|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/03/2006 08:14:46 PM · #101 |
The title of this thread is the title of the documentary by Dawkins. I'm pretty sure that’s not meant to be taken literally, hence the ?. I definitely don't believe religion is the root of ALL evil.
As far as China and Russia those countries are not historically atheist or communist. Nor did they do what they did out of atheist fervor. And again, nobody is saying religion is required for wrong doing. And yes, bad stuff can be done by atheists. And again, Hitler was a Christian.
In fact, I read about a corrupt banker in China who ripped off alot of people, similarly to an Enron situation here, after he was found guilty of the crimes he was executed. If you start executing white collar crimes there would be a hell of alot less corruption. Also not that I agree fully with there laws on limiting birth rates, I do think it’s good at least someone is facing the issue of overpopulation. As the worlds human population is currently at unsustainable growth rates.
But anyways, you’re getting pretty emotional and when emotions run wild, rational runs and hides. I will again suggest you actually watch the 2 part documentary that this thread was started about. You can download it using bittorrent from here:
Part 1: //www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=821
Part 2: //www.chomskytorrents.org/DownloadTorrent.php?TorrentID=822
Message edited by author 2006-02-03 20:17:35. |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 08:30:34 PM · #102 |
"As far as China and Russia those countries are not historically atheist or communist. Nor did they do what they did out of atheist fervor. And again, nobody is saying religion is required for wrong doing. And yes, bad stuff can be done by atheists. And again, Hitler was a Christian. "
I see, so China and Russia's actions weren't out of atheist motivation. Really, what motivation was it that led to the imprisonment of religious people in those nations? What motivation led them to sending pastors and priests to the gulag?
Oh please...do share.
And likewise, can I dismiss the Crusades, etc. as merely an excuse to gain $$$ and having little to do with religion?
"But anyways, you’re getting pretty emotional and when emotions run wild, rational runs and hides."
Nah, I just think a lot of atheists are dishonest and egotistical and unable to face reality and their own fears. And must constantly deny in the face of numerous examples. While at the same time epitomized hypocritical attitudes almost as much as christians do by constantly pointing out examples and making excuses for their own poor history.
*shrug*
Frankly, I think I've provided much more rational response than most of the atheists in this thread have. And unlike most atheists, I face and admit the wrongs done by those I am associated with.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 08:40:29 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
I am fully aware of how science works. |
Apparently not. You portray science as dogma and resistant to change because new findings are questioned or ridiculed. Scientists are inherently skeptics- they're SUPPOSED to question new research! Then they go test the idea and attempt to prove the first guy wrong. If tests turn out to support his conclusion, then it does actually result in change. This is the exact opposite of religion, where faith is taught over skepicism, and contradictions are explained away as miracles without any need for tests. There's nothing wrong with having personal beliefs, but non-believers don't build schools specifically to teach disbelief or justify killings for the glory of nobody.
No, I don't think religion is the root of all evil, but when Protestants kill Catholics or Arabs kill Jews for no other reason than differences of faith, that's not exactly a shining example of tolerance and compassion either. |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 08:43:24 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
...so China and Russia's actions weren't out of atheist motivation. Really, what motivation was it that led to the imprisonment of religious people in those nations? What motivation led them to sending pastors and priests to the gulag? |
Dictatorial regimes are fanatical about eliminating any challenge to their power. Church leaders would be an obvious target. |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 08:54:37 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by theSaj:
...so China and Russia's actions weren't out of atheist motivation. Really, what motivation was it that led to the imprisonment of religious people in those nations? What motivation led them to sending pastors and priests to the gulag? |
Dictatorial regimes are fanatical about eliminating any challenge to their power. Church leaders would be an obvious target. |
Herod sought to kill Christ for that very reason. He feared Christ would take over his reign.
Message edited by author 2006-02-03 20:55:13. |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 09:07:58 PM · #106 |
The Circle Game by Joni Mitchell
Yesterday a child came out to wonder
Caught a dragonfly inside a jar
Fearful when the sky was full of thunder
And tearful at the falling of a star
Then the child moved ten times round the seasons
Skated over ten clear frozen streams
Words like, when you’re older, must appease him
And promises of someday make his dreams
And the seasons they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and dawn
We’re captive on the carousel of time
We can’t return we con only look behind
From where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game.
Sixteen springs and sixteen summers gone now
Cartwheels turn to car wheels thru the town
And they tell him,
Take your time, it won’t be long now
Till you drag your feet to slow the circles down
And the seasons they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and dawn
We’re captive on the carousel of time
We can’t return we can only look behind
From where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game
So the years spin by and now the boy is twenty
Though his dreams have lost some grandeur
Coming true
There’ll be new dreams, maybe better dreams and plenty
Before the last revolving year is through.
And the seasons they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and down
We’re captive on the carousel of time
We can’t return, we can only look behind
From where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game
Any man who professes to have all the answers is just too stupid to ask the questions.
Message edited by author 2006-02-03 22:07:03.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 10:01:05 PM · #107 |
I started this thread with the intention of discussing some of the points this program made (the title refers to the program). I had expected a quiet afternoon and some time to participate but then received a new job and have been working all day and night... and now my home internet is down and i am tapping away on my palmtop.
I cannot respond easily for technical reasons, but just a couple of points.
I noted some resorting to personal attacks. I must admit, i would prefer these to be left in in any discussion; they do nothing more than highlight the absence of substantive response, and allow others a to judge how much credibility to give the author on whom they reflect most.
as for the challenge that this post is purely inflammatory or derogatory, i admit that i knew it would spark debate. i chose to report the argument of someone else, rather than mollify it with too much interpretation (after all, there were complaints about the absence of quality rants).
however, the points are genuine and not purely antagonistic.
Faith in the major religions approaching or constituting fundamentalism appears to be strengthening in key nations, including the US. Religions bring with them a morality code and righteousness that does Not always accrd with natural sensibilities. religious belief is often the consequence of indoctrinatio, often of children. the conflicts in the modern world, often initiated by well intentioned 'good' people in their own societies, stem in part out of a lack of tolerance and understanding in other cultures. we could do more, for example in education, to teach understanding and tolerance. one obstacle to this is the 'one true god' element of the abrahamic religions being taught too literally.
i would argue that all states where religion is typically taught literally, including the US, to use thesaj's terminology, are in need of a 'renaissance' and a softening of the widespread approach.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 10:04:00 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:
Yesterday a child came out to wonder
Caught a dragonfly inside a jar... |
You might want to credit Joni Mitchell for that one...
R.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 10:08:11 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:
Yesterday a child came out to wonder
Caught a dragonfly inside a jar... |
You might want to credit Joni Mitchell for that one...
R. |
Just did...
Thanks Bear..
Guess I made the assumption that was known... silly me..
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 10:46:12 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:
Yesterday a child came out to wonder
Caught a dragonfly inside a jar... |
You might want to credit Joni Mitchell for that one...
R. |
Just did...
Thanks Bear..
Guess I made the assumption that was known... silly me.. |
Maybe it is for most English-speakers "of a certain age", but I'm deaf and I had to google it. In general, it's a good idea to credit other artists when you quote their work :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
02/04/2006 01:20:49 AM · #111 |
I hope I don't live to regret participating in this thread. :) I also hope that I can respond to the points, without appearing to be a personal attack - I agree that personal attacks are not helpful.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
I think the glairing difference is that if you are religious, you let people and ideas and a very very old book control the way in which you view the world and in how you hold morals and they do this using superstition and promoting faith, which is the absence of logic and reason. They also do this in contradiction to provable science, the observation of the real world. This kind of non-thinking and close mindedness leads to all kinds of bad stuff. |
This strikes me as a "straw man" argument, which also relies on particular definitions to prove its case. To respond point by point:
- You let people and ideas ... control the way in which you view the world... Yes, I agree that some people will buy into a religious framework as a way of outsourcing their decision-making process. And some "leaders" enjoy the idea of other people giving them control. But this does not mean that the faith or religion endorses or encourages that behaviour. God expects me to use my brain, not waste it. I respect my minsters because of their learning, experience and character, but I am not called to follow them unthinkingly, because sometimes they will be wrong or make mistakes like anyone (including me) does. When that happens, hopefully we can help each other learn, grow and both be better off as a result. Additionally, the "unthinking agreement" mindset occurs in other contexts, not just religious/faith ones - unhealthy family dynamics, many political parties of all flavours, some businesses and even sometimes in science.
- faith, which is the absence of logic or reason This is a typical definition used to make faith look untenable. Again, God expects us to use our reasoning faculties, not throw them out the window. Faith can mean accepting things that can't be proven, but lack of provability does not equate with wrongness. I think Goedel proved that in the realm of mathematics. No-one should be expected to believe something that is clearly and provably wrong - but in some areas, proof isn't always as easy as we think it is, and sometimes we have to reexamine whether we're perceiving the evidence correctly. Also, logic and reason are good and useful, but they aren't much good as a God - concepts like love, charity, forgiveness and sacrifice are not "logical" but we do them anyway, even if we are atheists.
- in opposition to proveable science.... I partly agree with you here, but not entirely - some of the things that we may like to think have been proven by science haven't actually been proven. They might be highly likely, even overwhelmingly likely, but not neccessarily proven.
- non-thinking and close mindedness leads to all kinds of bad stuff I totally agree with you here.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
One example on how religion really eff's things up with their ideas; abstinence only sex education.
Let’s use logic for a second and analyze this. We are talking about telling adolescence, many whose role models today are sluts or rappers on MTV and the commercial marketing used on them is largely sexual, whose bodies and minds are going through the largest physical and psychological change in their lives, to completely resist the exact urges those changes are powerfully creating?
It's ridiculous to think that kids will simply not have sex if they are taught only its dangers. To not also teach birth control and other safe sex methods is asking for trouble. It is inevitable that some kids, most kids, will engage in sex before marriage and when they do, they need to know proper contraception and disease prevention. |
I agree with you here. While abstinence in marriage and lifetime monogamy are ideals I consider worthy, it's stupid to try and legislate morality, and I don't think ignorance about sex and contraception serves anyone well. I'd rather people didn't have sex before marriage, but if they are (as many will, both inside and outside my faith) I'd rather they practice safe sex than unsafe sex. I suspect (but can't prove this) that the desire among some for abstienence-only education stems from insecurity about sexuality in general or a focus on the superficial aspects of "doing right" - or the non-thinkingness you mentioned.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Also as far as the comments about any large group being worse than the individual, I don't know of any organized atheist groups that have mega churches, don't pay taxes, create huge sums of money and organize and lobby government to have their opinions pushed on everyone else. Especially when those opinions are often time not grounded in reality. |
Wouldn't most political parties fit these criteria? Possibly some other lobby groups too.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Again, not believing in a religion is not a belief system; it is the absence of a man made organized belief system. |
Errr, isn't science a man made organised belief system? Man-made - tick (unless you want to claim it came from God, aliens or dolphins?). Organised - tick (patterns of logic and reason, processes for determining what becomes part of the canon (pun serendipitous :) and with defined heirarchies and organisational structures. Belief system - tick (it requires valuing certain things, such as logic and reasoning, above all others). And, like every other belief system, it isn't practiced as well as it is preached.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Also, I don't recall ever hearing about atheist suicide bombers who think they will be rewarded with virgins. |
ROFLMAO. I'd be interested, however, to learn whether this really is consistent with Islamic teaching, or whether it is a distortion introduced by extremists under the guise of Islam. Speaking as a Christian, I certainly think that some of things that have been done in the name of God (the Inquisition and the Crusades for classical examples, but there are other more recent ones) were atrocious and fundamentally incompatible with Christianity as it should be; it wouldn't surprise me if God weeps at the sight of some of the things we claim to do for him. (Don't take this to mean that I claim to have achieved a comprehensive understanding of what is and isn't compatible with Christianity; I can only hope that my understanding improves with each passing year.)
Edited for formatting and clarity
Message edited by author 2006-02-04 01:29:03. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 01:41:48 AM · #112 |
Originally posted by paddles:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Also, I don't recall ever hearing about atheist suicide bombers who think they will be rewarded with virgins. |
ROFLMAO. I'd be interested, however, to learn whether this really is consistent with Islamic teaching, or whether it is a distortion introduced by extremists under the guise of Islam. |
The Islamic depiction of paradise is distinctly a sensual one. Believers are promised all manner of pleasures in the afterlife that they are forbidden to enjoy in the here-and-now; wine, for example, will "flow copiously" and yet a man will not get drunk from it.
The Koran (Qu'ran, but I can't get used to that) is extremely metaphorical and very difficult to translate into Western languages. Scholars have argued over it for centuries. In any event, the "virgins" bit seems to stem from a mistranslation of the word "hoor'ain" (what we're used to seeing as "houris") as "virgins." According to most scholars, the Arabic word has no sexual connotation or gender. A more appropriate translation would be "angels" or "heavenly beings."
This is my understanding of it, anyway, but I am just a dabbler in these things.
R.
|
|
|
|
02/04/2006 09:39:42 AM · #113 |
The best type of religion is one that is so arbitrary and contrary to common sense that it bifurcates its followers into two groups; the orthodox and clergy, hopefully very small, and the non-practicing general public who only goes to weddings, funerals and the occasional holy day to steal the seats of the devoted(joking). In that way the semblance of order and proprietry may be maintained without to much adherence to overly farsical doctrine.
The worst type of religion is state sponsored religion- it is legitimization of mythology, and santions oppression and untold countless bullshit.
oh yeah- the native american went to the happy hunting ground when they died, and islamic jihadists receive virgins. If you believe in any of this, youv'e got to be smoking a pretty big peace pipe.
The thought of an afterlife is there to passify the masses into toiling, or sacrificing their lives here on earth. Unfortunately the side effect of orthodox Islamic religion, no matter how noble in theory, is the subjugation of women, and that is not tolerable, and God, or Allah, had nothing to do with that.
|
|
|
|
02/04/2006 12:29:37 PM · #114 |
A few quotes by men smarter than me.
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. ~ Albert Einstein
Man is the religious animal. He is the only religious animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion -— several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat, if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven. ~ Mark Twain
Religion easily—has the best bullshit story of all time. Think about it. Religion has convinced people that there's an invisible man...living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn't want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money. ~ George Carlin
Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich. ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence; it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines. ~ Bertrand Russell
"I don't reject your Christ, I love your Christ.It's just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ." Ghandi
The beauty of religious mania is that it has the power to explain everything. Once God (or Satan) is accepted as the first cause of everything which happens in the mortal world, nothing is left to chance... logic can be happily tossed out the window. ~ Stephen King
To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today. ~ Isaac Asimov
We do not want churches because they will teach us to quarrel about God, as the Catholics and Protestants do. We do not want that. We may quarrel with men about things on earth, but we never quarrel about the Great Spirit. ~ Chief Joseph
When men stop believing in God, it isn't that they then believe in nothing: they believe in everything. ~ Umberto Eco
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. ~ Galileo Galilei
It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god. ~ Adolf Hitler
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion. ~ Steven Weinberg
The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion. ~ Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams (1796)
and this to make a point;
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war. ~ Ann Coulter
This is in reality the type of thing that has happened all throughout human history. Why do you think central and South America speaks Spanish from Spain and is Catholic or why 60 million slave descendants live in Brazil? The entire continent its peoples and cultures were destroyed by Spanish Christians and their slave trade and gold mining and their demand to "save" the "savages". This has been the case with most of the world. The world was systematically dominated throughout history as technology grew to allow world travel by white Christians. Same thing happened inside the US against the Native Americans. Now entire races of Indian cultures are gone. Native languages and customs are gone.
Nobody talks about this part of our history but white Christians shaped modern history. And it’s ugly.
|
|
|
|
02/04/2006 12:37:11 PM · #115 |
theSaj, I was working on a reply to you, but after reading a number of your posts, it seems you are laboring under a number of misconceptions which lead you to make statements which are loaded with assumptions. I would like to get you opinion on several statements before I continue debating with you.
If you wouldn’t mind, do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
Religion is not morally neutral.
Science is morally neutral.
Evolution does not equal atheism.
Weak Atheism, at its base, is simply a lack of belief in gods.
Atheism, at its base, is morally neutral.
Edited for clarity.
Message edited by author 2006-02-04 12:46:29. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 06:23:42 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
This is in reality the type of thing that has happened all throughout human history. Why do you think central and South America speaks Spanish from Spain... |
This is another of those questions that is pre-loaded with a false premise. While many people in Central and South America DO speak Spanish, Spanish is by far not the majority language. 51% of South Americans, for example, speak Portugese, while many others speak Dutch, English, French, or even Japanese.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
...and is Catholic... |
I think that the Iberians were quite successful in their efforts to evangilize Central and South America.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
...or why 60 million slave descendants live in Brazil? |
The Europeans found that African slaves were more robust - that is, they were better able to endure the ( European introduced ) diseases than were the indigenous peoples.
But to be fair, one could easily estimate that HUNDREDS of millions MORE Africans are descended from slaves, since African on African slavery was extremely commonplace at the time when Europeans were engaging in slave trade. In fact, it has been said, that a great many of the men taken as slaves would have been killed if they had NOT been taken, due to the high level of inter-tribal warfare in Africa at the time. In those conflicts, the winning tribes normally took the women from the losing tribes as slaves, but killed the men.
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
The entire continent its peoples and cultures were destroyed by Spanish Christians... |
This is a patently false statement. In fact, the opposite is quite likely true - the peoples and cultures would have been completely lost if NOT for the Spanish Christians. The earliest Spanish missionaries actually preserved the language and culture of the native peoples by meticulously recording them. Ref: this site where it says, in part:
"Early in the 16th century, Jesuit and Dominican priests began keeping more systematic linguistic records. They learned the indigenous languages in order to convert natives to Catholicism and also, in some cases, wrote analytic grammars and lexicons. In the Andean region of the Inca empire, for example, Jesuit priests were required to learn the three native languages of Quechua, Aymara, and Puquina. Their emphasis on Quechua, the language of the Inca nobility, resulted in the spread of this language, which today has an estimated 7 million speakers, while Puquina became extinct (Klein and Stark 1985)."
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
...and their slave trade and gold mining and their demand to "save" the "savages". |
I would be interested in having you post a link to a reputable source in which a Jesuit or Dominican priest referred to South American natives as "savages". Or is that just your own rhetorical hyperbole?
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
This has been the case with most of the world. The world was systematically dominated throughout history as technology grew to allow world travel by white Christians. |
Interesting. So you would expect us to believe that:
1) Alexander the Great was a white Christian
2) Genghis Khan was a white Christian
3) Attilla the Hun was a white Christian
4) Julius Caesar was a white Christian
5) Kublai Khan was a white Christian
6) The Aztecs were white Christians
7) The Incas were white Christians
8) The Mayans were white Christians
9) Suleyman the Magnificent was a white Christian
Sorry. But I am not convinced. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 09:01:26 PM · #117 |
Pure science is the study of the universe for understanding and knowledge sake.
Applied science the application of that knowledge and understanding.
Spirituality is an emotional understanding of the universe.
Religion is applied spirituality.
Out of spirituality/religion came Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., Father Oscar Romero, and Bishop Desmond TuTu, as well as the Inquistion and Crusades.
Out of science came penicillin and the hydrogen bomb.
The scientific method is just a tool. Prayer is just a tool.
Science, especially the applied kind, is no more morally neutral than religion and both can serve mankind in constructive, as well as, destructive ways. The parts of both that I detest most are those that destroy nature/god's work.
Message edited by author 2006-02-04 21:12:04. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 11:36:19 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
A few quotes by men smarter than me.
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. ~ Albert Einstein
Man is the religious animal. He is the only religious animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion -— several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat, if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven. ~ Mark Twain
Religion easily—has the best bullshit story of all time. Think about it. Religion has convinced people that there's an invisible man...living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn't want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money. ~ George Carlin
Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich. ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence; it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines. ~ Bertrand Russell
"I don't reject your Christ, I love your Christ.It's just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ." Ghandi
The beauty of religious mania is that it has the power to explain everything. Once God (or Satan) is accepted as the first cause of everything which happens in the mortal world, nothing is left to chance... logic can be happily tossed out the window. ~ Stephen King
To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today. ~ Isaac Asimov
We do not want churches because they will teach us to quarrel about God, as the Catholics and Protestants do. We do not want that. We may quarrel with men about things on earth, but we never quarrel about the Great Spirit. ~ Chief Joseph
When men stop believing in God, it isn't that they then believe in nothing: they believe in everything. ~ Umberto Eco
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. ~ Galileo Galilei
It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god. ~ Adolf Hitler
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion. ~ Steven Weinberg
The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion. ~ Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams (1796)
and this to make a point;
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war. ~ Ann Coulter
This is in reality the type of thing that has happened all throughout human history. Why do you think central and South America speaks Spanish from Spain and is Catholic or why 60 million slave descendants live in Brazil? The entire continent its peoples and cultures were destroyed by Spanish Christians and their slave trade and gold mining and their demand to "save" the "savages". This has been the case with most of the world. The world was systematically dominated throughout history as technology grew to allow world travel by white Christians. Same thing happened inside the US against the Native Americans. Now entire races of Indian cultures are gone. Native languages and customs are gone.
Nobody talks about this part of our history but white Christians shaped modern history. And it’s ugly. |
"Many educated men are fools."...David Ey (and others)
|
|
|
|
02/04/2006 11:53:23 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
"Many educated men are fools."...David Ey (and others) |
You truly are leaving yourself open with this one......you might consider editing it.
Ray |
|
|
|
02/05/2006 12:01:01 AM · #120 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by David Ey:
"Many educated men are fools."...David Ey (and others) |
You truly are leaving yourself open with this one......you might consider editing it.
Ray |
You know what they say about "where angels fear to tread", right Ray?
R.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2006 12:05:11 AM · #121 |
Well, have at it little buddys.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 10:23:36 AM · #122 |
"Apparently not. You portray science as dogma and resistant to change because new findings are questioned or ridiculed. Scientists are inherently skeptics- they're SUPPOSED to question new research!"
The scientific method is an excellent tool. However, humans are by their nature prejudiced and biased to their opinions. And yes, they will be skeptically in the aspects that go against their opinions. The problem is that the scientific community (which is different than science itself) often fails to maintain skepticism when it is something that they want to see.
So I agree, they're supposed to question new research. However, there is often a lack of skepticism on research that is popular or trendy.
"This is the exact opposite of religion, where faith is taught over skepicism, and contradictions are explained away as miracles without any need for tests."
I guess I've just never seen religion in that type of light. It's not how I've approached my faith. I am sure there are some who do. Just like the millions who believe whatever they are told on the news. Often with great misconceptions.
"No, I don't think religion is the root of all evil, but when Protestants kill Catholics or Arabs kill Jews for no other reason than differences of faith, that's not exactly a shining example of tolerance and compassion either."
I absolutely agree. And in no way am I endeavoring to absolve the guilt of religion as such. I simply opposed the statement and thought which was essentially attributing all of the world's problem to religion.
My point being, that this ill-nature tends to be an aspect of mankind in general and not an exclusive aspect of people who are religious. I pointed to completely secular atheistic structures and regions who likewise committed atrocities.
"Dictatorial regimes are fanatical about eliminating any challenge to their power. Church leaders would be an obvious target."
Agreed....
I believe there is a common tendency toward the protection of territory (power, assets, wealth, control, etc.) and the further acquisition of such (seen as strengthening one's ability to maintain such).
"as for the challenge that this post is purely inflammatory or derogatory, i admit that i knew it would spark debate."
It's just I've had you and a few others label posts of mine as "purely inflammatory or derogatory". Yet, this is supposedly different...I just get tired of such subjectiveness. Past arguments I had thrown at me were that such generalization of an entire group is prejudice. Yet, that's exactly what's done here. So, I apologize if I am having a very difficult time understanding your double-standard.
"the conflicts in the modern world, often initiated by well intentioned 'good' people in their own societies"
No good deed goes unpunished. Communist Russia was a state founded with the intent of creating a people's utopia. They, likewise as you, believed religion to be harmful. So much so, they eradicated it. Killing, imprisoning, etc.
Their utopia, free of religion, failed miserably.
"we could do more, for example in education, to teach understanding and tolerance."
I simply do not believe that this post is seeking tolerance. Rather, I believe this post to be exactly akin to what it is condemning. The post reflects an extremely intolerant position. And builds an argument against a demographic group while failing to account all observed history. |
|
|
|
02/06/2006 10:35:22 AM · #123 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
I simply do not believe that this post is seeking tolerance. Rather, I believe this post to be exactly akin to what it is condemning. The post reflects an extremely intolerant position. And builds an argument against a demographic group while failing to account all observed history. |
I strongly agree with what you just said. It seems that the very same people who try and accuse religion of having no tolerance, in turn have no tolerance themselves.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 10:56:35 AM · #124 |
Hi Milo, tried to answer your questions. Hope it makes sense.
- Saj
"Religion is not morally neutral."
[ I agree with the above. Though, the morality varies. Some religions have codes of what we'd commonly call moral statutes and others have codes that dictate inaction against others. But regardless of whether a religion says to do x & y and not z. Or do a and let anyone else do b,c,d, or anything else. Yes, there is usually an admonitive in religion. ]
"Science"
[ Science is method for observation and conclusion. The observations are inherently neutral. The interpretation and presentation of interpretation to the masses are subject to the nature of the individual. In other words, the interpretation and presentation may be biased by the individual's personal beliefs or agendas.]
"Evolution does not equal atheism"
[ Quite right, there are quite a few theologians who accepted evolution as the design of God. And there are evolutionists who believe the complexity was by design of a Creator. So they are not inherently in opposition. In fact, ID includes "evolution by design" on one end of it's spectrum. ]
"Weak Atheism, at its base, is simply a lack of belief in gods."
[ I can accept that. And I really have no problem with such. Might discuss and debate a point. I actually accept the removal of the "In God We Trust" from our money and the "One nation Under God" from our pledge. I do view these as breaches. My issues stem with "dogmatic atheism", those that want to prevent any use of public property by or for a religious purpose. (ie: any other group can hold a bake sale on the town green, accept for a church). Or file a lawsuit against a high school because members of their girl's volleyball team prayed off to the side before a game that everyone would have fun and no one would get hurt. Or, IMHO, posting threads that subjectively attack religion while ignoring the full scope of history. I have no problem with someone not believing in God in a general sense. Nor do I feel there is any reason we cannot live together.
But lately, I see a lot of atheists modelling themselves on 16-18th century religious models. They preach tolerance...but seem to spend much time assailing religion. And I do not merely mean assailing political issues such as homosexual marriage or the "In God We Trust" sort of thing. But rather, opposing religion and endeavoring to restrict it's free exercise. And they do so with a religious ferocity. ]
"Atheism, at its base, is morally neutral."
[ See, this is where things get very muddy. Everyone has their moral beliefs. I've often heard the rant about how I should not be allowed to vote on my religious beliefs (on the debate of abortion for instance). Even when I provide numerous scientific and philosophical reasons for my views and present none of my religious/spiritual arguments of said issue. I am told that I should not be allowed to vote on my beliefs. Well, I have individual beliefs. In fact most do. This is why in christianity you have those who are pro-death penalty and anti-death penalty. So, is it religious views? or individual views? is it more so that people gravitate to that which is more in-line with their own views?
As such, the individual always has his beliefs (which is where one's morals are derived). And obviously, most atheists put forth that murder is wrong, stealing is wrong, rape is wrong. Are these atheistic mores? or individualistic mores?
Is our gripe against murder simply a legacy of religion? were we to move to a completely atheistic view point would we lose the stigma that is murder? or is there still room for morals within a completely atheistic system? We see that atheists do have morals. So there is an individual means of morality.
In fact, if I were to address morality in light of atheism and politics, I would simply equate them to independents vs the major political parties. And being an Independent political candidate does not equate to a lack of platform or agenda. But why do we have Republicans and Democrats, and why do people join one or the other. Usually, because they feel more in line with certain platforms of either of the two parties. So when atheists dismiss religious people and state they should not be able to vote on their religious beliefs I feel they are mis-addressing the matter. Especially, if religion is bogus and there is no absolute. Than those who are members of a religion and voting according to said beliefs, are doing so because they share commonality with that group on an individual belief basis, at least on a large enough groundwork to maintain association.
Likewise, I'd have to conclude atheism is not morally neutral once it is addressed on an individual level. Though there is no general moral code, and the morality varies widely within atheism. Hence, it's akin to referring to independent candidates as a whole. You can't say independents are pro-choice or pro-life. They're both. But a single independent may be one or the other.
Likewise, with regards to morality. So yes, atheism has morality. But it must be defined as a variable, let's call it "M". And it stems from the individual. |
|
|
|
02/06/2006 10:58:25 AM · #125 |
Originally posted by HighwayFlower:
Originally posted by theSaj:
I simply do not believe that this post is seeking tolerance. Rather, I believe this post to be exactly akin to what it is condemning. The post reflects an extremely intolerant position. And builds an argument against a demographic group while failing to account all observed history. |
I strongly agree with what you just said. It seems that the very same people who try and accuse religion of having no tolerance, in turn have no tolerance themselves. |
The problem with religion, especially fanatical ones, is that "followers" assume and take a starting point that their god exists, and their interpretation is correct. Any challenge is evil or mean-spirited.
Unfortunately, the majority non-denominational Christian right wing refuses to have tolerance for the beliefs or lack of belief of others. They are snuffers... snuff out other people's right to choose in reproduction, snuff out the right to choose life partners, snuff out medical research, snuff out threads, etc.
The last part was half joking; but really, the religious should be a little more tolerant and a little less fanatical. Alittle more kind/a bit less righteous. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 08:30:01 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 08:30:01 AM EDT.
|
