Why Do You Hate It So?

[Heisenberg]

This country was founded by slave owners too. Lets enslave everyone that is darker than me.

Such a simple yet eloquent point. Guy's voice in my head is starting to sound like Dr House.

Meanwhile Cracker is saying 'we don't impose our beliefs on others' and then proceeding to describe ways which they impose beliefs on others.

You are the only one I see imposing your beliefs on others. No one is pushing anything on you, your schools, your work, or your government. The reason you might see religion in those places is because the majority of people want them there.

Translation: No one is pushing anything on you. If we have, it's because you wanted us to.

No one is demanding anything of you. But we just refuse to let you take religion out of everything.

Translation: No one is demanding anything from you, but we demand you let us continue to impose our beliefs onto others.

Not only does he not take the time to consider what others say, he doesn't take the time to consider what he himself says.

The country was founded on, among other things, the idea that you have every right to express your beliefs. Just do it with your own money. Nothing in the constitution or spirit of the founders suggests that you have the right to get angry when your beliefs are dismissed by others.

OP, are you starting to get an idea of how religion inspires hate?

 

[tip top toker]

It pisses me off because if i want nothing to do with it, well it appears that's not doable. Thrust in my face and ears at every turn. I mean hell only individuals who are protestant may inherit the crown. WTF right there! And if the next monarch of England was a roman catholic, well he would be classified as naturally dead for legal purposes so they can get a protestant in. Wtf??

 

[mindphuk]

Such a simple yet eloquent point. Guy's voice in my head is starting to sound like Dr House.

haha, That's funny.

Crackerboy's voice in my head sounds a lot like venomfangX.

 

[undertheice]

you'll have to excuse the tardiness of this entry. i started this reply quite some time ago and then found myself a bit too busy to pick it back up again until now.

It gives people another justification to commit the acts wars require. We've been over that a million times. Your counter-argument seems to always be "well if it wasn't religion it would just be something else" which, to me, isn't much of an argument at all because we should be working towards weeding out all the things that give our species false justification for such horrible acts. You seem to give organized religion some sort of pass in this dept.

i've skipped over all the other posts because you at least have gotten to the crux of the matter. yes, religion has been used over and over again to justify the evil that men do. our gods have been used as an excuse for any number of horrendous acts throughout the history of the human race, but it seems rather disingenuous to blame these fairy tales for the deeds of the unscrupulous.

every time the subject of religion comes up, some idiot chimes in with the same laundry list of so-called religious wars and atrocities. since long before the crusades and up to the present day, faith has been used to motivate the cannon fodder. does this mean that these wars are caused by religion? of course not, none of these conflicts have so simple a motivation. in each instance there are social conflicts and power struggles that can be found as the basis for hostilities and it is the cause, not the justification, that deserves our scorn.

i don't think i've been giving religion any pass, i've merely put things in their proper perspective. there is certainly much of religion that runs contrary to the advancement of the species and, in case you haven't noticed, much of that has been slowly falling away over the centuries. we no longer burn witches and seldom stone wayward children. blaming demons for the world's woes is restricted to only the most backward of the faithful and tolerance plays a greater role in the affairs of the various churches every day. do you expect perfection overnight? if so, then don't look toward humanity. simply "weeding out" the justifications for evil is a piss poor way to go about advancing the human race. it is the causes that must be concentrated on.

What say you about the 2,000 year long or so experiment we've had with organized religion actively dominating 90%+ of the human populations lives?

Is 2,000 years not long enough to come to a good conclusion of whether or not organized religion is good or bad for humanity?

only 2,000 years? i think you've underestimated the amount of time mankind has depended on superstition to calm its fears and answer the unanswerable. but ok, i'll play and i'll even use your favorite scapegoat as an example.

the spread of christianity over the last 2,000 years may have led to a certain amount of elitism within its ranks and allowed the occasional atrocity here and there, but its overall influence on the population has probably had a slightly positive effect on the western world where it is most prominent. it has established a codified morality that has influenced our perceptions of justice and human rights. by readily admitting the fallibility of humanity and recognizing the necessity of forgiving that defect, it has led to a much more tolerant population. it has given even the most ignorant of us a reason to behave in a civilized fashion, considering that good behavior in the present might actually have some effect on their future or even their eternity.

along with the authoritarian nature of christianity's paternalism, there is the demand toward charity and actions which enhance the lives, both spiritual and secular, of those around us. this positive tendency can be seen most readily in nations like the u.s. the very tenets upon which this country was founded rely heavily on a less formal, more grassroots, form of christianity than was seen in many european nations of the time and the result has been a population more prone toward giving of themselves than anywhere else on earth.

you may try to claim that a society unencumbered with the superstitious nonsense of religion might have advanced far further in the same amount of time, but there is more to this life than the science you hold so dear. i wonder if we would even have the opportunity for secular enlightenment if various religions hadn't stepped in and forced us to "be good" along the way. without that overhanging threat of eternal damnation, how often do you think civilizations might have succumbed to the primitive urges of their populations and torn themselves apart? we are, after all, little more than savage beasts and even enlightened self-interest is not always enough to keep the most savage of us from wreaking havoc for their own gain.

we may very well outgrow our need for the silliness of gods and religious dogma, but that day is not now. humanity must evolve out of that need and we are slowly doing so. you must look back a lot further than a mere 2,000 years to really understand just how far we have come. we have, for the most part, left behind the multitudes of animistic deities and the vast pantheons of specialized gods. we have ceased to anthropomorphize these higher powers and begun to recognize the world for what it really is. much of the world has come down to one god and it too must eventually pass away. more and more are worshiping at the altar of ideas instead of mythical creatures, but that doesn't mean that the teachings of those past fantasies are worthless or that they should simply be thrown away. there is still plenty of room and a definite need for those virtues extolled under the tutelage of mythical beasts.

 

[MexicanWarlord420]

haha, That's funny.

Crackerboy's voice in my head sounds a lot like venomfangX.

lolol [youtube]QPrhsBcpYr4 [/youtube]

 

[guy incognito]

i've skipped over all the other posts because you at least have gotten to the crux of the matter. yes, religion has been used over and over again to justify the evil that men do. our gods have been used as an excuse for any number of horrendous acts throughout the history of the human race, but it seems rather disingenuous to blame these fairy tales for the deeds of the unscrupulous.

every time the subject of religion comes up, some idiot chimes in with the same laundry list of so-called religious wars and atrocities. since long before the crusades and up to the present day, faith has been used to motivate the cannon fodder. does this mean that these wars are caused by religion? of course not, none of these conflicts have so simple a motivation. in each instance there are social conflicts and power struggles that can be found as the basis for hostilities and it is the cause, not the justification, that deserves our scorn.

i don't think i've been giving religion any pass, i've merely put things in their proper perspective. there is certainly much of religion that runs contrary to the advancement of the species and, in case you haven't noticed, much of that has been slowly falling away over the centuries. we no longer burn witches and seldom stone wayward children. blaming demons for the world's woes is restricted to only the most backward of the faithful and tolerance plays a greater role in the affairs of the various churches every day. do you expect perfection overnight? if so, then don't look toward humanity. simply "weeding out" the justifications for evil is a piss poor way to go about advancing the human race. it is the causes that must be concentrated on.

You are so full of shit. To simply say it wasn't a cause it was only a justification is bullshit. Secondly to say that it shouldn't be held in contempt because it is a justification is bullshit too. ANY justification for such atrocities should be examined very closely. "Weeding out" the justifications for evil is not a piss poor way to advance society. In fact it would be a fantastic benefit for society to start weeding out bullshit justification. Once you have no pile of bullshit to "justify" your violence and hate and must rely on rational thinking as the basis of your actions EVERYBODY wins.

I'm still befuddled by your words. Do you think Bin Laden is simply using religion as an excuse for the 9/11 attacks? He has some underlying hatred of america that has NOTHING to do religion or religious beliefs? Really? Are you retarded?

only 2,000 years? i think you've underestimated the amount of time mankind has depended on superstition to calm its fears and answer the unanswerable. but ok, i'll play and i'll even use your favorite scapegoat as an example.

the spread of christianity over the last 2,000 years may have led to a certain amount of elitism within its ranks and allowed the occasional atrocity here and there, but its overall influence on the population has probably had a slightly positive effect on the western world where it is most prominent. it has established a codified morality that has influenced our perceptions of justice and human rights. by readily admitting the fallibility of humanity and recognizing the necessity of forgiving that defect, it has led to a much more tolerant population. it has given even the most ignorant of us a reason to behave in a civilized fashion, considering that good behavior in the present might actually have some effect on their future or even their eternity.

along with the authoritarian nature of christianity's paternalism, there is the demand toward charity and actions which enhance the lives, both spiritual and secular, of those around us. this positive tendency can be seen most readily in nations like the u.s. the very tenets upon which this country was founded rely heavily on a less formal, more grassroots, form of christianity than was seen in many european nations of the time and the result has been a population more prone toward giving of themselves than anywhere else on earth.

you may try to claim that a society unencumbered with the superstitious nonsense of religion might have advanced far further in the same amount of time, but there is more to this life than the science you hold so dear. i wonder if we would even have the opportunity for secular enlightenment if various religions hadn't stepped in and forced us to "be good" along the way. without that overhanging threat of eternal damnation, how often do you think civilizations might have succumbed to the primitive urges of their populations and torn themselves apart? we are, after all, little more than savage beasts and even enlightened self-interest is not always enough to keep the most savage of us from wreaking havoc for their own gain.

we may very well outgrow our need for the silliness of gods and religious dogma, but that day is not now. humanity must evolve out of that need and we are slowly doing so. you must look back a lot further than a mere 2,000 years to really understand just how far we have come. we have, for the most part, left behind the multitudes of animistic deities and the vast pantheons of specialized gods. we have ceased to anthropomorphize these higher powers and begun to recognize the world for what it really is. much of the world has come down to one god and it too must eventually pass away. more and more are worshiping at the altar of ideas instead of mythical creatures, but that doesn't mean that the teachings of those past fantasies are worthless or that they should simply be thrown away. there is still plenty of room and a definite need for those virtues extolled under the tutelage of mythical beasts.

More bullshit. How about we make codified morals that have real underlying thought out reasons? So when someone asks WHY something is wrong we have a good answer other than "because god said so", which is a terrible reason. It may be easy to invoke such simple and unjustified responses to a child who may not understand the reasoning of why something is wrong. That doesn't mean the reasons you give are good though. Society would be much better off with valid justifications for what is moral/immoral.

I have my doubts that america and americans are the most charitable and generous people on earth. Do you have any sources?

I think they would succumb to their primitive urges just as often as they do with religion. I don't understand why people think the threat of hell is a good deterrent. As if people are going to start raping and murdering if they think there is no god sitting on a cloud with a gavel ready to send them to jail. People who want to rape and murder do it. It happens all the time. The vast majority of people do not though, and I doubt very much that the reason is fear of hell. If that is the only thing standing in your way you obviously have an inability to think rationally and are also a terrible person. The rest of us who don't have our heads up our asses will not stand by and allow that to go on - god or no god.

Anything good and virtuous about religion can be derived independently of religion. A good moral code, charitability, and kindness can not only happen without divine intervention but it would be better. There is nothing virtuous about faith.

 

[Padawanbater2]

our gods have been used as an excuse for any number of horrendous acts throughout the history of the human race, but it seems rather disingenuous to blame these fairy tales for the deeds of the unscrupulous.

I don't blame the fairy tales. I blame the people who are incapable of understanding fact from fiction partly because of those same fairy tales. Do you understand? A persons organized religion rejects any and all claims that do not reinforce that religion, so it follows that a moral claim based in science that contradicts someones organized religion -homosexuality- will be discarded, regardless of the evidence that supports it.

Fuck that.

every time the subject of religion comes up, some idiot chimes in with the same laundry list of so-called religious wars and atrocities. since long before the crusades and up to the present day, faith has been used to motivate the cannon fodder. does this mean that these wars are caused by religion? of course not, none of these conflicts have so simple a motivation. in each instance there are social conflicts and power struggles that can be found as the basis for hostilities and it is the cause, not the justification, that deserves our scorn.

I don't understand how you can reason it out that way. Without these false justifications organized religions provide to people, they would need to come up with some other kind of justification for waging war, and there is no logical justification for killing millions of innocent people. If you have one, I'd really like to hear it. A person in a position of power could not manipulate the masses in this way because inside each individuals mind there would be no reason to kill another person they'd never met before. And it works both ways, in this case, eliminate Christianity from the American solders mind, he's left with nothing but his own moral compass to guide him on the battlefield. He's forced to figure out what's right. In the mind of the terrorist, the same thing applies, without Islam guiding his immoral actions, he's forced to figure out what's moral for himself.

This is why I think organized religion is so dangerous. It tells you what is moral. You don't have to figure it out for yourself.

I really think you should reevaluate your position on this one UTI.

simply "weeding out" the justifications for evil is a piss poor way to go about advancing the human race. it is the causes that must be concentrated on.

UTI, the cause IS organized religion. The cause is the false justification people believe their religion gives them.

What do you suggest we do in order to rid the human race of retarded false justifications?

but its overall influence on the population has probably had a slightly positive effect on the western world where it is most prominent.

Christianity has had a positive effect on the western world? Well, how are you measuring this? Are you arguing that without the spread of Christianity, something else (we both know what that is) would have just taken it's place, and I probably wouldn't be writing this right now...?

Interesting, because that's far from what I'm arguing. Because, like I've said a million times before, fuck Islam just the same.

Until you reveal your method of measuring the positive impact Christianity has had on the western world against a world where Christianity never existed, I'm afraid all I'm left with is speculation and opinion. In that case, I would argue in a world where no organized religion ever existed, the human race would be much better off, and we would have established our collective morality based on what is actually right, not off what our ancient ancestors believed to be right at the time they lived when our conscious morality was just being established. We've had thousands of years to study what's right and wrong, and as it turns out, we've been wrong this whole time.

It is time to change our tactics if we wish to succeed into the future.

it has established a codified morality that has influenced our perceptions of justice and human rights.

...which could have been established anyway - no Christianity required. (still don't get why you push that argument..)

by readily admitting the fallibility of humanity and recognizing the necessity of forgiving that defect, it has led to a much more tolerant population.

...just ask the homosexuals.

it has given even the most ignorant of us a reason to behave in a civilized fashion

considering that good behavior in the present might actually have some effect on their future or even their eternity.

Religion is required for this again, why?

along with the authoritarian nature of christianity's paternalism, there is the demand toward charity and actions which enhance the lives, both spiritual and secular, of those around us. this positive tendency can be seen most readily in nations like the u.s.

So you're inferring that most nations that give charity or 'enhance the lives of those around us' have a majority population that is Christian? Is that the argument? Does that mean that those nations with minority Christian populations shouldn't be recognized as charitable? Or that because of Christianity, these people are more charitable?

My argument is a little more simple than that... The US is the richest nation on the planet, so again, it follows that the US would give the most in charity, wouldn't it? ...lets see..

Highest GDP

1. US
2. Japan
3. China
4. Germany
5. France
6. UK
7. Italy
8. Brazil
9. Spain
10. Canada

Most Charitable

1. US
2. France
3. Germany
4. UK
5. Japan
6. Spain
7. Netherlands
8. Sweden
9. Norway
10. Canada

That's 6 for 10 son.

... oh, by the way, those 3 at the bottom on the 'Most Charitable' list are among the most atheistic countries.

the very tenets upon which this country was founded rely heavily on a less formal, more grassroots, form of christianity than was seen in many european nations of the time and the result has been a population more prone toward giving of themselves than anywhere else on earth.

The 'tenets' as portrayed by the VERY 1st AMENDMENT to our Constitution? Is freedom of religion one of those tenets you're referring to UTI? Because I'm pretty sure the 1st commandment goes something like this;

"I am the Lord your God, you shall have no other gods before me"

...and again, my previous point stands. We are more 'generous' because we have more to give, not because more of us are Christian. (you do know each of us consume 4 times more than our European and Asian counterparts, right? But I guess that's because more of us are Christian too huh?)

you may try to claim that a society unencumbered with the superstitious nonsense of religion might have advanced far further in the same amount of time, but there is more to this life than the science you hold so dear. i wonder if we would even have the opportunity for secular enlightenment if various religions hadn't stepped in and forced us to "be good" along the way.

The Enlightenment would have been far less significant without organized religion.

without that overhanging threat of eternal damnation, how often do you think civilizations might have succumbed to the primitive urges of their populations and torn themselves apart?

Never. Freedom of individual thought doesn't permit such events on such scales. When was the last time country with a high percentage of atheists declared war?

we are, after all, little more than savage beasts and even enlightened self-interest is not always enough to keep the most savage of us from wreaking havoc for their own gain.

That is an opinion.


Do you believe it isn't harmful to our society for people to believe false claims?

You said "religion has never directly caused a single death" Heis and I brought up cases of religious neglect. Do you concede you were wrong about that?

Is teaching someone creationism teaching them to be ignorant? Should a parent/teacher have the "right" to teach this to their children/students?

What is your definition of "tolerant" and how have most of the threads about religion been "vilifying" Christianity?

 

[st235]

Religion is just a cult with more people

 

[undertheice]

as much as i hate splitting a post into a dozen different quotes, you've made it impossible to avoid. so, here goes...

I don't blame the fairy tales. I blame the people who are incapable of understanding fact from fiction partly because of those same fairy tales. Do you understand? A persons organized religion rejects any and all claims that do not reinforce that religion, so it follows that a moral claim based in science that contradicts someones organized religion -homosexuality- will be discarded, regardless of the evidence that supports it.

Without these false justifications organized religions provide to people, they would need to come up with some other kind of justification for waging war, and there is no logical justification for killing millions of innocent people.

When was the last time country with a high percentage of atheists declared war?

so are you blaming people's ignorance or are you blaming the false justifications of religion? you've got me a bit confused here and i think that stems from your own confusion. your bringing up the subject of homosexuality is a perfect example of this confusion. you would love to blame society's anti-gay prejudice on religion, but i think you are putting the cart before the horse. do you honestly believe that it is religion that is to blame for this prejudice or, as is much more plausible, that it is a societal bias against a practice that clearly goes against our physical designs and has merely been placed in the dogma of our religions? our tendency toward religious mania may predate any present civilization, but our physical design and our understanding of its purposes goes back much further than our first thoughts of mysticism.

so too does our ability to justify our aggressions. we have never really had any need to come up with a "logical" justification for our violent natures. our needs and desires have always provided us with ample justification for even the most vile atrocities. the desire to expand our influence, the need to gather more resources to provide for ourselves and our families, the simple desire to gain power over others have all been reason enough for war, genocide and myriad other acts of savagery. you ask what atheist nation has ever gone to war. well there have been so few truly atheist nations, since religion pre-dates our ability to build societies capable of what we would consider war, that this is a difficult task, but it certainly isn't impossible. quite a few modern totalitarian socialist nations have attempted to stamp out religion and this certainly hasn't blunted their thirst for warfare. the stalinist soviet union used the ideology of its secular revolution to wage many a war across the globe. look to any strong-arm regime that replaces religion with a cult of personality surrounding its leader for quite a few other examples of just how violent an atheist society can be.

you consistently speak of religion as this monolithic, unchanging monstrosity and that just isn't the case. constant change can be seen in even the most adamant fundamentalist sects. this is because even the fantasy based dogma of religion must reflect the society surrounding it. there is simply nothing that doesn't change. it wasn't so long ago that churches were led exclusively by men and now we see more and more women in positions of power within the church hierarchy. as society has become more tolerant of alternative lifestyles, so too have many religious institutions. the history of religion is filled with such changes, it merely takes time for such established doctrines to catch up to the evolving societies around them.

So you're inferring that most nations that give charity or enhance the lives of those around us have a majority population that is Christian?

We are more 'generous' because we have more to give, not because more of us are Christian.

no, my noting that this nation is predominantly christian was merely in answer to your continued attacks on christianity in particular. most every religion has within it the seeds of such charitable ambitions. all that i am proposing is that by easing the formal restrictions of the traditional church and still maintaining its charitable spirit, this nation has allowed religion to evolve into a more caring creature and that that creature has infected the population as a whole. you, on the other hand, would completely ignore that influence. relying wholly on our wealth as the impetus for this generosity does not answer the question of why this nation's people are willing to give a higher percentage of their wealth, it only explains why they are able to give more.

i have to admit that i have been unable to find my original source for this information. i remember it was a rather torturous path that led to it and that it took some precise wording to find the documentation, but i'm sure you could find it if you bothered to try. no, i don't expect you to take my word for it. in fact, i don't really care whether you believe me or not. it is a minor thing, but i'll pm it to you if i come across it again.

You said "religion has never directly caused a single death" Heis and I brought up cases of religious neglect. Do you concede you were wrong about that?

do we blame medical science for each botched diagnosis or ignorant practitioner? why should we blame religion as a whole for the ignorance of some of its adherents? the history of science has included such atrocities as vivisection and purposeful neglect, but you still glorify its logic. if we look hard enough at even the finest acts of man we can find some hint of cruelty and failure. do you really expect religion to be any different? it seems you hold religion to some higher standard than the rest of man's accomplishments and i find this deplorable. every single attack on religion i have read in this thread has used the same disingenuous tactic, using its own claims of infallibility against it. we know that religion is made by man and we know that man is fallible. so how can his creation not be imperfect? sure, it's a human conceit, but it is far from man's greatest sin. so yes, you might consider me incorrect. it wouldn't be the first time, but, once again, it is far from my greatest sin.

Is teaching someone creationism teaching them to be ignorant? Should a parent/teacher have the "right" to teach this to their children/students?

again with the higher expectations. should parents have the right to teach their children their own view of the world? of course they should. should state sponsored educators be given the power to indoctrinate their charges against the will of the parents of those children? of course not. the passing down of tradition from one generation to the next is the prerogative of parenthood and even the most foolish traditions must be allowed. we are all taught a certain amount of ignorance and it certainly isn't restricted to the realm of religion. you may not like what your neighbor teaches his children, but it is, quite frankly, none of your damn business. those children will grow into adulthood and make their own decisions about the nature of the universe. some will find fault with the fantasies of their parents and others will continue on as they were taught. this is the nature of the growth of the individual.

i really don't have much of a problem with the childish ignorance of religion. i know that advancing human knowledge is important, but not everyone is up to that task. there will always be those who find comfort in fairy tales and that just might be best for them. the majority of the human race lives in ignorance, but that really has little effect on those who strive for knowledge. of those that eschew the rigors of scientific endeavor, some few might well serve to advance the ethical nature of mankind and this should be seen as every bit as important as discovering the origins of the universe. after all, big bang or big miracle makes very little difference to the average joe on the street.

Until you reveal your method of measuring the positive impact Christianity has had on the western world against a world where Christianity never existed, I'm afraid all I'm left with is speculation and opinion.

of course it's all opinion and speculation. man's need to explain the world around him has led him down many a false trail and the concepts of our spirituality have been with us since the dawn of time. all we can do is theorize what a world without religion might be, taking into account the tendencies we see in the world around us and trying to minimize the effect of our own biases. i dare say that you have failed to minimize your anti-religious bias and let your own zeal color your view of religion's history. on the other hand, i have tried to take my own atheism out of the picture to attain a more rational view of that history. while you cling to the false notion that men are capable of being wholly rational and altruistic in their outlook, i see the savagery that exists in our so-called civilized society and realize that many are in dire need of an overseer they cannot influence and from who's scrutiny they cannot hide.







pad, please quit doing this to me. by cutting my post up into a thousand little quotes, you've forced me to compose this damn opus and i just don't have the stamina for it any more. you know perfectly well that i only come here when i'm high and that makes it nearly impossible for me to post those insignificant one-liners that many here are so fond of. are you purposely trying to drive me insane or are you just as crazy as i am?

 

[Heisenberg]

Prayer Trumps Medicine

Oregon jury acquitted two parents, Carl and Raylene Worthington, in the death of their 15-month-old daughter, who died of pneumonia. A jury sympathized with their use of prayer not medicine to save the child's life.

“Americans aren’t necessarily hostile to the concept of faith healing. In fact, there is openness to its possibilities. The trial may have been less about faith-healing and more about the way we view the responsibilities of parents. There was a sense among jurors that the parents were doing what they thought was right"

do we blame medical science for each botched diagnosis or ignorant practitioner? why should we blame religion as a whole for the ignorance of some of its adherents? the history of science has included such atrocities as vivisection and purposeful neglect, but you still glorify its logic. if we look hard enough at even the finest acts of man we can find some hint of cruelty and failure. do you really expect religion to be any different? it seems you hold religion to some higher standard than the rest of man's accomplishments and i find this deplorable.

I see your point and science in fact still does horrible (and IMO unforgivable) things in the name of research. However I see some important distinctions here. Science for one attempts to learn from it's mistakes and changes it's mind in the face of new evidence. Often times religion would rather kill than admit it's wrong. Science is driven by the thirst for knowledge, while religion fosters ignorance. I don't think it's a clear dichotomy in any case, and I would hesitate to call religion an accomplishment.

 

[mindphuk]

[video=youtube;U1lTR8V90qU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1lTR8V90qU[/video]

 

[Padawanbater2]

as much as i hate splitting a post into a dozen different quotes, you've made it impossible to avoid. so, here goes...

I do that to make it clear to the reader exactly what point I am responding to. I thought it made it easier, but if you disagree, I don't have any problem changing up my format. Though I've noticed when it's in paragraph form, a lot of points are missed or not acknowledged at all, even when I bold them, so keep that in mind, if something is bolded, it's usually a direct question to the person I'm quoting, everything else is me making my point or sharing an opinion. Just answer the bold stuff.

so are you blaming people's ignorance or are you blaming the false justifications of religion?

I am blaming both. Religions provide the false justification for people to commit horrible acts and disable them from educating themselves to the point of understanding why the justification is false to begin with.

you would love to blame society's anti-gay prejudice on religion, but i think you are putting the cart before the horse. do you honestly believe that it is religion that is to blame for this prejudice or, as is much more plausible, that it is a societal bias against a practice that clearly goes against our physical designs and has merely been placed in the dogma of our religions?

Well, lets examine that... It "clearly goes against our physical designs" - I'm guessing you mean it's "not normal" in the sense that a male and a female are needed for human procreation and that's why the societal prejudice exists... OK, what about other things considered "not normal" in our society, but are generally accepted because no religious text has deemed them sinful? Glasses, walking canes, crutches, prosthetic limbs, the list goes on and on.

It seems obvious to me that the reason the majority of society does not place homosexuality into the same category is because it is specifically mentioned in the Bible (and Quran) that it's an abomination. Though there is clearly some merit to your observation, and I would also agree with you as taking a look at the 10 commandments, it's clear that people cherry pick what they want to believe and societal pressures play a big part. So, if the leader of the tribe has a strong opinion about homosexuality, the likely conclusion is that the rest of the tribe (or the majority, as in this case) will have a similar opinion, like I said before, regardless of the evidence;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belongingness

"Whether it is family, friends, co-workers, or a sports team, humans have an inherent desire to belong and be an important part of something greater than themselves."

Why do you believe it is "much more plausible" that your observation be the ONLY reason for the social taboo regarding homosexuality?

our tendency toward religious mania may predate any present civilization, but our physical design and our understanding of its purposes goes back much further than our first thoughts of mysticism.

Yes, but this alone is not a good enough reason for millions of people to - at one point in history - hate people they've never known for something they can't control to the point of thinking execution is a reasonable solution to the problem. That is some serious hate, and it doesn't only come from our understanding of human anatomy. It couldn't. Organized religions reinforces this idea. My argument is that if they didn't, such hate would be unjustifiable. There is no logical reason to take a persons life based on their sexual orientation, even if it is their choice (in my opinion, especially if it's their choice). You don't have the right to make my choices for me, likewise I don't have the right to make your choices for you. In no way can such a position be morally correct or logically consistent, and your average Joe on the street isn't smart enough to come up with some deep philosophical reason why it is, because one doesn't exist. The only reason one can find to justify hating homosexuals lies in religious texts.

so too does our ability to justify our aggressions. we have never really had any need to come up with a "logical" justification for our violent natures. our needs and desires have always provided us with ample justification for even the most vile atrocities. the desire to expand our influence, the need to gather more resources to provide for ourselves and our families, the simple desire to gain power over others have all been reason enough for war, genocide and myriad other acts of savagery.

I think this might be another thread completely. Justifications for war throughout human history.

But again, all you seem to be saying is "if it wasn't religion, it would be something else", to which my reply will remain until you actually consider it; "so what, lets get rid of them ALL".

But I would like to make a point about this... There are a ton of reasons why our species is so xenophobic towards other members, it has evolutionary advantages, so it seems consistent to me that some of these problems would inevitably arise early on in our history, the need for clothes, shelter, food for our families, etc. would be the most important factor for ours and our families survival, but I believe once we reached a certain point, perhaps we've already reached that point, we will gain the ability to overcome this flaw in our early history. We've reached globalization, the need to wage war for resources falls on very few people who stand to gain enormous amounts of money. We have the ability to feed every living person on this planet, the way the resources are allocated are the problem, and you know it, and the reasons WHY they're allocated that way not surprisingly have a lot to do with organized religion.

In short, these problems are fake, they're made up or they only exist in the mind. If life were different, if organized religion didn't have such an influence over so many people, they could easily be solved.

you ask what atheist nation has ever gone to war. well there have been so few truly atheist nations, since religion pre-dates our ability to build societies capable of what we would consider war, that this is a difficult task, but it certainly isn't impossible. quite a few modern totalitarian socialist nations have attempted to stamp out religion and this certainly hasn't blunted their thirst for warfare. the stalinist soviet union used the ideology of its secular revolution to wage many a war across the globe. look to any strong-arm regime that replaces religion with a cult of personality surrounding its leader for quite a few other examples of just how violent an atheist society can be.

It seems just as disingenuous for you to bring something so absurd as comparing the Stalinist Soviet Union to anything I've ever mentioned or stated any kind of support for up as you tell me it is for atheists to bring up atrocities during the Crusades in the name of Christianity. You know for a fact past atheistic societies is not what I was referring to... Do you think countries like Norway or Sweden would straight up initiate a perpetual war on terror this day in age? I don't mean if Uncle Sam kicked em into the fight, I mean on their own.

you consistently speak of religion as this monolithic, unchanging monstrosity and that just isn't the case. constant change can be seen in even the most adamant fundamentalist sects. this is because even the fantasy based dogma of religion must reflect the society surrounding it. there is simply nothing that doesn't change. it wasn't so long ago that churches were led exclusively by men and now we see more and more women in positions of power within the church hierarchy. as society has become more tolerant of alternative lifestyles, so too have many religious institutions. the history of religion is filled with such changes, it merely takes time for such established doctrines to catch up to the evolving societies around them.

It isn't enough. Too little, far too late I'm afraid. That's what me and Heis and mindphuk and people like us are doing, giving it that little nudge out the door.. The snails pace has real world consequences that cause more harm to society at large than does criticizing the flaws of organized religions, and to be honest, I don't see any organized religion EVER on par with modern science because the two are incompatible by their very nature. One requires evidence, the other the exact opposite, faith.

no, my noting that this nation is predominantly christian was merely in answer to your continued attacks on christianity in particular. most every religion has within it the seeds of such charitable ambitions. all that i am proposing is that by easing the formal restrictions of the traditional church and still maintaining its charitable spirit, this nation has allowed religion to evolve into a more caring creature and that that creature has infected the population as a whole. you, on the other hand, would completely ignore that influence. relying wholly on our wealth as the impetus for this generosity does not answer the question of why this nation's people are willing to give a higher percentage of their wealth, it only explains why they are able to give more.

So the claim now is that religion, with emphasis on Christianity, has influenced the American population...? Well no shit, Sherlock! Of course it has!

What does this mean? Nothing, as atheists can be, and are, just as charitable as their Christian counterparts. My point was that one of the main contributing factors is clearly national GDP. The majority religion within a country has an influence on it's population, so clearly any religion a state might have will have an impact upon the national GDP as well. I'm not, and never have, and it's reasons like this that get me so confused as to the creation of threads such as these, said that all of every single religion is shit and should be discarded and science, science, SCIENCE, LOGIC!!! Wtf man? I don't think you give me enough credit.. Some aspects of organized religion IS GOOD, I'TS GOOD for the species. But it's the bullshit, the Adam and Eve not ADAM and STEVE! bullshit that we can seriously do without, and your adamant defense of religion every time any of us get started, even with that type of shit, is why you fail to see so many of the flaws the rest of us point out daily.

I think you're biased.

...get the rest tomorrow...

 

[tardis]

i see thread after thread posted here vilifying religion, christianity in particular. i just have to ask why y'all are so vehement in your condemnation of this archaic practice, what do you see as so dangerous in these fairy tales? though i'd agree that this tendency to create mythical reasons for our existence is rather childish and a bit embarrassing, i really don't see any more harm in it than any of our other bad habits. though it has been used as an excuse for millions of atrocities, religion has never directly caused a single death or started a single war. it is not the cause of ignorance, though it may allow the ignorant to feel justified in their plight, and it has even safeguarded ancient teachings during some of history's darkest hours. religion has been used to bind societies together in times of strife and as a rallying point to rebuild after many a disaster. it has provided solace for the disenfranchised and is a major conduit for charitable contributions and much needed aid.

as an atheist i have no great love of religion, but its evil is minimal compared to the avarice and hatred that is so much a part of humanity. every major religion in the world demonizes the worst of human nature and promotes the virtues we would all like to see grow within our society. our morality has been shaped and codified by these religions and even the most rabid atheists can trace their own codes of conduct back to the teachings of various religious leaders and sacred texts. today's religions bind billions to ethical conduct, practices they might eschew if they were not lead to them by the concept of a universal understanding of right and wrong.

so what the hell are you bitching about? maybe i'm just mellowing in my old age, but i've begun to see some small merit in the religious indoctrination that keeps the angry mob at bay. i've begun to see the religious elitism that once seemed intolerable as merely a minor nuisance, an insignificant assault on the ego and nothing more. i've begun to realize that we all owe our very existence to the futile institutions of religion and that they may be a necessary evil, something to be tolerated until some semblance of enlightenment can be attained by the multitudes. religion may even be a path to such an enlightenment.

Because the bible is used and religion is used to demonize a plant which benefits mankinds health and wellbeing. Now the ACTUAL bible is not anti cannabis at all, BUT the people today who claim to understand it seem to be despite the fact it is illogical, they somehow want to punish people who are not doing anything morally, physically, or in any way wrong, just because they need someone to hate. Some people just love to punish the innocent in the end, and they like to use religion as one of their weapons of choice on the innocent. When followed correctly I see nothing wrong with occasional use of religion.

 

[Nullis]

I've tried so hard to understand, I think.

I've spoken with Christian after Christian about my religious perspective(s). They say God is our wonderful good and almighty creator.

I say I haven't such a huge problem with the concept/possibility that there is some kind of a 'God' or infinitely complex celestial entity which I couldn't possibly hope to understand completely in my life-time. I say I just don't understand things like why God has to have a penis, or why an all-knowing benevolent God would create ignorant (but supposedly highly intelligent) beings who [he?] knows will disobey [him?] and use that as basis to punish all future generations... We have to suffer because Eve (that BITCH!) ate the forbidden fruit? And everyone is a sinner; not even babies are innocent?

Then they ask: "well, have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and savior?".

 

[Padawanbater2]

To shorten all that

-I am blaming both. Religions provide the false justification for people to commit horrible acts and disable them from educating themselves to the point of understanding why the justification is false to begin with.

-"clearly goes against our physical designs" - So do a lot of other things, but we still accept them. Homosexuality, I believe, is condemned by the majority of society because it is specifically condemned in religious texts as an abomination.

-Yes, but this alone is not a good enough reason for millions of people to - at one point in history - hate people they've never known for something they can't control to the point of thinking execution is a reasonable solution to the problem. That is some serious hate, and it doesn't only come from our understanding of human anatomy. It couldn't. Organized religions reinforces this idea. My argument is that if they didn't, such hate would be unjustifiable. There is no logical reason to take a persons life based on their sexual orientation, even if it is their choice (in my opinion, especially if it's their choice). In no way can such a position be morally correct or logically consistent, and your average Joe on the street isn't smart enough to come up with some deep philosophical reason why it is, because one doesn't exist. The only reason one can find to justify hating homosexuals lies in religious texts.

-What is the problem with getting rid of every false justification we observe that people can come up with for their actions, including ones that originate from a persons faith?

-I don't support a "Stalinist Soviet Union" type atheistic society, and you know that.

-Organized religion and modern science are incompatible.

-We are in agreement that Christianity has shaped the US we live in, and organized religion as a whole has shaped society and civilization at large. This has no bearing on anything though, and I believe the good things you can learn from any religion you can attain through other means, no hate or belief in magic required.

 

[tardis]

To shorten all that

-I am blaming both. Religions provide the false justification for people to commit horrible acts and disable them from educating themselves to the point of understanding why the justification is false to begin with.

-"clearly goes against our physical designs" - So do a lot of other things, but we still accept them. Homosexuality, I believe, is condemned by the majority of society because it is specifically condemned in religious texts as an abomination.

-Yes, but this alone is not a good enough reason for millions of people to - at one point in history - hate people they've never known for something they can't control to the point of thinking execution is a reasonable solution to the problem. That is some serious hate, and it doesn't only come from our understanding of human anatomy. It couldn't. Organized religions reinforces this idea. My argument is that if they didn't, such hate would be unjustifiable. There is no logical reason to take a persons life based on their sexual orientation, even if it is their choice (in my opinion, especially if it's their choice). In no way can such a position be morally correct or logically consistent, and your average Joe on the street isn't smart enough to come up with some deep philosophical reason why it is, because one doesn't exist. The only reason one can find to justify hating homosexuals lies in religious texts.

-What is the problem with getting rid of every false justification we observe that people can come up with for their actions, including ones that originate from a persons faith?

-I don't support a "Stalinist Soviet Union" type atheistic society, and you know that.

-Organized religion and modern science are incompatible.

-We are in agreement that Christianity has shaped the US we live in, and organized religion as a whole has shaped society and civilization at large. This has no bearing on anything though, and I believe the good things you can learn from any religion you can attain through other means, no hate or belief in magic required.

My problem as well is the notion that when Religion and Science don't match up, its Science that needs to change to fit the religion.....

 

[tardis]

My problem as well is the notion that when Religion and Science don't match up, its Science that needs to change to fit the religion.....

To me its like saying the dictionaries all have to change to match the 5th graders spelling error....

 

[Padawanbater2]

Exactly...

Fanatics fail to see the benefit of the scientific method because they don't understand it.

It's a self correcting system, designed to seek truth regardless of any personal biases.

Even some smart people around here can't seem to understand that..

 

[Heisenberg]

My problem as well is the notion that when Religion and Science don't match up, its Science that needs to change to fit the religion.....

So true. Creationists proudly trump out science when it seems, often erroneously, to agree with them. Anytime science disagrees, it becomes an archaic closed minded process bent on spreading Satan's lies.

This morning my roomie and I hit the wrong button on the remote and got a broadcast signal from some christian station. We were baked so we wached for about 10 minutes, until we just couldn't take the absurdity anymore. A man was using vauge bible quotes to interpret recent events as signs of the end of times. The leaps and failures of logic just kept coming and coming. He was telling people that bread would soon cost them an entire days pay. He had charts, facts and figures to backup what he was saying, along with scary visuals. Of course after he explained how we were all headed to a point where money means nothing, he asked for money... I just can't imagine what it's like to be a person like him. To stoop to such a depraved, despicable existence as that. And somehow in the world we live in, this behavior is praised.

 

[stelthy]

All religion is is bullshit old campfire stories that perhaps mythical leaders would use or be used as a guide to curb our thoughts into living our lives in a set way, and doing what that religion depics as being the right way to live your life.. As with every story it gets old.. and boring..and less accurate, life moves on, the motivations behind the stories are lost since they have no resemblance in todays world. And weak people that need something extra in their lives to get them through each day with a touch of faith that they believe something good/better will come of their lives are the people that push their beliefs onto us others who can clearly see whats happened and to them some of us put up with it and are glad that someone is looking after these people, some of us hate the bullshit these false acts are feeding our brothers and sisters friends and families and others want to blatantly proclaim how unjustified and false the church/ mosque's and other crap meeting places are.
Your born you live you die, Knowing the difference between right and wrong and being fairly well educated will get you alot further in life than any 'spirit conspiracy' could ever hope to. I hope that oneday the people that do believe in all this crap will take a step back, look at themselves and the lies they've been living and the thousands of hours they've wasted praying, they hundreds of wars they've caused and only the few people they've saved, have an hours silence a year to remember how dumb they'd been and start living their lives in a more productive way that really can help contribute towards a better future - They say the truth hurts and to some they will be hurt but the good thing about being hurt is you'll get over it - STELTHY