Skip to main content

The problem is that religion creats a fundamental division between "them and us." they call it good and evil, and their general remedy for "them" is to marginalism them...sometimes to the point of eleminating them.  But most often by creating arbitary laws that only effect them, i.e. banning gay marriage, abortions, drugs, etc.

I would have absolutely nothing to say about fairy tale believers if they would just mind their own business and leave me alone.

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
Originally Posted by Zazu:

 

I'm not sure i would say that violence is rampant. Considering how many thousands of churches exist and how many people claim to hold a religious view, it would be a very small percentage. Those that do force their ideas onto others make the headlines.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Does anything you said up there change the fact that this is religious violence? Personally I can't except it as "ok" just because it is a few million violent believers....since there is so many more that are just in the background acting in a supportive role.

 

Sort of like child molesters, just because every adult does not abuse children doesn't mean I don't concern myself with the ones that do.

 

No, it doesn't.  But to control religious violence requires the religious leaders to step in. All the complaining in the world will not make one iota of difference.. I am in no position to effect any changes. Any faction of the population who commits crimes is as guilty as any other.

Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by FirenzeVeritas:

My take on the premise is that it's similar to comparing all who support animal welfare to members of the Animal Liberation Front...

==
No one has lumped all theists of any or all religions together.

The thing is though, religious criminals find all the immoral support they need in the words and actions exemplified by their holy books. Books supposedly inspired/written by their god.

More importantly, anyone who willingly suspends their natural disbelief in the ridiculous and thinks they have a personal relationship with an invisible deity who offers life after death, is capable of anything.

Actually, murder is banned in all three major religions. As for willingly 'suspending belief', that would be a matter of opinion, yes?  Since you cannot disprove that invisible deity, claiming someone is unbalanced because of their belief is a false argument. As I have shown, evolution may have created that need for the deity. Now as to whether 'it' exists in a separate dimension or outside the bounds of our scientific study, we cannot ascertain.

Z rob didn’t say suspend natural belief “for” or simply suspend belief  as in cessation of;  he said suspend natural belief “in”.  there is a huge difference.

  That’s what he said but what he meant to say could be as you assumed. I took his statement literally as he stated it.

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:

Hmmmm works fine for me. You have to click on the image to enlarge it. It is a pretty huge image so it might take a minute.

 

You have a religion Bill. You worship and attend services. You follow a doctrine and an ancient book written by men. Many of the things you say on this forum come directly from your religious belief. All religion is man made. Even yours.

 

To me religion promotes much of the hate and intolerance in the world today. It gives humans something to point to and say "I don't think you should have this right because it is against my beliefs" It also affords those that would kill and murder in the name of their god the ability to do so without remorse. It rarely (if ever) stays in the realm of "a personal relationship" between you and your god. I have a personal relationship with my spouse and just because we do things a certain way in our marriage I do not expect or demand that others have the same kind of marriage as I do. As I have witnessed many times here on this forum and in the world outside, all religious groups feel the need to tell others they are doing it wrong. Some go so far as to kill anyone who disagrees.

 

Are you not doing just what you are speaking against? Are you not telling us who believe in God that we are doing it wrong?

Originally Posted by vega:

Z rob didn’t say suspend natural belief “for” or simply suspend belief  as in cessation of;  he said suspend natural belief “in”.  there is a huge difference.

  That’s what he said but what he meant to say could be as you assumed. I took his statement literally as he stated it.

“More importantly, anyone who willingly suspends their natural disbelief in the ridiculous and thinks they have a personal relationship with an invisible deity who offers life after death, is capable of anything“.[Rob]

 

He said 'disbelief' in...meaning that according to him, it is the natural order of things to find religion and deities to be of a ridiculous nature. Studies have shown that the natural order of things is to have a belief in deities. 

 

As per another thread:

If these theories are correct, then it means that religiosity – belief in higher powers – may have an evolutionary origin.  It is evolutionarily familiar and natural to believe in God, and evolutionarily novel not to be religious. 

Originally Posted by Gingee:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel:

Hmmmm works fine for me. You have to click on the image to enlarge it. It is a pretty huge image so it might take a minute.

 

You have a religion Bill. You worship and attend services. You follow a doctrine and an ancient book written by men. Many of the things you say on this forum come directly from your religious belief. All religion is man made. Even yours.

 

To me religion promotes much of the hate and intolerance in the world today. It gives humans something to point to and say "I don't think you should have this right because it is against my beliefs" It also affords those that would kill and murder in the name of their god the ability to do so without remorse. It rarely (if ever) stays in the realm of "a personal relationship" between you and your god. I have a personal relationship with my spouse and just because we do things a certain way in our marriage I do not expect or demand that others have the same kind of marriage as I do. As I have witnessed many times here on this forum and in the world outside, all religious groups feel the need to tell others they are doing it wrong. Some go so far as to kill anyone who disagrees.

 

Are you not doing just what you are speaking against? Are you not telling us who believe in God that we are doing it wrong?

__________________________________

 

Gingee, are you asking me if I think its wrong, to force (by law)  religious beliefs on American citizens, to deny rights based solely on the bible, then yes I am telling those believers that they are doing it wrong. If you are implying that I think those who kill in the name of a god are doing it wrong, then the answer is yes again. Theocracy does not work.

Originally Posted by Zazu:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
Originally Posted by Zazu:

 

I'm not sure i would say that violence is rampant. Considering how many thousands of churches exist and how many people claim to hold a religious view, it would be a very small percentage. Those that do force their ideas onto others make the headlines.

 

------------------------------------------------------

 

Does anything you said up there change the fact that this is religious violence? Personally I can't except it as "ok" just because it is a few million violent believers....since there is so many more that are just in the background acting in a supportive role.

 

Sort of like child molesters, just because every adult does not abuse children doesn't mean I don't concern myself with the ones that do.

 

No, it doesn't.  But to control religious violence requires the religious leaders to step in. All the complaining in the world will not make one iota of difference.. I am in no position to effect any changes. Any faction of the population who commits crimes is as guilty as any other.

__________________________________

 

So you say nothing? Is this the "I'm not my brothers keeper" argument?

 

When the ****s came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
_________________________________

 

So you say nothing? Is this the "I'm not my brothers keeper" argument?

No, this is the 'I am not in a position to change laws, influence religious doctrine or rewrite the constitution' argument. LOL

 

As far as my ability to change things: I can state that molestation is wrong, I can agree that people being controlled by religion, politics or culture is wrong, and I can say that deities are sky fairies and atheists are immoral, but what I say on a forum will not amount to anything. I can contribute to causes I agree with and shun those I don't.  I can offer ideas and counter points to an argument but whether that will cause a change in the status quo is unknown. I can debate the merits of an idea and hope to enlighten the viewpoints  of both sides.

 

And when they come for me, I can unleash a spray of ammo in their general direction.

Originally Posted by Zazu:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by FirenzeVeritas:

My take on the premise is that it's similar to comparing all who support animal welfare to members of the Animal Liberation Front...

==
No one has lumped all theists of any or all religions together.

The thing is though, religious criminals find all the immoral support they need in the words and actions exemplified by their holy books. Books supposedly inspired/written by their god.

More importantly, anyone who willingly suspends their natural disbelief in the ridiculous and thinks they have a personal relationship with an invisible deity who offers life after death, is capable of anything.

Actually, murder is banned in all three major religions. As for willingly 'suspending belief', that would be a matter of opinion, yes?  Since you cannot disprove that invisible deity, claiming someone is unbalanced because of their belief is a false argument. As I have shown, evolution may have created that need for the deity. Now as to whether 'it' exists in a separate dimension or outside the bounds of our scientific study, we cannot ascertain.

==
1. LOL to murder being banned by the big three!  Crack open any history book, ever. The faithful (especially from the big 3) are just as likely to kill those from an outgroup by the hundreds or thousands, as they are to kill each other. The scriptures not only support but exemplify these behaviors. This is undeniable. Historically, atrocities small and large are often sanctioned by the leadership.

I notice you didn't address how all religious atrocities and genocides, ever, have been justifiable by interpreting holy scriptures & supposedly communing with a deity that guarantees rewards after death.

2. As for suspending our natural disbelief in the ridiculous, it's certainly not a matter of opinion. It's a plain fact. All believers must be inculcated and trained to initially and continually subdue their natural instinct for doubt, skepticism and reason in the face of the ridiculous things that religions can conjure up as explanations and dictates.

3. I guess since neither you nor anyone can disprove the existence of Leprechauns, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus or Poseidon - means that they're all real, right??

BTW, there's an invisible pink dragon behind you right at this very moment. It can't be heard, felt or otherwise detected with any instrument but it can read your mind. Please, please prove to me that it doesn't exist... I'll wait

4. As to things outside of science, I don't think so. Just about every pronouncement from religions are well within the bounds of science. The efficacy of prayer, the authenticity of miracles, the historical nature of scriptures, even the existence of deities that intervene in human affairs, etc. are all claims about the natural world and very much the specific domain of science. Religions have historically given embarrassingly awful answers to all phenomena. There's no reason whatsoever to expect that religions suddenly have any good answers that won't prove embarrassing in the near or distant future.

5. The historical human tendency for religion may be evolutionary in basis. Evolution is responsible for everything, including whales with hip bones, snakes with legs bones, narrow human birth canals, nipples on male mammals, etc. As with religion, none of these are currently necessary or necessarily beneficial to have. They're just vestiges of our distant past.

Originally Posted by Gingee:

Are you not telling us who believe in God that we are doing it wrong?

________

Question is not for me but I will answer it.

Yes, some of you are doing it wrong. I've seen those Christians in action that belittle, gossip, put down, judge, make fun of, call names, (I could go on & on).  Do you honestly believe that God (if he exist) is happy with those people?

Did you know the Bible says that not everyone who says 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of Heaven? Can't shoot any straighter than that.

It also says that only those who do the will of God will enter into the kingdom of Heaven. Do you think it's His will the way some "Christians" treat others?

Instead of concentrating on the Atheist & non-believers, get the the beam out of your own eyes first.

Originally Posted by Zazu:
Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
_________________________________

 

So you say nothing? Is this the "I'm not my brothers keeper" argument?

No, this is the 'I am not in a position to change laws, influence religious doctrine or rewrite the constitution' argument. LOL

 

As far as my ability to change things: I can state that molestation is wrong, I can agree that people being controlled by religion, politics or culture is wrong, and I can say that deities are sky fairies and atheists are immoral, but what I say on a forum will not amount to anything. I can contribute to causes I agree with and shun those I don't.  I can offer ideas and counter points to an argument but whether that will cause a change in the status quo is unknown. I can debate the merits of an idea and hope to enlighten the viewpoints  of both sides.

 

And when they come for me, I can unleash a spray of ammo in their general direction.

________________________________________________

 

Speaking out against wrongs does make a difference. We have seen it in the past and we should not forget the lessons of history.

 

The reason your answer bothered me is that I have heard it so many times from believers. When the Catholic church was being exposed for covering up decades of child abuse those in that religion used that same answer. "What can I do? I don't like it, but I can't control it." When we here of Islamist killing their daughters for what they consider dis-honorable behavior, the Muslim community says that those are the extremist and they can't do anything about them. When the Christian Scientist let their children die from easily curable sicknesses those that are CS say they were only doing what they believed God wanted them to do.

 

You are right that if you only spoke out on forums it would do very little to change things. That's why all these good believers that find the horrible crimes that are done in the name of their god wrong and deplorable, should stand up and speak out publicly. If as you say these that commit this terrible acts are such a very small minority, why can't the majority of the group stand up against them? Remove them from their churches, denounce them as true followers, refuse to support in anyway the leaders and churches that turn a blind eye to it. Get tough and stand up for this peace and love that we are told the 3 main religions stand for.

 

If I were part of a group that had this element in its midst I would be even more vocal than someone on the outside. I would in no way want it to appear I am condoning it.

 

Sadly, most of the time the silence is deafening.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Zazu:

 

As per another thread:

If these theories are correct, then it means that religiosity – belief in higher powers – may have an evolutionary origin.  It is evolutionarily familiar and natural to believe in God, and evolutionarily novel not to be religious. 

__________________________________________

 

Would you say that since non-belief is growing faster than any religion, humans are beginning to evolve past the need for deities?

Originally Posted by A. Robustus:

==
1. LOL to murder being banned by the big three!  Crack open any history book, ever. The faithful (especially from the big 3) are just as likely to kill those from an outgroup by the hundreds or thousands, as they are to kill each other. The scriptures not only support but exemplify these behaviors. This is undeniable. Historically, atrocities small and large are often sanctioned by the leadership.

I notice you didn't address how all religious atrocities and genocides, ever, have been justifiable by interpreting holy scriptures & supposedly communing with a deity that guarantees rewards after death.

2. As for suspending our natural disbelief in the ridiculous, it's certainly not a matter of opinion. It's a plain fact. All believers must be inculcated and trained to initially and continually subdue their natural instinct for doubt, skepticism and reason in the face of the ridiculous things that religions can conjure up as explanations and dictates.

3. I guess since neither you nor anyone can disprove the existence of Leprechauns, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus or Poseidon - means that they're all real, right??

BTW, there's an invisible pink dragon behind you right at this very moment. It can't be heard, felt or otherwise detected with any instrument but it can read your mind. Please, please prove to me that it doesn't exist... I'll wait

4. As to things outside of science, I don't think so. Just about every pronouncement from religions are well within the bounds of science. The efficacy of prayer, the authenticity of miracles, the historical nature of scriptures, even the existence of deities that intervene in human affairs, etc. are all claims about the natural world and very much the specific domain of science. Religions have historically given embarrassingly awful answers to all phenomena. There's no reason whatsoever to expect that religions suddenly have any good answers that won't prove embarrassing in the near or distant future.

5. The historical human tendency for religion may be evolutionary in basis. Evolution is responsible for everything, including whales with hip bones, snakes with legs bones, narrow human birth canals, nipples on male mammals, etc. As with religion, none of these are currently necessary or necessarily beneficial to have. They're just vestiges of our distant past.

Murder is banned in all three religions, also note that murder is also banned by secular laws, yet it still happens.  I disagree that we have a natural doubt of religion.  From what I have observed, religion is easy to accept. It is the rejecting of religion that is hard. . .I have never doubted the evolutionary process.

 

If an omnipotent deity exists: above, beyond and outside the realm of our understanding of the universe, then 'it' can exist without any proof being available. "It" can also exist solely in the brain of the believer as well. So i do not claim one exists, i simply state that one cannot be proved or disproved.

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
_______________________________________________

 

Speaking out against wrongs does make a difference. We have seen it in the past and we should not forget the lessons of history.

 

The reason your answer bothered me is that I have heard it so many times from believers. When the Catholic church was being exposed for covering up decades of child abuse those in that religion used that same answer. "What can I do? I don't like it, but I can't control it." When we here of Islamist killing their daughters for what they consider dis-honorable behavior, the Muslim community says that those are the extremist and they can't do anything about them. When the Christian Scientist let their children die from easily curable sicknesses those that are CS say they were only doing what they believed God wanted them to do.

 

You are right that if you only spoke out on forums it would do very little to change things. That's why all these good believers that find the horrible crimes that are done in the name of their god wrong and deplorable, should stand up and speak out publicly. If as you say these that commit this terrible acts are such a very small minority, why can't the majority of the group stand up against them? Remove them from their churches, denounce them as true followers, refuse to support in anyway the leaders and churches that turn a blind eye to it. Get tough and stand up for this peace and love that we are told the 3 main religions stand for.

 

If I were part of a group that had this element in its midst I would be even more vocal than someone on the outside. I would in no way want it to appear I am condoning it.

 

Sadly, most of the time the silence is deafening.

 

 

 

 

 

If you have a way of predicting who will turn into an extremist and who will not, you should publish it. I know of no way to stop people from using religion or anything else for bad intentions. As the saying goes: guns don't kill people, people do. Even if we ban all guns, they will use knives.  Ban knives, and they will use fists.  I don't think we can ban fists. The person who was loved by all could turn out to be a serial killer. Until science can detect the defective genes for 'extremist', we can only react after the fact, not before.

 

I never said I condoned any of the atrocities. As I said, the members of the various religions have to be the ones who speak up and condemn the actions of their members.  It is basically like being the parent who tells another their kids are brats. While the statement is true, having heard it form an 'outsider' will not cause the parent to rein in their child.  More than likely, they will be offended and let the child go un-controlled even more.

 

As you already know, the law does step in where a child has died because of the religious beliefs of the parents. We all agree that this is the right thing to do, but at the same time, we are encouraging the loss of freedom to practice the religion of choice. "WE" can say a person who 'hears voices' is insane and let them off the hook for a crime, yet "WE" also state that people who 'talk' to a deity in prayers is perfectly sane.

 

Unless "WE" actually want the government to outlaw religion, then it will have it's problems the same as any faction of society. Even with the reprehensible outcomes that do occur, i do not want any freedom to be restricted.

Remember when- with their hand on the bible- "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help you god"?  And they'd say "yes". 

 

That one cracked me up. Like they'd say, "well if you're going to make me swear on the bible I guess I'll have to tell the truth, I did it. Yeah, they're going to commit a crime and if they swear on the bible they'll be forced to confess. Then later there'd be-"but you swore on the bible"!!!  In the movie "Fried Green Tomatoes" the preacher lied, but because he didn't have his hand on the bible it was OK. Just two examples, for me, of the ridiculousness of it all.

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
Originally Posted by Zazu:

 

As per another thread:

If these theories are correct, then it means that religiosity – belief in higher powers – may have an evolutionary origin.  It is evolutionarily familiar and natural to believe in God, and evolutionarily novel not to be religious. 

__________________________________________

 

Would you say that since non-belief is growing faster than any religion, humans are beginning to evolve past the need for deities?

Entirely possible.  It could be that the 'feeling of paranoia' is no longer needed in society. A few million more generations should tell.

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Remember when- with their hand on the bible- "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help you god"?  And they'd say "yes". 

 

That one cracked me up. Like they'd say, "well if you're going to make me swear on the bible I guess I'll have to tell the truth, I did it. Yeah, they're going to commit a crime and if they swear on the bible they'll be forced to confess. Then later there'd be-"but you swore on the bible"!!!  In the movie "Fried Green Tomatoes" the preacher lied, but because he didn't have his hand on the bible it was OK. Just two examples, for me, of the ridiculousness of it all.

It is a ridiculous practice.  Tell me, as an atheist, have you ever been in court and told them that you did not want to use a Bible as you didn't believe in God?

It is a ridiculous practice.  Tell me, as an atheist, have you ever been in court and told them that you did not want to use a Bible as you didn't believe in God?

==================

From what I understand they don't ask people to swear on the bible anymore. I've never been asked to swear on the bible for any reason, can't see that happening, but if it did I'd tell them I was an atheist. I'd explain that means I don't need to put my hand on a book so that, in some people's way of thinking, I'd be forced to tell the truth, because I fully intended to do that as I always do, without their bible being involved.

From Dark Angel: 

"You are right that if you only spoke out on forums it would do very little to change things. That's why all these good believers that find the horrible crimes that are done in the name of their god wrong and deplorable, should stand up and speak out publicly. If as you say these that commit this terrible acts are such a very small minority, why can't the majority of the group stand up against them? Remove them from their churches, denounce them as true followers, refuse to support in anyway the leaders and churches that turn a blind eye to it. Get tough and stand up for this peace and love that we are told the 3 main religions stand for.

 

If I were part of a group that had this element in its midst I would be even more vocal than someone on the outside. I would in no way want it to appear I am condoning it.

 

Sadly, most of the time the silence is deafening."

____________________________________

Actually, a lot of us DO chastise those who don't behave in a Christian manner. Look at all of the Christians here on the forum who keep telling Bill he is doing it wrong.

 

In my personal life, I really don't know any Christians who are doing anything wrong. They are all kind, loving people who, like myself, have dedicated their lives to doing God's work. And the difference between them and some of the Christians who are NOT acting in a kind and loving manner is this: We have asked God to run our lives rather than doing it ourselves. We don't "decide" to be good people, God makes it so. Those who think and plan and decide how best to represent themselves as Christians are doing it THEMSELVES, and as fallible humans, they are bound to mess it up.

 

But as for people committing "atrocities" in the name of the Lord, frankly I don't know any and never have.

 

Originally Posted by Zazu:

If you have a way of predicting who will turn into an extremist and who will not, you should publish it. I know of no way to stop people from using religion or anything else for bad intentions. As the saying goes: guns don't kill people, people do. Even if we ban all guns, they will use knives.  Ban knives, and they will use fists.  I don't think we can ban fists. The person who was loved by all could turn out to be a serial killer. Until science can detect the defective genes for 'extremist', we can only react after the fact, not before.

 

I never said I condoned any of the atrocities. As I said, the members of the various religions have to be the ones who speak up and condemn the actions of their members.  It is basically like being the parent who tells another their kids are brats. While the statement is true, having heard it form an 'outsider' will not cause the parent to rein in their child.  More than likely, they will be offended and let the child go un-controlled even more.

 

As you already know, the law does step in where a child has died because of the religious beliefs of the parents. We all agree that this is the right thing to do, but at the same time, we are encouraging the loss of freedom to practice the religion of choice. "WE" can say a person who 'hears voices' is insane and let them off the hook for a crime, yet "WE" also state that people who 'talk' to a deity in prayers is perfectly sane.

 

Unless "WE" actually want the government to outlaw religion, then it will have it's problems the same as any faction of society. Even with the reprehensible outcomes that do occur, i do not want any freedom to be restricted.

_________________________________________

 

Of course I have no way of predicting who will become an extremist. What I can predict is that if you believe in a Abrahamic religion then the chances of violence and hate within that belief system will always raise its ugly head. There is a long history to attest to that. It is an ongoing issue that has been a part of those beliefs since their inception. 

 

The Bible and the Qur'an are pack full of violence and hate. It encourages its followers to war against those that oppose it. God of the bible ordered his people to kill, rape and enslave those that did not worship him. What message do you think humanity should take away from these examples?

 

Do I want to see religion outlawed? No. I do not want to have freedoms restricted either. What I would really like to see is those that hold these beliefs catch up to the 21st century and put their beliefs in perspective. To understand and accept that it is only their personal belief and can not be used to control others.

 

Of course that is wishful thinking on my part. Since the whole essence of those religions are based on  the idea that those that don't adhere to their beliefs should be treated as the enemy.

 

Hence the problem I have with religion.....

Originally Posted by DarkAngel:
Originally Posted by Zazu:

If you have a way of predicting who will turn into an extremist and who will not, you should publish it. I know of no way to stop people from using religion or anything else for bad intentions. As the saying goes: guns don't kill people, people do. Even if we ban all guns, they will use knives.  Ban knives, and they will use fists.  I don't think we can ban fists. The person who was loved by all could turn out to be a serial killer. Until science can detect the defective genes for 'extremist', we can only react after the fact, not before.

 

I never said I condoned any of the atrocities. As I said, the members of the various religions have to be the ones who speak up and condemn the actions of their members.  It is basically like being the parent who tells another their kids are brats. While the statement is true, having heard it form an 'outsider' will not cause the parent to rein in their child.  More than likely, they will be offended and let the child go un-controlled even more.

 

As you already know, the law does step in where a child has died because of the religious beliefs of the parents. We all agree that this is the right thing to do, but at the same time, we are encouraging the loss of freedom to practice the religion of choice. "WE" can say a person who 'hears voices' is insane and let them off the hook for a crime, yet "WE" also state that people who 'talk' to a deity in prayers is perfectly sane.

 

Unless "WE" actually want the government to outlaw religion, then it will have it's problems the same as any faction of society. Even with the reprehensible outcomes that do occur, i do not want any freedom to be restricted.

_________________________________________

 

Of course I have no way of predicting who will become an extremist. What I can predict is that if you believe in a Abrahamic religion then the chances of violence and hate within that belief system will always raise its ugly head. There is a long history to attest to that. It is an ongoing issue that has been a part of those beliefs since their inception. 

 

The Bible and the Qur'an are pack full of violence and hate. It encourages its followers to war against those that oppose it. God of the bible ordered his people to kill, rape and enslave those that did not worship him. What message do you think humanity should take away from these examples?

 

Do I want to see religion outlawed? No. I do not want to have freedoms restricted either. What I would really like to see is those that hold these beliefs catch up to the 21st century and put their beliefs in perspective. To understand and accept that it is only their personal belief and can not be used to control others.

 

Of course that is wishful thinking on my part. Since the whole essence of those religions are based on  the idea that those that don't adhere to their beliefs should be treated as the enemy.

 

Hence the problem I have with religion.....

______________________________________________

 

Of course, if you really choose to believe those things, welcome to it. The fact that none of it is true should be no impediment. But I ask you, what "atricities" have you, personally, had to endure? Someone asking you what church you attend? HORRIBLE!! How could you endure it??!!

 

 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Remember when- with their hand on the bible- "do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help you god"?  And they'd say "yes". 

 

That one cracked me up. Like they'd say, "well if you're going to make me swear on the bible I guess I'll have to tell the truth, I did it. Yeah, they're going to commit a crime and if they swear on the bible they'll be forced to confess. Then later there'd be-"but you swore on the bible"!!!  In the movie "Fried Green Tomatoes" the preacher lied, but because he didn't have his hand on the bible it was OK. Just two examples, for me, of the ridiculousness of it all.

Best I think you will admit that you are less apt to lie if your hand is on a Bible.

That's just human nature.

quote:   Originally Posted by O No!:
Actually, a lot of us DO chastise those who don't behave in a Christian manner.  Look at all of the Christians here on the forum who keep telling Bill he is doing it wrong.

Hi O No,

 

In saying this, aren't YOU presuming that you are always right?

 

But, let's get a wee bit of clarification.  You say, "all of the Christians here on the forum."    Let me see -- the "Christians" on the forum who keep disagreeing with me are O No, often GB, and Contendah.   To the best of my knowledge, that comprises your ALL CHRISTIANS on the forum.  Have I missed anyone?

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Bless My Friend Mouse

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Bless My Friend Mouse
Originally Posted by SeniorCoffee:

I recently testified during a case in Colbert County, and at the beginning of my testimony I was told to raise my right hand, and asked if "I swore or affirmed," that my testimony was "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." I responded, "I so affirm."

I saw no bible anywhere in the courtroom.

Thank you.  I have not been in a courtroom in a while and wondered if they had changed the oath.

That makes much more sense.

What I would really like to see is those that hold these beliefs catch up to the 21st century and put their beliefs in perspective. To understand and accept that it is only their personal belief and can not be used to control others.

 

I completely agree.  But for that to happen, the fact that someone has a belief should not be ridiculed or considered to be a ridiculous stance. As I noted, the different denominations or sects of religions seem to do more of the active attacks than those who have no religion...

I think that relates to a simple observation:

A 'religion' is a group of people "I" belong to who share my beliefs.

A 'cult' is a group of people "I" do not belong to who do not share my beliefs.

Broken down further:

A denomination is a branch of religion if "I" agree with it's teachings and is a cult if "I" don't.

 

So if we take that further still, atheism could be considered a religion/cult as it is a group of individuals who share the same ideas pertaining to a deity or the supernatural. Even though atheism is the lack of belief, it is still a religious view point.

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:
Originally Posted by Zazu:

A common viewpoint of there being no deities is a religious viewpoint. Even though it is denying the existence of deities, it is still a view point on religion.

_____

My view point on religion is that I'm not 100% positive that God exist.

That would make you closet to the 'agnostic theist' category. But i would not want to label anyone other than myself.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×