Religion Itself Is The Fount Of Most Evil

[ecnarf]

ALL western religions believe people have a personal relationship with god. It's one of many things that make them distinctive from eastern religions.

 

Although I would agree that Americans are, as a nationality (though I hesitate to use that word) the most zealous when it comes to religious types.

Edited August 5, 2005 by ecnarf

[Lauren]

i think, in a lot of ways, people use their religious beliefs as some sort of s status symbol, no matter what their beliefs. i just had to type out my little thought...

[supercanuk]

i think, in a lot of ways, people use their religious beliefs as some sort of s status symbol, no matter what their beliefs. i just had to type out my little thought...

You are very correct in my opinion. I find that depending upon where you are from and what religious institutions are in place that some people will use religion as a status symbol. I guess an example would be the red blooded, god fearin, american type from the bible belt. I mean can you imagine being a muslim in the heart of the bible belt where there are very few people who share your system of belief. One would definatly look down their nose at the other.

[Moonlight_Graham]

religion is one of the most divisive things in this world between people, and has been throughout history. Along with race and politics.

[heyrabbit]

This personal relationship theology is what causes people to pick and choose what they believe especially among the strongest fundamentalists who "demand a literal interpretation of the Scriptures."

 

The entire religious world randomly "picks and chooses" rationale in order to rationalize their ridiculous beliefs.It's the nature of the beast. That's what sustains religion.

Therefore, There's zero point in differentiating between and categorizing religious persons based on how they practice being naive. Whether or not you're a zealot, your policies are going to be harmful if you've crossed and line and decided to be intellectually unreasonable.

 

Just as you wouldn't bestow your idiot little bother with authority in the household, you shouldn't elect into power any pious morons who're intellectually imature.

 

When I become supreme dictator of the world I'm going to hoard irrationalist christians,muslims, buddhists etc into detainment centers where they will be psychologically evaluated and treated. this will isolate them and prevent them from spreading stupidity aswell as interfering with intelligent society. The economy will boom and I will be a god.It will become a crime to be stupid.

[no yu begin wher i end]

Just take some grammar lessons before you outlaw stupidity.

[Lauren]

When I become supreme dictator of the world I'm going to hoard irrationalist christians,muslims, buddhists etc into detainment centers where they will be psychologically evaluated and treated. this will isolate them and prevent them from spreading stupidity aswell as interfering with intelligent society.

segregating people isn't interfering at all with intelligent society? i very much think you'd be surprised to know that religious people can, in fact, be intelligent. the way i see it, you're an idiot for thinking all religion is b.s., but i don't go around saying you are of lesser intelligence all the time. please refrain from calling religious people stupid. this is just not true.

 

edit: if you don't know much about religions, specifically christian-based religion, it comes off like they are picking and choosing rules when they really aren't. it says that gay people go to hell in the old testiment. in there, it also says that women, when on their period are unclean and shouldn't make physical contact with anyone. so why can we touch menstruating women but not be gay? because things changed in the new testiment. there was a new covenent and that voided a lot of the rules set by the old testiment. anything that is not outlawed by the new testiment is fair game.

 

 

yeah, stupid religious people.. not knowing anything..

Edited August 12, 2005 by Lauren

[no yu begin wher i end]

If my understanding is correct, Jesus basically whittled down the entire Old Testament to two rules: do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and turn the other cheek.

[Lauren]

that's what all the rules come down to, basically. the bible doesn't say to do (or don't do) stuff just for heck of it. don't get drunk (note: the bible does not say do not drink!) because drunk people aren't always the brightest. don't have pre-marital sex so there aren't babies everywhere you turn, along with diseases. don't be gay because that's not how to go about making new generations of people. there is a method to the bible's madness.

[supercanuk]

don't be gay because that's not how to go about making new generations of people. there is a method to the bible's madness.

Lauren, once more i have to disagree with yah. I know we come from different points of view in the first place, which by the way i embrace. But this is simply science. There are something like 17% of every species is homosexual, it is actually quite natural, you find the research everywhere. So if this is a natural occurance, wouldn't god have created it? Fear of homosexuality is a cultural thing, the bible simply represents its time and view of said lifestyle. It doesnt have anything really to do with nature and what is natural. Sure you don't procreate, however its only a small proportion of the population and thus does not ultimatly effect things so much.

EDIT: This is how spiritual i am. Energy can change forms, but cannot be destroyed. Therefore if we are all energy we simply live on in a different form. Whether we be actually concious we exist is something nobody can ever answer until we are dead, so why waste time, get on with the buisness of living, be happy and such.

Edited August 12, 2005 by supercanuk

[heyrabbit]

Just take some grammar lessons before you outlaw stupidity.

Haha.Oh wow. Go ahead and correct the one or two sentences I inadvertently screwed up.

 

don't be mad because you're too dumb to constructively criticize my comments.

 

segregating people isn't interfering at all with intelligent society? i very much think you'd be surprised to know that religious people can, in fact, be intelligent. the way i see it, you're an idiot for thinking all religion is b.s., but i don't go around saying you are of lesser intelligence all the time. please refrain from calling religious people stupid. this is just not true.

 

edit: if you don't know much about religions, specifically christian-based religion, it comes off like they are picking and choosing rules when they really aren't. it says that gay people go to hell in the old testiment. in there, it also says that women, when on their period are unclean and shouldn't make physical contact with anyone. so why can we touch menstruating women but not be gay? because things changed in the new testiment. there was a new covenent and that voided a lot of the rules set by the old testiment. anything that is not outlawed by the new testiment is fair game.

 

 

yeah, stupid religious people.. not knowing anything..

I completely understand religions, more than most religious people. The point I was making was that you need to be picky and choosy if you're going to attempt at rationalizing your metaphysical beliefs. It's widely accepted that religious beliefs are irrational. that's not even an argument. religious people accept existential laws sometimes and sometimes not.They'll dither and dather if it helps them feel secure.

 

I've read many parts of the New Testament. So what? it's a book of morals. When people question religion from a philisophical standpoint the reply is often filled with scripture quotes. That is really indicative of the fact that they can't see the forest through the trees. They are incapable of seeing religion on a philosophical level.

 

e.g. Why would a benevolent god arbitrarily condemn innocents to hell? response: "jesus loves you", or "John hearded the sheep out to pasture". That sounds silly but it's pretty much how the argument goes. They have no critical thinking skills.

 

I realize that I sound like an ass when I saw all religious people are unintelligent.I just find that that kind of primitive ignorance is inexcusable.You are really saying something about yourself when you admit to being religious. Admitting belief in god is to admit a complete lack of critical judgement.

Edited August 12, 2005 by heyrabbit

[no yu begin wher i end]

Just take some grammar lessons before you outlaw stupidity.

Haha. Oh wow. Go ahead and correct the one or two sentences I inadvertently screwed up.

 

Don't be mad because you're too dumb to constructively criticize my comments.

 

segregating people isn't interfering at all with intelligent society? i very much think you'd be surprised to know that religious people can, in fact, be intelligent. the way i see it, you're an idiot for thinking all religion is b.s., but i don't go around saying you are of lesser intelligence all the time. please refrain from calling religious people stupid. this is just not true.

 

edit: if you don't know much about religions, specifically christian-based religion, it comes off like they are picking and choosing rules when they really aren't. it says that gay people go to hell in the old testiment. in there, it also says that women, when on their period are unclean and shouldn't make physical contact with anyone. so why can we touch menstruating women but not be gay? because things changed in the new testiment. there was a new covenent and that voided a lot of the rules set by the old testiment. anything that is not outlawed by the new testiment is fair game.

 

 

yeah, stupid religious people.. not knowing anything..

I completely understand religions, more than most religious people. The point I was making was that you need to be picky and choosy if you're going to attempt at rationalizing your metaphysical beliefs. It's widely accepted that religious beliefs are irrational. That's not even an argument. Religious people accept existential laws sometimes and sometimes not. They'll dither and dather if it helps them feel secure.

 

I've read many parts of the New Testament. So what? It's a book of morals. When people question religion from a philisophical standpoint the reply is often filled with scripture quotes. That is really indicative of the fact that they can't see the forest through the trees. They are incapable of seeing religion on a philosophical level.

 

e.g. Why would a benevolent god arbitrarily condemn innocents to hell? Response: "Jesus loves you", or "John hearded the sheep out to pasture". That sounds silly but it's pretty much how the argument goes. They have no critical thinking skills.

 

I realize that I sound like an ass when I saw all religious people are unintelligent. I just find that that kind of primitive ignorance is inexcusable. You are really saying something about yourself when you admit to being religious. Admitting belief in god is to admit a complete lack of critical judgement.

Have you seriously gotten those answers when you asked why a benevolent god would condemn someone to hell? I'd think that you'd end up in hell (or whatever form of hell) if you don't atone or feel guilty for any sins you've committed. An innocent person wouldn't go to hell. That's a spiritual belief, not one bound in any religion.

 

I was never taught in church that there was no free will. I was taught to think for myself. Come to think of it, the story of Jonah and the whale is a perfect example of free will in the Bible. So, I don't really understand where the talk of primitive ignorance comes from. Maybe just different experiences, I guess.

 

This picking and choosing can apply to other areas. In Indonesia, the poorest areas that were the hardest hit in the tsunami haven't been receiving their fair share of aid money. Instead, it has been going mainly to the more well-off areas. These aid agencies are picking and choosing where to contribute their help, and not making the best decisions. Does this mean that aid agencies are bad and irrational? No.

 

I don't find it hard to be picky and choosy about two beliefs: treat others as you'd like to be treated and turn the other cheek. You don't need to be religious to follow those, and those are the rules around which almost every religion is based around. If everyone just followed those two rules then the world would be much better off.

 

Just take some grammar lessons before you outlaw stupidity.

 

That had nothing to do with your arguments and points. A moment of weakness, I'll admit, and I'm sorry. It's your talk of acting like a two-bit dictator that set me off (even though the sarcasm wasn't lost on me).

 

Oh, and I corrected your sentences like you wanted me to.

Edited August 12, 2005 by no yu begin wher i end

[RicardoObviouso]

Obviously.

hahahaha. totally.

[ecnarf]

don't be gay because that's not how to go about making new generations of people.

Yeah, that has to be the best argument against people being gay. If everyone did it, the population would collapse!

 

Wake up and smell the reality - NOT EVERYONE IS GAY, and there will never be a time when everyone will be gay. And don't even try to apologize for the babble's bigotry by saying that it is trying to safeguard society against total population collapse.

[no yu begin wher i end]

don't be gay because that's not how to go about making new generations of people. there is a method to the bible's madness.

Lauren, once more i have to disagree with yah. I know we come from different points of view in the first place, which by the way i embrace. But this is simply science. There are something like 17% of every species is homosexual, it is actually quite natural, you find the research everywhere. So if this is a natural occurance, wouldn't god have created it? Fear of homosexuality is a cultural thing, the bible simply represents its time and view of said lifestyle. It doesnt have anything really to do with nature and what is natural. Sure you don't procreate, however its only a small proportion of the population and thus does not ultimatly effect things so much.

EDIT: This is how spiritual i am. Energy can change forms, but cannot be destroyed. Therefore if we are all energy we simply live on in a different form. Whether we be actually concious we exist is something nobody can ever answer until we are dead, so why waste time, get on with the buisness of living, be happy and such.

I think I see where she's coming from. Right, homosexuality is natural, but the folks who wrote the bible probably didn't know that, seeing as how they didn't have the biological research that would point that out. It's "flat Earth" logic.

[Lauren]

and back then, having babies was a big deal. they didn't have the promising mortaility rate we have now. and more babies means more chances of getting a boy which means more farm hands.

[heyrabbit]

Have you seriously gotten those answers when you asked why a benevolent god would condemn someone to hell? I'd think that you'd end up in hell (or whatever form of hell) if you don't atone or feel guilty for any sins you've committed. An innocent person wouldn't go to hell. That's a spiritual belief, not one bound in any religion.

Oh man this is gonna be a long one.

 

I don't need the answer. I know the answer. I ask religious people that question to provoke thought.

 

You bring up a good point.

Many people believe the same thing you do. I think that that is due in large part to the fear tactic that the church uses. Fear of hell has indoctrinated so deeply in the minds of so many, from such a young age, that their decision to believe in god ultimately derives from that fear instead of thought. That's why, when you ask someone why they believe in god, the answer is often " I dunno, I just do". Any time you hear this you know that this person has based their beliefs on feelings rather than thought. Because, I don't know about you, but I require a little more reason than just " It feels right" before I'll believe I understand the origin of our existence.

 

That is why I find religion pretentious. These people all of a sudden understand the origin of existence while spending as much thought reaching that conclusion as I do on what I'm going to eat for breakfast.

 

I was never taught in church that there was no free will.

This is what it all comes down to. Free will doesn't exist, as the bible describes it. The question I previously asked was meant to discredit religious philosophy because the answer is: a benevolent god wouldn't condemn innocents to hell (That's what he'd be doing if he sent me to hell).

Peole try to evade real reason by saying, " everyone has the choice ". This doesn't make sense according to the bible itself.

 

It is deadly simple. If god created everything, then he is solely responsible for everything. This includes me, my brain and the situations I've been in which ultimately influence my decisions to belief or disbelieve in god.

If I don't believe in god that is direct result of HIS actions.

People say, "But you're given the choice to accept him or not". this makes no sense.

Nobody who believes in this superstition would to go to hell and nobody who doesn't believe in god is responsible for that. If I don't believe, well then god created me that way and I'm his responsibility. Why would be punish me for something he did? He wouldn't, unless he's an asshole. That's why I have to conclude that god is either non-existent, or an assole. it's called non-contradictory identification.

[supercanuk]

and back then, having babies was a big deal. they didn't have the promising mortaility rate we have now. and more babies means more chances of getting a boy which means more farm hands.

This is true and i understand it in the form of the logic of the day. I completely misinterpreted what you meant by that.

[no yu begin wher i end]

Many people believe the same thing you do. I think that that is due in large part to the fear tactic that the church uses. Fear of hell has indoctrinated so deeply in the minds of so many, from such a young age, that their decision to believe in god ultimately derives from that fear instead of thought. That's why, when you ask someone why they believe in god, the answer is often " I dunno, I just do".

The fear point (from my experiences): it's never come up whenever I've been to church. I guess the United Church of Canada is a little crazy like that. I've got nothing against it. The way we were taught to believe in God had nothing to do with hellfire and brimstone, but rather through good actions, the beauty of nature, etc. It's been a good 5 years since I was last in church school. That's probably why I'm not as cynical about these issues as others.

 

Any time you hear this you know that this person has based their beliefs on feelings rather than thought. Because, I don't know about you, but I require a little more reason than just " It feels right" before I'll believe I understand the origin of our existence.

 

There's an article in this week's Time magazine that you'd probably like. It's about the debate around teaching intelligent design in schools alongside evolution. They interview some biologists who don't find it difficult at all to reconcile their faith with their working knowledge of evolution.

 

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1090909,00.html

 

That is why I find religion pretentious. These people all of a sudden understand the origin of existence while spending as much thought reaching that conclusion as I do on what I'm going to eat for breakfast.

 

6 day creationist types. Yeah, I know the feeling.

 

It is deadly simple. If god created everything, then he is solely responsible for everything. This includes me, my brain and the situations I've been in which ultimately influence my decisions to belief or disbelieve in god.

 

Not exactly. It is possible that if God created everything, then he could've just left it after he was finished except in occasional divine interferences. Things like the water cycle or the carbon cycle are pretty self sustaining. God (or any other higher being) probably just kicked it off 6 billion years ago or so. Unless this is what you mean and it's all some sort of butterfly effect.

 

a benevolent god wouldn't condemn innocents to hell (That's what he'd be doing if he sent me to hell).

 

The key word is 'if'. A benevolent god wouldn't condemn innocents to hell. That's part of being a benevolent god.

[ecnarf]

and back then, having babies was a big deal. they didn't have the promising mortaility rate we have now. and more babies means more chances of getting a boy which means more farm hands.

But getting a girl means that you'd be able to sell her as a slave according to Leviticus.

[Lauren]

that was social, not biblical.

[trufflepig]

heyrabbit is an idiot

[supercanuk]

Y'know, i think we can all debate the various scriptures, religions and points of view till we're all blue in the face. I personally think that any religion is rubbish and that pretending to know what is going to happen when i die is impossible and i wouldnt bother. That being said i dont force my opinions on others and I think thats how it should be. But, both ways. What I think is very much a debatable topic is how religion interferes with other peoples lives. I mean i can't go downtown without being hasseled by a jehova's witness and personally id really like to be able to walk down the street and not run into that. I dont walk down the street and say "be agnostic, its the only true way to inner peace". I guess since its in my face a lot and its not my opinion sometimes it gets to me.

[no yu begin wher i end]

I mean i can't go downtown without being hasseled by a jehova's witness and personally id really like to be able to walk down the street and not run into that.

I feel the same way about panhandlers ;) .

[heyrabbit]

The fear point (from my experiences): it's never come up whenever I've been to church. I guess the United Church of Canada is a little crazy like that. I've got nothing against it. The way we were taught to believe in God had nothing to do with hellfire and brimstone, but rather through good actions, the beauty of nature, etc. It's been a good 5 years since I was last in church school. That's probably why I'm not as cynical about these issues as others.

Of course it hasn't come up in church. It not something that's accepted or understood by the relgious community, quite the opposite.Whoever is being duped by the church is obviously not going to be aware of it, or else they wouldn't be religious to begin with. It's something that is subconsciously taught and learned by both parties.

 

There's an article in this week's Time magazine that you'd probably like. It's about the debate around teaching intelligent design in schools alongside evolution. They interview some biologists who don't find it difficult at all to reconcile their faith with their working knowledge of evolution.

I couldn't read the article. I'm not registered with times mag. Anyway, I have a lot of issues with the education system. That's a whole other issue. Although, I wouldn't have a problem with intelligent design being taught( as a theory). Schools just need to teach critical thinking first and foremost, then students can wade through all the crap and decide for themselves. No unfounded theory should be taught as a fact. I think it's absolutely disgusting to abuse that power and position. I remember my dumb socialist teachers whininga nd bullshitting about the government when we were supposed to be learning. Luckily for me I was aware they were full of it. It should be an indictable offence.

 

6 day creationist types. Yeah, I know the feeling.

The same applies to anyone who believes in god.

 

Not exactly. It is possible that if God created everything, then he could've just left it after he was finished except in occasional divine interferences. Things like the water cycle or the carbon cycle are pretty self sustaining. God (or any other higher being) probably just kicked it off 6 billion years ago or so. Unless this is what you mean and it's all some sort of butterfly effect.

He's not freed from his responsibility by leaving. If I shat on the sidewalk and left, I'm still liable.If he created everything, he is responsible for everything.

 

The key word is 'if'. A benevolent god wouldn't condemn innocents to hell. That's prt of being a benevolent god.

that contradicts religious philosophy because everyone is innocent. You don't believe that because you've been taught to believe in self-sacrifice and unworthiness. God is the only perfect being and we're all dirty sinners!

 

heyrabbit is an idiot

compelling argument.kiss my scottish arse, random dumb person. Edited August 14, 2005 by heyrabbit