Listening to a lady in the States this morning reminded me of how stupid religion is. When discussin ghte fact that whilst all her neighbourhood is destroyed but her parents are still alived she said that "it is thanks to God that they are alive."

Now hello? Act of God. Heard of the phrase?

God created nature right? So God created that Hurricanine 9whether directly or indirectly). So , therefore, God murdered all those people? Right?

So why do religious people seem to ignore this. Same with all kinds of disasters.

I see no other option than to assume that religion appeals to the stupidest segment of society.

Agreed.

It seems a bit odd to believe in something so completely even though it can't be proved to exist. Religion has also led to more pain, suffering and death than anything else... :loopy:

If you talk to these people they will tell you it is gods will certain people died. He moves in mysterious ways and perhaps it was their time to go, and it is thanks to god that certain people were spared so they can continue to do his work and to spread the word. There is nothing wrong with these people or their beliefs.

I take point with religion being the cause of wars and such. I think that is an oversimplification of the truth, and it is people who cause wars through their own ideas of their religions. This is why we get some shouting for a jihad, and others, of the same religion, who say "Yeah right! Maybe in the next millenieu".

Don't let religious fanatics give you the wrong ideas about religion in general. It was men who decided that anyone not of their religion should either convert or die - not gods.

Dragon

Religion is a crook for the weak.
How many times have you preyed before exams when you know you haven't studied till the night before?
Or when a relative is dying?
Suddenly one becomes religious.

In the past it was a good tool to controll the peasants & plebs, and a wonderful way of making money out of the emotion 'guilt'.

It's simply an instrument with which to controll & bully.

Agree.
I suppose you’ll have the religious trundling out the same old drivel that ‘god moves in mysterious ways’ or ‘this was sent to test us’? Mysterious indeed. What a great guy to throw tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, bird flu, the embola virus, etc at us. By supposedly testing our faith in him through these ‘acts of god’, he behaves like some kind of deranged, coked-up drug lord.
God (in a rough Mexican gangster accent): Hi Abraham, how I know you really with me, eh? How I not know you no steenking stool pigeon, eh? Tell you what, bring your son here and slit his throat for me, eh?
Abraham: sure thang boss.

Nice bloke.

How many more generations do we have to wait until people realise there is no god, there is no heaven, there is no hell? I suppose the flat earthers took a while to die out, here’s to a god free future! In the mean time, more fun from the bible:

http://www.evilbible.com/

What is to say that god has not given us what we have and then said - there you go - get on with it. If people die - then I will be waiting for them, but the dying is upto them?

It is so easy to state there is no god and that belief in one is a fools way, but I suppose that is definitely just a point of view.

If you think of god in the same manner as you think of people then sure - there are many faults, but who said he was like other humans? Aside from which - look at the mistakes we have made all by our lonesomes.

I do not blame a god for what takes place in my life. It is my responsability. If someone dies - then they die. If someone survives an accident then they survive.

The decline of religious principles has occurred at the same time as a decline in moral values. Instead of love thy neighbour we have p**s all over them and burn their house down.

And people who go on about the religious intollerances of religions are usually the most intollerant of all.

Dragon

Originally posted by Dragon

The decline of religious principles has occurred at the same time as a decline in moral values. Instead of love thy neighbour we have p**s all over them and burn their house down.
Dragon

Run of the mill Daily Mail nonsense.

So, the middle ages when religious authority was at its apogee were the height of moral values from which we have slowly fallen back? I don’t think so. And Plato showed that morals exist independently of religion over 2000 years ago. You bizarrely assume that failing to follow religious principles leads to, your words, p**sing all over one’s neighbours and burning their houses down. How? Are not Muslims/Hindus/Jews/Christians engaged in these activities on a daily and global basis (Kashmir/Palestine/Indonesia/Africa)? Secular states like China or Japan must find the rest of the world ripping itself apart because of the Abrahamic religions utterly bizarre if not terrifying. Would you say that Japan, a state that strictly enforces the separation of religion and the state, is amoral? Why is it then that they have the lowest crime rates for any developed country, the least inequality in distribution of wealth and a far stronger sense of community than anything on offer over here?

Dragon [/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Dragon

And people who go on about the religious intollerances of religions are usually the most intollerant of all.
Dragon
Tosh.
How many atheists have you seen instigating inquisitions, imposing death fatwa’s on writers, condemning homosexuality, banning dancing, stoning adulteresses, strapping on suicide bombs, and all the rest of it? Go to a theocracy like Saudi Arabia or parts of Nigeria to see how intolerant these places, defined by religion, are. Go to the US bible belt for that matter. Or simply read any of the Pope’s pronouncements on gays or sex before marriage.

Originally posted by Dragon
What is to say that god has not given us what we have and then said - there you go - get on with it. Dragon

Science, rational thought, common sense, human progress.....

Religion is simply a tool for people who need to believe in something and can't cope with the idea that this life is all there is.
If these people just applied themselves to the world around them, rather than the world in their heads - I reckon the world would not only be a better place, but they would also stop wasting their time chasing a dream that'll never actually happen!

Originally posted by Briano
Religion is simply a tool for people who need to believe in something and can't cope with the idea that this life is all there is.
If these people just applied themselves to the world around them, rather than the world in their heads - I reckon the world would not only be a better place, but they would also stop wasting their time chasing a dream that'll never actually happen!

Well put...what a waste to live this life in pursuit of some afterlife.

Originally posted by withnail

Tosh.
How many atheists have you seen instigating inquisitions, imposing death fatwa’s on writers, condemning homosexuality, banning dancing, stoning adulteresses, strapping on suicide bombs, and all the rest of it? Go to a theocracy like Saudi Arabia or parts of Nigeria to see how intolerant these places, defined by religion, are. Go to the US bible belt for that matter. Or simply read any of the Pope’s pronouncements on gays or sex before marriage.

Well said, my friend. Can't argue with any of that! ;)

Originally posted by robbie
I see no other option than to assume that religion appeals to the stupidest segment of society.

I would have to disagree with this statement. some of the worlds greatist leaders, thinkers and scientitis have been religious too.

Would you call Gandhi or Nelson Mandela members of the 'stupidest segment of society'. How about J.R.R. Tolkien, Isaac Newton and Louis Pasteur they where Christian!

We *are* god.

We are inseperable from the oneness of all life. We are part and parcel of everything that is. Just as all the individual drops in the ocean, are the ocean itself (there is an ocean, and she flows within herself - don).

That we invent these religions and belief systems, is a result of our inherent nature; our need to have the unknown become known.

We can't just be comfortable with the unknown, we run from it, like from our own shadow, instead of embracing and being consumed by it, like a child with its mother.

If there is anything to fear, it is the known, not the unknown.

One concerning trend I notice in our species, is how we feel threatened by those who do not share our world view, tolerant creatures that we are (!) hmmm ...

Originally posted by Jamie


One concerning trend I notice in our species, is how we feel threatened by those who do not share our world view, tolerant creatures that we are (!) hmmm ...

And it's only going to get worse. It's undeniable that in some respects our society is becoming more and more intolerant. Christian extremists trying to ban Jerry Springer, Sikhs storming theatres and weddings, Muslims calling for jihad, animal rights extremists digging up graves for example. On the other hand, I think there is a need for more, not less, intolerance….of bigotry, racism, sexism, creationist teaching, sharia law…in short of allowing religion to interfere in public life. Freedom of speech and civil liberties are more important that affronting religious values and we should be intolerant of any creed that says otherwise.

Originally posted by Briano
Agreed.
Religion has also led to more pain, suffering and death than anything else... :loopy:
Disagree. That honour goes to science and technology through the invention of agriculture, closely followed by disease as a result.

Originally posted by Briano
Religion is simply....

If you start a sentence like that, it is bound to be wrong.


Originally posted by withnail
How many atheists have you seen instigating inquisitions, imposing death fatwa’s on writers, condemning homosexuality, banning dancing, stoning adulteresses, strapping on suicide bombs, and all the rest of it?

How would you know if they are an atheist or not just by looking at them, or in your case, hearing about their actions. Just because someone looks or sounds overtly religious, says nothing about whether they actually believe in a deity or not.

In fact if one were to judge them by their actions, the most obvious conclusion is that they do not believe in a deity at all.

Don't make the mistake of trying to pin man's inhumanity to man on the mantle of religion - it can be a convenient fig leaf, but so can plenty of other practices.

And British civil society is founded on core christian values, quite explicitly - should we throw that out too?

[i]
How many atheists have you seen instigating inquisitions, imposing death fatwa’s on writers, condemning homosexuality, banning dancing, stoning adulteresses, strapping on suicide bombs, and all the rest of it? [/B]
Two people sort of spring to mind for some of those excesses and a whole lot worse, Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler both atheists I believe?

All forms of relegion are based on chinese whispers... think about it!

mary and joseph got bladderd one night, had sex, couldnt remember a thing... suddenly a few weeks later shes up the duff!

pregnant virgin my arse, the dirty bugger.


I'm not a believer in religion, they are all corrupt and are/were ways of controlling populations of people, nothing puts fear in them than the supernatural...

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Disagree. That honour goes to science and technology through the invention of agriculture, closely followed by disease as a result.

Eh? What are you on? So you believe agriculture has killed more people than any religious related wars/terrorist acts/hatred attacks?.... how? :loopy:

And it's not science and technology that has done this either, it's the religious beliefs of the people who used this science and technology to cause harm and death...

Originally posted by Phanerothyme.
Disagree. That honour goes to science and technology through the invention of agriculture, closely followed by disease as a result.

Originally posted by Briano
Eh? What are you on? So you believe agriculture has killed more people than any religious related wars/terrorist acts/hatred attacks?.... how? :loopy:

And it's not science and technology that has done this either, it's the religious beliefs of the people who used this science and technology to cause harm and death...

If only you knew. Our Phan has been on just about every drug there is at some time or other. It's his hobby ;)

Originally posted by Phanerothyme

And British civil society is founded on core christian values, quite explicitly - should we throw that out too?

Yes, because you can have all the values without the superstition. Purge religion of all the mystical nonsense, take it down to core values and you essentially have a humanist agenda. Religion is redundant. You don't need any religious beliefs to be a good person or member of society. Religions might suggest otherwise (in fact they are obliged to) and display a stunning arrogance when they do so.

[
QUOTE]Originally posted by daverity
Two people sort of spring to mind for some of those excesses and a whole lot worse, Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler both atheists I believe? [/QUOTE]

Half a good point, but the Catholic church made an accommodation with the Nazi regime (which they are forever trying to downplay/hide) and Stalin merely illustrates the dangers of extremism. Marxism never called for the state to be atheist; it was assumed, mistakenly as it turned out, that once the veil had been lifted, religion would simply die away.

Originally posted by Briano
Eh? What are you on? So you believe agriculture has killed more people than any religious related wars/terrorist acts/hatred attacks?.... how? :loopy:

And it's not science and technology that has done this either, it's the religious beliefs of the people who used this science and technology to cause harm and death...

Without agriculture and the civilisations that arose from it, the world population would have stabilised at around 200 million (according to the best estimates). Today we have a global population of about six and a half billion.

With a stable world population of 200 million hunter gatherers, I honestly don't think there would have been any wars, let alone many wars. The odd bout of bashing heads with rocks maybe.

Having said that, 75 million people dead in two world wars, neither of which were overtly motivated by religion, is not an insignificant rebuttal to your faintly ridiculous idea that somehow religious wars and conflicts have killed more people than 'agnostic' wars, disease and famine.

Originally posted by mojoworking
If only you knew. Our Phan has been on just about every drug there is at some time or other. It's his hobby ;)
That smells worse than your posts normally do mojo, nice one.

Originally posted by withnail
Half a good point, but the Catholic church made an accommodation with the Nazi regime (which they are forever trying to downplay/hide) and Stalin merely illustrates the dangers of extremism. Marxism never called for the state to be atheist; it was assumed, mistakenly as it turned out, that once the veil had been lifted, religion would simply die away.

When you asked

"How many atheists have you seen instigating inquisitions," I would have thought Stalin was a pretty good example.

Or an inconvenient one.

Religion is not the cause of this behaviour. I broadly agree with where you are coming from, but it is nonsensical to say that somehow the overtly religious have a monopoly on inhumanity. Or indeed that somehow the majority of the world's ills are rooted in the belief of a deity.

The massacres in rwanda where a million people were hacked to death with machetes and dumped in the river, were not religiously motivated, IIRC.

There's an interesting discussion to be had here.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
With a stable world population of 200 million hunter gatherers, I honestly don't think there would have been any wars, let alone many wars. The odd bout of bashing heads with rocks maybe.

Well you've just said it all there!! So in order to live harmoniously we just need to forget all our learning, cut half our brains out so we can no longer build on experience and kill a few billion people... wish I'd thought of that! :loopy:

So..err... how'd you start on this hobby of yours! :heyhey:

Originally posted by Briano
Well you've just said it all there!! So in order to live harmoniously we just need to forget all our learning, cut half our brains out so we can no longer build on experience and kill a few billion people... wish I'd thought of that! :loopy:

So..err... how'd you start on this hobby of yours! :heyhey:

Stop putting words in my mouth.

I said that science and technology, and the invention of agriculture made all of this possible whether you are talking about religious slaughter or feeding the world.

I did not say that we should regress to our hunter gatherer selves, or that it was even possible.

That was your 'loopy' idea, not mine.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme


There's an interesting discussion to be had here.

Agree, and, no, I wouldn't like to suggest that all the world's ills are down to religion, but then again, I have recently dusted off the clash of civilisations....!

forgive me returning to this, by I just can't resist picking scabs.Originally posted by Briano
Well you've just said it all there!! So in order to live harmoniously we just need to forget all our learning, cut half our brains out so we can no longer build on experience and kill a few billion people... wish I'd thought of that! :loopy:

What makes you think that we would need to cut out half of our brains? Nothing separates us from these ancestors apart from language and technology - certainly not brain size. However, the common ancestry of man is sometimes called into question, even on this board.
Originally posted by Briano
So..err... how'd you start on this hobby of yours! :heyhey:
Easy, I took an interest in thinking, and what constitutes it. And despite 15 years of pumping class A drugs into my system, I seem strangely able to hold up my end of a discussion without too much trouble.

Originally posted by Briano
Religion has also led to more pain, suffering and death than anything else... :loopy:

That is simply wrong.

I'd say that the minority of pain suffering and death was caused by religion. The majority being caused by war, famine, and pestilence.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phanerothyme
What makes you think that we would need to cut out half of our brains?

How else do you propose (as you did) stopping humans from improving themselves other than removing the part of their brains that leads to memories/thought processes/ideas?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Easy, I took an interest in thinking

Hmmm, and so it seems that isn't such a good idea in your case!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phanerothyme
I'd say that the minority of pain suffering and death was caused by religion.

Especially when it leads to statements like this exiting your lower regions...

I wish people would learn how to use the quote facility correctly ...

Originally posted by Briano
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phanerothyme
What makes you think that we would need to cut out half of our brains?

How else do you propose(as you did)where? stopping humans from improving themselves other than removing the part of their brains that leads to memories/thought processes/ideas?

Easy, by trying to explain to you that our hunter gatherer ancestors had the same brain we do today.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Easy, I took an interest in thinking

Hmmm, and so it seems that isn't such a good idea in your case!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phanerothyme
I'd say that the minority of pain suffering and death was caused by religion.

Especially when it leads to statements like this exiting your lower regions...

Well instead of just witty rejoinders, perhaps you'd like to discuss your assertion with which I disagree. Could you explain your reasoning behind your assertion, assuming there is some?

Phanerothyme, you know what!? I really can't be bothered to try and explain myself to you in a way that you'll understand.

It's Friday afternoon, I've nearly finished work, it's sunny outside and there's more important things to think about than arguing with the kind of person that'll always move the goal posts slightly on any argument to suit yourself, so it's a no win situation for either of us. :loopy:

And Jamie, please forgive me. We're obviously not all as adept as you are with regards to 'using the quote facility'... :P

Originally posted by Briano
Phanerothyme, you know what!? I really can't be bothered to try and explain myself to you in a way that you'll understand.

Just stick to this sort of thing, and you'll never have to explain anything -


Originally posted by Briano
Especially when it leads to statements like this exiting your lower regions..

Originally posted by Phanerothyme

That smells worse than your posts normally do mojo, nice one.


Thanks. I do try. ;)

Originally posted by Phanerothyme

I'd say that the minority of pain suffering and death was caused by religion. The majority being caused by war, famine, and pestilence.

Two of those are natural disasters. Only one of them is directly attributable to the actions of man.

...and what would you say caused most of the wars?

Brilliant! I love a heated debate of a Friday afternoon. I'm jumping into the fray immediately...

I saw a story in the papers today about a British Iraqi lady who is running for the title of Miss GB this weekend. But instead of being prased for doing her bit to help cultural intergration ect., she's been slammed by Muslim leaders for exposing her body. One was quoted as saying that a woman should only expose her head, hands and feet.

And the Christian bunch are no better. Confessing your sins? No impure thoughts? No sex before marriage?

NO THANKS!

If there is a god, and he makes up such bl***y stupid rules, then quite frankly, I'm not going to waste my time worshiping him. But I suspect the whole thing is a load of tosh, so I don't think I need worry about incuring the wrath of a greater being.

I live my life in the way I see fit. I have a good set of morals and values, I work hard at my job, respect my family and friends, and I try to be kind and considerate to my fellow human beings. And shock horror, I do this all on my own, without a set of religious rules guiding me.

Originally posted by JBee
Brilliant! I love a heated debate of a Friday afternoon. I'm jumping into the fray immediately...

I saw a story in the papers today about a British Iraqi lady who is running for the title of Miss GB this weekend.

Any pictures??? :heyhey:

errrrr that I can pass onto slimsid2000 :blush: {cough} of course... :suspect:

Originally posted by Briano
And Jamie, please forgive me.

That's ok. All sins are forgiven my child ...

:P

Just as no-one should force you to accept their religion, you have no right to enforce your beliefs or belittle others. It is a persons choice to believe or disbelieve in god.

You think it is all a pile of cow droppings? Fine - your choice. Some prefer to think otherwise.

Like I said - current society lacks respect for others.

Dragon

Originally posted by mojoworking
Two of those are natural disasters. Only one of them is directly attributable to the actions of man.

...and what would you say caused most of the wars?

It's not the number of wars, it's the number of dead and suffering I am concerned with, when refuting the notion that somehow religion is to blame for the majority of human suffering.

Famine and rampaging pestilence are not purely natural disasters. Some famines would never have ocurred if artificial borders weren't preventing natural human migration. It also hard to imagine a crop failure and famine sweeping through a pre-agrarian population. Pandemic disease has a much harder time getting a foothold in a widely dispersed (interglacial) small population with a short life expectancy.

Religion is not the source of evil nor has it ...

... also led to more pain, suffering and death than anything else... :loopy:

re

Religion is not the source of evil nor has it ...

Actually I think you are incorrect. Religion invented the concept of evil. The story goes that without religion we would be evil. But for hundred of thousands of years, we got along just fine without it. If humans were naturally evil and needed to seek salvation, we would have wiped ourselves out before language, civilization and then religion were even conceived. It was at that stage, when Religion was formed the concept of evil was introduced to us.

Just to hit your point about agriculture and science being the root of most human suffering. It's interesting but speculative at best, you I am sure will admit that. We have no idea what would have happened if we had not invented irrigation. We would certainly have to me nomads, destroying the local area and having to move on to more fruitful hunting grounds. That in it's self would have started wars as we expanded and fought over the best hunting grounds. We would likely be even more tribal today. So at the very best your point is so speculative it can only be taken as a light hearted and fun thing to think about, not something that could ever be proved. We could have just as easily wiped out the human race by not inventing these things.

Also on a basic level, it is not the invention but the implementation you must be talking about? There is a huge difference.

As for science causing more suffering, hard to quantify. Religion has eased the suffering of many. Science has saved more lives than Religion will ever save. Just penicillin alone probably saved more lives than any Religion. But I also know that science has caused suffering. Well I would say the implementation of science has caused suffering. Again BIG difference. The science behind industrialization, was one thing. But it was the implementation of industrialization that really caused the suffering. The same with the atom bomb. It was a politician that took the decision to make it a weapon, rather than a power source. It was also a politician that decided to use the bomb, rather than using it as a deterrent.

Today we have big Pharam. The scientists inventing the drugs do not decide to put the drug on the market. It's not the scientists hiding the research, its teh business guys. So maybe we can say, business, capitalism, power and money has caused more suffering?

I don't think this is splitting hairs, I just think you are mixing science and industry and capitalism. The process of critical thinking, experimentation and peer review has never hurt anybody.

Religion certainly has started wars, but it has been used to justify more.