is as simple as this. The number of affluent Indians I have met in USA far outnumbers the ones I have met in Canada. There is no contest. Just Silicon Valley alone, probably has multiple time the wealth under managment of Indians, as all of the Indians in Canada. Yet Indians, Sikhs and South Asians, in general, are a mini-political force in Canada. While they are almost non-existent as a political force in USA. It has a lot more to it than stuffing party meetings......The Canadian society views them in a different manner. And they, view their own position in the Canadian society differently........

As an example, I participated, at a grassroots level, in the political campaign of a Liberal Party candidate. The guy got elected and knows who I am, and calls me. I can go talk to him anytime I want. Now his campaign staff have asked me to become a more permanent member of their team. If I pursue this, I could become quite active in the party. All of this happened, before I had even become a citizen............There is no way I could done this in the USA, at this level.............Or in England or anywhere else (unless I supported someone specifically from a Pakistani or South Asian ghetto).............

By the way, the ability of a stupid member of a minority community to get elected, to me, is the ultimate sign of a country that accepts multi-culturism and supports minority rights. After all, any country may want Manmohan Singh as their Finance Minister. But only Canada will be ready to accept even Dullabhatti as their Finance Minister..........Speaking of which, this maybe why Bhatti Saab has chosen Canada as his home. As have so many other Sardarjis............

``BTW, Canadian States have premiers, not governors, and the wife of the health minister is not an M.P.``

You are correct on both counts. The Health Minister is Ujjal. And the husband-wife pair is Greywal. I will have to add another name to the Punjabi list of MPs.

Culture Cloning scout #35: ``do not watch indian videos with the stripper dancers etc.``

I thought this is the exact reason that people watched Indian videos.............

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry Dost-mittar #104: ``As far as your comparison of Canada and the US is concerned, it is a case of ``Bud achhaa, budnaam bura``. The US may not tout its multiculturalism, but cultural diversity is as much a fact of life in the US as in Canada. You see hijabi employees both in Canadian and American malls. New York is every bit as muticultural as is Toronto, if not more. Every dance or music or bollywood group that comes to Canada visits more cities in the U.S than it does in Canada. The Americans have accomodated their hispanics by providing them ESL instructions in schools and providing them services in their language in many cases.``

I don`t think I can agree with this.........USA is better than most countries at integrating different cultures, but I have found Canada to be far better. No contest......

First of all, New York is not everybit as multi-cultural as Toronto. Toronto is the most multicultural city in North America. And with the large increases in Canadian immigration, it is getting to a point, where it will not even be a contest. 52% of Toronto`s citizens are immigrants. And in around 10 years to 15 years, 1 out of every 8 residents of GTA will be a South Asian............

Canada is adding 1% of its total population, per year through immigration. Most of which are coming from two areas which culturally totally different from Canada - China and South Asia. Canadian govt. is now thinking of increasing this number to higher than 1%. There is no country in the world that adds 1% of its population, per year, through legal immigration.

Any immigrant who comes to Canada, straightaway, becomes a resident and a part of the system. Unlike USA where they have to go through a six year long H-1 visa process. So many Indians have had to go back to India, since they could not get their green cards in time.

There are various other ways to look at it. There are four major political parties in Canada -Conservative, Liberal, Bloc Quebecois and NDP - every single one of them supports immigration. I don`t know of any country, like that.............

Most importantly, literally anyone can become an Member Parliament in Canada. I can become one. I had no chance in hell of becoming one in USA (or in any other country, unless I was from a Pakistani or Muslim ghetto). Canada has 11 or 12 South Asian members. A Pakistani is a member from the sixth richest constituency in Canada. All three poeple opposing him were, from other parties, were South Asian also! Mississauga - the center of Pakistani immigrants - is the safest city in North America and one of the wealthiest. There are nine (?) Punjabi speakers in the Federal Parliament. The senior most minister - the Health Minister - is a Sardarji (?). He was the governor of the fourth most important province in Canada. His wife is a member parliament also. An unknown sardarji candidate beat out the second most powerful Conservative candidate in an election.

Within ten years, I think there will be two to three more Pakistanis getting elected. Amongst other things, Miss Canada last year was an Indian American. Miss Canada, for the year before that, was an Irani Muslim!!

I think a lot of this has to do with with handling Quebec. For all the trouble it has caused Canada, it has adjusted it to a form of society, which can handle a lot of multi-culturism........

This is not to take anything away from America. For a long time, it was (and perhaps still is) a lot better than other Western countries (like France etc.). My own experience was quite positive in USA. But my personal experience, through recent immigration and an interest in statistics, indicates that Canada is way ahead in adjusting to multi-culturism...........