What do you believe?

[old.Tohtori]

And tohtori: Mojo is right, you keep derailing these conversations by creating new discussions over some minor details.

Little offtopic question for tohtori: Whats with the viking gods ?

Find that at all amusing? *grin*

Anyhoo, if anyone takes them as derailings, they shouldn't, it's not my intention. Just when something peeks my interest, i like to explore that discussion segment, while on a thread that is related to it. You know? Instead of making a new thread about every thing, i just ask here. It's no "offensive maneuver" of epic proportions or a conspiracy to create little jiblets that go moo.

I've stated, in some occasions, that i'm a nordic believer(it has a couple of words for it, pick what you will), (some info here), but more towards the finnish gods and ways. They can roughly translate to the classic odin, thor etc. with a couple of variations.

I'm more interested in the way of life, then just "believing in gods and valhalla", which include things like "let others live unless they disturb your life", basically defend your own and let others live. And also the rather interesting way they saw family. If, say, a man went out for three years with his wife home with no child, and came home to a couple of kids, he would take them as his children with no "reprocussions" or some such. Just a couple of examples there. All in all, the belief and way of life is me, to the bone, always has been.

Also, i've found(not yet documented further myself), that stories about Odin and stories about bibles "the god", go hand-in-hand in very many cases. Even spreading to the egypt gods. Have to post about it when i get it all sorted more. But i've found out, that odin is so widely known god, with so many people believing and actually naming him, and those people having zero influence over eachother, that it's rather interesting. How does one god appear in so many writings, in different cultures, over the world, taking into consideration the way news etc travelled and how little interaction there was.

Wow...rant...

 

[Binky the Bomb]

But they might get that nasty aftertaste of 'burning in hell'

All cats go to heaven, didn't you know They could eat as many religious people as they wanted and still be welcomed beyond the pearly gates.

 

[liloe]

Didn't anyone tell you that the whole wealthy Jew thing was a stereo type? There are well educated and wealthy people in all religions, incidentally people at the top of religions and cults have never been the poorest. Why do you expect that is?

Yes, cults maybe, but there are a lot of religions which don't even have a leader. Are we speaking of people who do it for the sake of religion or are we talking about some cult or sect leaders which spout their shit for the money, because there is a big difference in that.

Also check out the names of some rich families or politicians in the US and you will be surprised. "…thal" etc. is always a good indicator. So ofc not ALL jews are ultra-rich people. In Israel, the numbers might look bad overall, but most of the poor people there are the arabian Israelites and as such are not jews =)

Were not in ancient Egypt, and its not Moot at all, it is a fact that religious beliefs are related directly to education to be more specific, the higher the IQ the less likely it is that you will be convinced that gods exist and that you must obey them, (I don't recall who I heard put like that, but I thought it funny, I hope you do to)

So what you are saying is, that ancient egyptians, maya, chinese etc...all had a low IQ and that nowadays we all have supreme brains? I'm sorry but every day I come out of university and walk down the street I see so many idiots that I fail to believe that.

I haven't given any extremist examples. Part of the frustration debating with Tho is that if you don't spell out every meaning of something he will dig into it in the best way he can to support his argument.........you bought into it, tell me what extremist points was I using my guess is you got it from what someone else was saying not me I will check though but please feel free to clarify.

I think people would get on better if their "Beliefs didn't get in the way" that's pretty much what I meant. But you will insist on spinning.

I kinda mixed that up with Gorbachioo, though. Still I think that's generalising. I get along well with most people and if I don't, it's not cause of my beliefs but because I simply don't like the person or their attitude.

What has banning computer games got to do with this thread? what has banning anything got to do with this thread?

That question was more aimed at Gorbachioo. I'm using exactly the same argument, yet I instantly get told that it's a completely different thing. Gorbachioo says that the world would be better off without religion cause it harms everyone, so why can't I say that the world would be better off without computer games cause they harm everyone?

It also seems some people missed the sarcasm in that. I love computer games and in my opinion, the whole "aggression" thing is absolute bullshit, but in the same way I think that the "religion is harmful" argument is bullshit. A lot of things can do good or harm, depending on how they're being "used."

It's always easy to say it's "someone's" fault, but we're society heavily influenced by the media, so we often lost our will to ask more questions or find out the truth behind. It's a sad thing which nourishes prejudices, hate, fear…

It's a shame that we, with our "high IQ", still have to force people into a certain category just because they believe in something else. Of course there is a healthy distance to other things which influences our reactions, but that distance should be something we can at least accept, even if not overcome. For instance I don't like Scientology, but I'd have no problems talking to their members, while still keeping a healthy distance to what they believe. That doesn't mean I become a member, but that means I respect them as human beings, as long as they don't try to force me into anything. In the same way I have no problem with playing Snooker with a gay guy, but I won't lie and tell him that I think it's great he's gay.

I hope that was clear, because the funny thing is, that at the moment the advocates of religion keep their calm, while some of the other side start acting like "extremists."

 

[dub]

religions in general are inherently bad , this has to to do with essence of religion , truth.

truth is bad , truth makes you think the other religions and pagans and even the agnostics got it wrong , truth make you think that the sexual orientation of your snooker opponent even is a point to consider , truth is false , truth make people willing to die for their beliefs.

basicly religions are dividers and we have enough of those as it is , to have to deal with dividers that are based on a nice feeling inside makes it needlesly complicated.

this has nothing to do with how beneficial religion is for anyone as a person , but rather the problems that arise when more than one claim to believe the same truth.

as for some of the previous discussion i thought id add that there do seem to be a negative correlation betveen the level of education in a given population and the percentage who will identify themselves as religious , this can ofc be effected by many other factors , but so far the only exeption to this negative correlation is USA , correlation or negative correlation is only data , not a proof of anything.

and on a sidenote , this discussion made me realize that scientology pleads my case better than im able to myself , if i ever saw russel´s celestial teapot performed more convincingly i cant recall it , the IPU and the flying spaghetti monster are amateurs compared to these guys

 

[Iceforge]

I like how Dawkins put's it when asked why there is a problem with even those who are only moderate believers, those who do not go around preaching their teachings door to door, those who doesn't try and force schools to teach bollocks science such as Creationism, what could possibly be wrong with those?

Well, they do teach their children that it is a virtue to take that leap of faith into believing in something for which there is no proof. That the more secure you put yourself in a belief of which you got no proof, the more virtue. So basicly teaching their children to disregard any evidence that contradicts their belief and while some of those who are taught that will end up just like their parents, as moderate believers, some of them will end up as the fundamentalistic fanatics that do evil in the name of god, who feels rightous to do the most horrible acts in the world, like suicide bombings, killing people of another skin colour than yourself, killing homosexuals, and protest against equal treatment of all.

 

[Gorbachioo]

In the same way I have no problem with playing Snooker with a gay guy, but I won't lie and tell him that I think it's great he's gay."

So how exactly do you feel about gay people?

 

[old.Tohtori]

basicly religions are dividers and we have enough of those as it is , to have to deal with dividers that are based on a nice feeling inside makes it needlesly complicated.

I get the point that we have dividers, and less is better, but i bet around 50 years ago some white guy said "Hey, we got enough dividers as it is, let's get rid of some people and in 50 years, we'll all be white, blue eyed and pretty as a betty!"

Extreme example, but seems people like to use them. Why should we remove dividers, instead of trying to live with them? IF, those "dividers" are kept to self and used for self?

I think the only "divider" problem is the people bashing other people for what/who/how they are, not the people believing, acting some way or being something.

I like how Dawkins put's it when asked why there is a problem with even those who are only moderate believers, those who do not go around preaching their teachings door to door, those who doesn't try and force schools to teach bollocks science such as Creationism, what could possibly be wrong with those?*snip*st horrible acts in the world, like suicide bombings, killing people of another skin colour than yourself, killing homosexuals, and protest against equal treatment of all.

Again, have to say, not all. It's not as clear cut as "everyone does this when they do this". In anything really.

 

[Iceforge]

Nice, no arguement, just saying I'm wrong.
Not really getting it anywhere.

 

[rynnor]

I get the point that we have dividers, and less is better, but i bet around 50 years ago some white guy said "Hey, we got enough dividers as it is, let's get rid of some people and in 50 years, we'll all be white, blue eyed and pretty as a betty!".

Wow - thats a hell of a stretch linking atheism and the Nazis - religion sets groups of people up to be naturally antagonistic to each other because of what some old guy wrote in the desert hundreds of years ago - you can never really have co-existence between religions - just periods of truce.

The big religions all say 'and ours is the one true faith' i.e. we wont share you.

Extreme example, but seems people like to use them. Why should we remove dividers, instead of trying to live with them? IF, those "dividers" are kept to self and used for self?

Why should we remove them? Because dividers keep us apart - things that keep us apart become a source for war and persecution - its purely logical.

As to religious people keeping their religions to themselves it just doesnt happen - belief systems cloud all an individuals perceptions and reactions even if they dont realise it - its nasty stuff.

Religion is like genital herpes - you get this nasty itch to spread it around

 

[tierk]

Seems strange that people are choosing to ignore the fact that humans have already tried to remove religion from the social fabric, as was the case in the old USSR and guess what its back in Rusia and growiing stronger and stronger. This despite the fact that it was illegal, for a lot longer then one generation, to pray or visit churches.

What does this lead us to believe? Personally i think it just underlines the fact that human beings are in need of something other then science to explain their reason for existence. Is this a bad thing? Some people might argue that it is and that it should be stamped out but reality is that it is not possible to get rid of peoples beliefs, not through education or wealth.
It strikes me as funny that so many people on here want to make out religion to be some sort of monster that is out of control and killing millions of people every year when the reality of the matter is that commercialism and globalisation is doing that in a far more effective way then religion ever did.

Look at the last 200 years and count how many wars have been fought and how many millions of people have been killed in the name of - progress, democracy, trade, or ideals as a few examples. Pointing at religion and saying that it is the biggest killer of people in todays modern world is just a no brainer, there are far worse things destroying in far greater degrees then religion.

Consumerism (hope i spelt that right) and its effect on the enviroment and the wars that are being fought to protect it is far more deadly then religion ever was. WW1 and WW2 were not religious wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq (though some in the Muslim world would say it is a religious war) or even places like Rwanda were not religous wars and the casualities were in far greater numbers then anything that has been done in the name of religion.

Another thing that the kill religion crew fail to address is the many good things that relgion brings to peoples lives and no i am not talking spiritualy but physical work. Charity work provided by and implemented by religious organisations the world over play a far greater role today then they ever did in the past. But you all choose to ignore this factor and only want to state the obvious bad things and weigh yoiur whole argument on these smal extremist expressions of religion rather then balance it out with all the good these organistaions do, daily world wide.

 

[Mojo]

Yes, cults maybe, but there are a lot of religions which don't even have a leader. Are we speaking of people who do it for the sake of religion or are we talking about some cult or sect leaders which spout their shit for the money, because there is a big difference in that.

All religions like any other large organisation have leaders and associated hierarchy most rely on donations of some description those donations get filtered up to the top. There are huge amounts of money involved with religion, it does not revolve around money but it's there in huge sums. The only thing that separates cults from the organised religion is numbers, some cults are a bit stranger in their beliefs than others but at the end of the day when you don't believe anyone's bullshit it's hard to figure out why some bullshit is socially acceptable (organised religion) to the masses even non believers and some is not (these have been termed cults)

Also check out the names of some rich families or politicians in the US and you will be surprised. "…thal" etc. is always a good indicator. So ofc not ALL jews are ultra-rich people. In Israel, the numbers might look bad overall, but most of the poor people there are the arabian Israelites and as such are not jews =)

Yes and some of these rich Jews as well as their wealthy Christian counterparts use their wealth to support political campaigns and lobby government, create a power base make governments who in turn make policy and then you deny that religion affects the rest of us, thanks for that.

So what you are saying is, that ancient egyptians, maya, chinese etc...all had a low IQ and that nowadays we all have supreme brains? I'm sorry but every day I come out of university and walk down the street I see so many idiots that I fail to believe that.

They weren't even measuring IQ the concept wasn't created but yes of course we are smarter and not because we have super brains because we have more knowledge, better education, and huge leaps in science etc.

I kinda mixed that up with Gorbachioo, though. Still I think that's generalising. I get along well with most people and if I don't, it's not cause of my beliefs but because I simply don't like the person or their attitude.

Les getting mixed up,
So you think because we don't like religion and we voice that on a forum that we don't get along with people? That's a pretty large assumption and quite un true.

 

[rynnor]

Seems strange that people are choosing to ignore the fact that humans have already tried to remove religion from the social fabric, as was the case in the old USSR and guess what its back in Rusia and growiing stronger and stronger. This despite the fact that it was illegal, for a lot longer then one generation, to pray or visit churches.

The USSR was just a dictatorship that recognised religion as competition - ie another system setting out to brainwash people - thats why religion was crushed as were any other brand of thought.

In the vacuumn left after the fall of communism its not suprising superstitious folk went back to religion - to be honest its unlikely even Stalin managed to purge religion he just sent it underground amongst the peasants.

What does this lead us to believe? Personally i think it just underlines the fact that human beings are in need of something other then science to explain their reason for existence. Is this a bad thing? Some people might argue that it is and that it should be stamped out but reality is that it is not possible to get rid of peoples beliefs, not through education or wealth.

I think it just shows that illiterate peasants will believe any old thing - education is the cure for religion - religion flourishes amongst the ignorant and credulous - thats why the Catholic church for instance has long been the enemy of science.

Science teaches people to question where Religion requires blind faith that is why they will always be at odds.

Look at the last 200 years and count how many wars have been fought and how many millions of people have been killed in the name of - progress, democracy, trade, or ideals as a few examples. Pointing at religion and saying that it is the biggest killer of people in todays modern world is just a no brainer, there are far worse things destroying in far greater degrees then religion.

You seem to be ignoring WW2 - fought against a genocidal Catholic - did you ever wonder where his anti-semitism came from? It came from the Catholic church which has a long history of anti-semetism - he didnt just wake up one day and think lets kill jews - he was building on views he was brought up with which had existed in the church for centuries.

Another thing that the kill religion crew fail to address is the many good things that relgion brings to peoples lives and no i am not talking spiritualy but physical work. Charity work provided by and implemented by religious organisations the world over play a far greater role today then they ever did in the past. But you all choose to ignore this factor and only want to state the obvious bad things and weigh yoiur whole argument on these smal extremist expressions of religion rather then balance it out with all the good these organistaions do, daily world wide.

Religious charities are just a recruiting arm of the church - what better time to gain someones trust than when they are in hardship - they'll naturally feel gratefull and may even convert.

Plus much 'charity' from religious groups is tainted - the Catholic church spends a great deal of time and effort fighting the use of condoms in africa and south america - spreading stupid rumours like they have holes in or will give you aids - these actions have doomed who knows how many to an early death from AIDs - yay religion!

 

[Mojo]

Seems strange that people are choosing to ignore the fact that humans have already tried to remove religion from the social fabric, as was the case in the old USSR and guess what its back in Rusia and growiing stronger and stronger. This despite the fact that it was illegal, for a lot longer then one generation, to pray or visit churches.

What does this lead us to believe? Personally i think it just underlines the fact that human beings are in need of something other then science to explain their reason for existence. Is this a bad thing? Some people might argue that it is and that it should be stamped out but reality is that it is not possible to get rid of peoples beliefs, not through education or wealth.
It strikes me as funny that so many people on here want to make out religion to be some sort of monster that is out of control and killing millions of people every year when the reality of the matter is that commercialism and globalisation is doing that in a far more effective way then religion ever did.

Look at the last 200 years and count how many wars have been fought and how many millions of people have been killed in the name of - progress, democracy, trade, or ideals as a few examples. Pointing at religion and saying that it is the biggest killer of people in todays modern world is just a no brainer, there are far worse things destroying in far greater degrees then religion.

Consumerism (hope i spelt that right) and its effect on the enviroment and the wars that are being fought to protect it is far more deadly then religion ever was. WW1 and WW2 were not religious wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq (though some in the Muslim world would say it is a religious war) or even places like Rwanda were not religous wars and the casualities were in far greater numbers then anything that has been done in the name of religion.

Another thing that the kill religion crew fail to address is the many good things that relgion brings to peoples lives and no i am not talking spiritualy but physical work. Charity work provided by and implemented by religious organisations the world over play a far greater role today then they ever did in the past. But you all choose to ignore this factor and only want to state the obvious bad things and weigh yoiur whole argument on these smal extremist expressions of religion rather then balance it out with all the good these organistaions do, daily world wide.

I agree with most of what you say but a lot if it is out side the scope of this thread, However I don't think I have seen anyone here say religion is the biggest evil out there and not many are saying we should immediately get rid of religion and that its as all bad. I like many other just don't think we need to perpetuate what we believe to be a lie/group of lies and give religion credit for things like "Charity work" when there are plenty of arguably better people out there (because they are not compelled by a religion) doing the exact same thing just because they as individuals want to.


Gorbs most relevant argument in our day and age is the one against the apparently charitable Christians lobby against or flat removing any funding for condoms in Africa, wars might not be relevant in this day and age.
But refusing condoms to aids ridden countries, only educating children if they are "Christian" or convert to and pray to gods.

"Hey little African kid, Jesus loves you some come Kiss his arse and learn in this school he gave you...............Talk about getting them in young.

The non religious organisations don't write contracts to "Gods" into their charitable work...which i would argue makes them better people.

 

[liloe]

… some of them will end up as the fundamentalistic fanatics that do evil in the name of god, who feels rightous to do the most horrible acts in the world, like suicide bombings, killing people of another skin colour than yourself, killing homosexuals, and protest against equal treatment of all.

So I maintain my claim that we should forbid all computer games and violent movies, cause some children become violent monsters from playing/watching them.

So how exactly do you feel about gay people?

So how exactly do you feel about answering my question first? If I answer this one, you will ask anoher one and another and … and I'll never get to know your interesting arguments.

All religions like any other large organisation have leaders and associated hierarchy most rely on donations of some description those donations get filtered up to the top. There are huge amounts of money involved with religion, it does not revolve around money but it's there in huge sums. The only thing that separates cults from the organised religion is numbers, some cults are a bit stranger in their beliefs than others but at the end of the day when you don't believe anyone's bullshit it's hard to figure out why some bullshit is socially acceptable (organised religion) to the masses even non believers and some is not (these have been termed cults)

Yes, all hail the leaders of norse mythology, nature religions, animism…

Yes and some of these rich Jews as well as their wealthy Christian counterparts use their wealth to support political campaigns and lobby government, create a power base make governments who in turn make policy and then you deny that religion affects the rest of us, thanks for that.

I rest my case, you simply don't get it, do you? That wasn't even the POINT of the argument. Just to explain it a bit. Your argument: "knowledge+wealth = no religion". I say: "Jews = knowledge +wealth + religion" You: "they use money for bad things"

So as you can see, that didn't even remotely answer the question.

They weren't even measuring IQ the concept wasn't created but yes of course we are smarter and not because we have super brains because we have more knowledge, better education, and huge leaps in science etc.

So because they had less knowledge they had a smaller IQ? I hope you know that the I stands for intelligence and not for knowledge. Following your assumption, the lower level of knowledge in the medieval should have created more religious belief. Now I ask you...can there be more religious belief than a society entirely dominated by religion, like Maya/Babylon/Egypt?

Also this assumes that people in the medieval were really religious and not just oppressed by the powerful catholic church. Telling someone to believe or die is maybe some form of religion, but it's definately not a christian religion. A red car doesn't become blue by simply calling it that.

Less getting mixed up,
So you think because we don't like religion and we voice that on a forum that we don't get along with people? That's a pretty large assumption and quite un true.

If people say that all religion should be banned and/or believers burned, then no, I don't call that "getting along with people"

Religious charities are just a recruiting arm of the church - what better time to gain someones trust than when they are in hardship - they'll naturally feel gratefull and may even convert.

Plus much 'charity' from religious groups is tainted - the Catholic church spends a great deal of time and effort fighting the use of condoms in africa and south america - spreading stupid rumours like they have holes in or will give you aids - these actions have doomed who knows how many to an early death from AIDS - yay religion!

And again people take one single religion as example for all. Only the catholic church fights condomn, nobody else does that (maybe we should, people dieing stops the increasing population, haha)

Also your arguments are wrong, because christian school are open for everyone (at least the ones my "religion" pays).

So if you think that everyone can do it. Feel free to open an atheist health organisation and tell everyone one you help that there is no god and that all believers are fools. You're absolutely free to do so…but tbh, up to now I've not heard of such an organisation.

 

[tris-]

i dont think its fair to say people in the past arnt as clever as us now.

look at philosophers or the ancient greeks and their medical expertise etc

 

[rynnor]

i dont think its fair to say people in the past arnt as clever as us now.

look at philosophers or the ancient greeks and their medical expertise etc

I dont think intelligence has changed but we now have a better framework for education and have created systems such as pier review to ensure that new knowledge is carefully evaluated in a scientific way.

The Greeks and Romans were pretty advanced societies but after each of these came long periods of anarchy during which learning stalled.

 

[Laddey]

What a boring ass thread!

 

[rynnor]

And again people take one single religion as example for all. Only the catholic church fights condomn, nobody else does that (maybe we should, people dieing stops the increasing population, haha).

It would be a pretty long discussion if we mentioned every religion in the world eh? As a westerner I know the catholic church best and due to their massive wealth/corruption they make a pretty good example of the problems with religion.

Also your arguments are wrong, because christian school are open for everyone (at least the ones my "religion" pays).

What religions that then? In the UK religious schools are only open to those that accept that particular faith which leads to segragation and non-integration.

So if you think that everyone can do it. Feel free to open an atheist health organisation and tell everyone one you help that there is no god and that all believers are fools. You're absolutely free to do so…but tbh, up to now I've not heard of such an organisation.

Perhaps you have been living in a cave? Theres plenty of charities that dont have all the religious garbage thrown in - Unicef, Medecins sans frontieres,Worldvision - the list is nearly endless.

Theres actually a lot more non-religious charities than religious ones and with the added bonus that these people do it of simple human kindness rather than as 'dont go to hell' insurance that christians do.

 

[rynnor]

So I maintain my claim that we should forbid all computer games and violent movies, cause some children become violent monsters from playing/watching them.

Computer games dont set out to turn people into maniacs but Religions do - thats the difference - surely its plain enough to see?

 

[liloe]

It would be a pretty long discussion if we mentioned every religion in the world eh? As a westerner I know the catholic church best and due to their massive wealth/corruption they make a pretty good example of the problems with religion.

But doing that is a wrong way of argumenting. You cannot take one and apply it to all.

What religions that then? In the UK religious schools are only open to those that accept that particular faith which leads to segragation and non-integration.

It's called SDA (or Adventist) and even though I do not support everything, it's the religion that comes closest to what I believe. There is a school rather near to where I live in Germany and everybody can go there. Same goes for the school/hospitals we maintain in Africa or other poor areas in the world.

Perhaps you have been living in a cave? Theres plenty of charities that dont have all the religious garbage thrown in - Unicef, Medecins sans frontieres,Worldvision - the list is nearly endless.

Theres actually a lot more non-religious charities than religious ones and with the added bonus that these people do it of simple human kindness rather than as 'dont go to hell' insurance that christians do.

You didn't get my point, did you? Does "Medecins sans fontières" tell everyone that being atheist is THE win? I don't think so.

Computer games dont set out to turn people into maniacs but Religions do - thats the difference - surely its plain enough to see?

Oh they don't? Then why do all those suicidal murder kids play those terribly violent games and watch 18+ movies?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Nice, no arguement, just saying I'm wrong.
Not really getting it anywhere.

Thought i said plenty. That "not all religious people teach their kids etc etc".

I don't think it was that complicated in the wording.

Unless you just don't agree that not ALL people teach their kids their religion.

Wow - thats a hell of a stretch linking atheism and the Nazis - religion sets groups of people up to be naturally antagonistic to each other because of what some old guy wrote in the desert hundreds of years ago - you can never really have co-existence between religions - just periods of truce.

The big religions all say 'and ours is the one true faith' i.e. we wont share you.

Why should we remove them? Because dividers keep us apart - things that keep us apart become a source for war and persecution - its purely logical.

As to religious people keeping their religions to themselves it just doesnt happen - belief systems cloud all an individuals perceptions and reactions even if they dont realise it - its nasty stuff.

Religion is like genital herpes - you get this nasty itch to spread it around

the "stretch", is mostly 'cause nazis is such a tabu, but basically it's the same thing. Some people don't like something other people do, so let's eradicate it completely. It had NOTHING to do with atheists, just about people who want to eradicate religion completely and how it's not a way to go.

Dividers, sure, CAN keep us apart, when there's a zealot preaching, or a non-believer preaching how wrong the religious guy is. As i said, the problem isn't with dividers, or differences as i like to call it, but with people who make a problem about someone elses way of life.

Religious people DO keep it to themselves, just that in these kind of discussions, the anti-religion people only use the examples that are bad and even the religious people think is bad, and don't take into consideration that a huge majority of religious people just live like you and decide on their own, without preaching it on the streetcorner.

 

[Binky the Bomb]

And now for something, completely different:

A large golden question mark, dedicated to the idiocy inherant in all humanity.

 

[tierk]

......In the vacuumn left after the fall of communism its not suprising superstitious folk went back to religion - to be honest its unlikely even Stalin managed to purge religion he just sent it underground amongst the peasants......

You dot seem to get that you are only making my point more valid. If you go and look at the lot of a peasant in the USSR before the revolution and say after 1953 and make a comparsion you will see a highly educated mass of people who has a far better standard of living then they ever did under the Tsars of old.

This would lead any sensible person to believe that the comment made by Gorbo, about education and wealth being the death of religion, as surely flawed? Considering that they reverted to this religion once they had free choice?

.....religion flourishes amongst the ignorant and credulous - thats why the Catholic church for instance has long been the enemy of science......

I will put this comment down to a inability to express yourself clearly as you are so off the track that i am not even going to give it any attention.

.....You seem to be ignoring WW2 - fought against a genocidal Catholic - did you ever wonder where his anti-semitism came from? It came from the Catholic church which has a long history of anti-semetism - he didnt just wake up one day and think lets kill jews - he was building on views he was brought up with which had existed in the church for centuries.......

I think the point you are making is for another debate on the sources of antisemitism. WW2 was not fought to rid the world of antisemitism and the crimes commited by Nazi Germany was only discovered after the allies totlaly defeated the Nazis.

Jews where being thrown to the lions long before Christians were btw so lets not open this can of worms and lets save it for another day /thread.

.....Religious charities are just a recruiting arm of the church - what better time to gain someones trust than when they are in hardship - they'll naturally feel gratefull and may even convert........

Well i dont know what your thoughts on this are but personally i would suggest that a school setup by a religious charity is far preferable to no school at all.

If you are implying that a school, religious or otherwise, will be the deciding factor for what religion people are and not parents then you are wrong in the vaste majoirty of cases.

.....Plus much 'charity' from religious groups is tainted - the Catholic church spends a great deal of time and effort fighting the use of condoms in africa and south america - spreading stupid rumours like they have holes in or will give you aids - these actions have doomed who knows how many to an early death from AIDs - yay religion!

Yes ok lets just cling to this one face of the church and totaly ignore all the other good that religious groups of all faiths have and continue to do. Lets ignore all the schools, the medical care, the opposition, usually with the Church in the forefront, against dictators or injustices. Do you have any idea how many people there are in this world doing work similar to Mother Theresa that are not in the headlines every day?

 

[Gorbachioo]

So I maintain my claim that we should forbid all computer games and violent movies, cause some children become violent monsters from playing/watching them.

Some do, but very few. Not enough to make computer games a bad thing. Millions of people dying because of religion (+ all the other bad things) is enough to make it a bad thing.

So how exactly do you feel about answering my question first? If I answer this one, you will ask anoher one and another and … and I'll never get to know your interesting arguments.

I didnt see a question there, just answers to questions/arguments. But anway, how do you feel about gay people?

Yes, all hail the leaders of norse mythology, nature religions, animism…

Didnt you just say you respect other peoples beliefs? If you dont respect nature religions then why should we respect your religion?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Didnt you just say you respect other peoples beliefs? If you dont respect nature religions then why should we respect your religion?

I think liloe meant that in a sarcastic manner, as in, in norse mythology, nature religions, animis etc, there are no leaders, no money going about, or other of that "corporate religion" stuff.

 

[rynnor]

Lets ignore all the schools, the medical care, the opposition, usually with the Church in the forefront, against dictators or injustices.

Hmm - I couldnt let this bit pass - are you being ironic or something?

The Church looks to its own self interest - if a dictator is of that religion then their happy - how much did the Catholic church stand up to hitler?

Answer - not at all - they colluded with him and when it went wrong they even helped smuggle out the Nazi war criminals.

 

[rynnor]

I think liloe meant that in a sarcastic manner, as in, in norse mythology, nature religions, animis etc, there are no leaders, no money going about, or other of that "corporate religion" stuff.

I think that would make it a belief rather than a religion - religons need some kind of structure (and generally a hierarchy).

 

[old.Tohtori]

I think that would make it a belief rather than a religion - religons need some kind of structure (and generally a hierarchy).

Well that's a whole new bag of bones to pick.

What defines a religion, is it ONLY the ones with churches and such, collecting money, taxes(aka big ones), or are religions like norse religion valid religions?

Afterall, i could say norse religion is older. As is, say, egyptian.

I think it's such a wide concept, what is and is not religion, that answering it well might take some time.

Sure, one indicator could be a system, but is it really a necessity, or is that something transferred from the "science" side of things?

 

[rynnor]

Do you have any idea how many people there are in this world doing work similar to Mother Theresa that are not in the headlines every day?

She was an interesting lady - from her private letters it appears that she lost her faith many years before her death but continued on ministering to the poor and sick regardless - I'd say she's more an example of the good humanism can do than some religion she had lost faith in.

Its a sign of the desperation of the catholic church that they push a woman who had lost her faith forward for sainthood.

Excuses, excuses. | Unscrewing The Inscrutable

 

[rynnor]

Well that's a whole new bag of bones to pick.

What defines a religion, is it ONLY the ones with churches and such, collecting money, taxes(aka big ones), or are religions like norse religion valid religions?

Afterall, i could say norse religion is older. As is, say, egyptian.

I think it's such a wide concept, what is and is not religion, that answering it well might take some time.

Sure, one indicator could be a system, but is it really a necessity, or is that something transferred from the "science" side of things?

I dont think its a question of validity - the norse gods and the christian god are both equally valid as equally un-provable - just a matter of description.

You could start an organisation based on the norse gods and that would be a religion.

Heres an example - I could believe theres an invisible magic teapot orbiting the earth - thats a belief - it would only be a religion if I founded the Magic Teapot Church.