Why has religion retained its appeal?

[Thorpist 72]

As a species we all form attachments to groups that suit our needs /desires. The problems arise when groups try to impose their will upon other sections of society by any other means than persuasion.

[Annie Bynnol 610]

9 hours ago, danot said:

The darker aspects of religion merely reflect the darker aspects of our true nature. 

 

With or without efficacious instruments such as religion, we'll never escape humanism.  Our frailties make us human, they're woven into the fabric that religion is cut from and can't be suppressed or denied.  We can't help being what we are, but we can hope for something better. 

 

Heard the same stuff from the pulpit decades ago as a child.

Pulpit gas gone.

Chapel has gone.

The slides, swings and roundabouts are no longer padlocked.

 

 We are still here and free from their control both real and imaginary.

 

 

[mrcharlie 10]

I really don't understand  why people are religious. All religion is based on fables and tales scribbled 1000's of years ago. None of it stands up to 21st century scrutiny. 

I think its time mankind moved on.

[Anna B 1,401]

On 16/03/2019 at 10:04, mrcharlie said:

I really don't understand  why people are religious. All religion is based on fables and tales scribbled 1000's of years ago. None of it stands up to 21st century scrutiny. 

I think its time mankind moved on.

Religion is a man made concept and is therefore full of flaws. Spitituality, however, comes from within and does not need an organised 'church' for belief. 

 

Unfortunately the two have been confused.

[Cyclone 10]

On 15/03/2019 at 08:09, woodview said:

Why does it matter to you if someone takes comfort that they, or their loved ones, might be in a good place after they die?

I don't believe it, but I can understand and respect other peoples need to.

Sorry, I didn't reply because I went away for the weekend.  But I'm happy to now.

 

You have of course invented a lot that I didn't say, and then responded to it, as you often do.

 

I didn't try to, nor did I suggest, taking anything away from people.  That was all in your head.

 

Nor did I say that it somehow mattered to me what they believe (I mean, it does, if it starts to impinge on me, but otherwise it doesn't).

It's not difficult to understand is it, I explained the basis for it, false hope, there, understanding complete.  Respecting other peoples delusions, well, respect is something you earn.  So I'll respect their believe so long as they don't feel like we have to discuss it and it has no impact on me.   Tolerate as well for that matter.

On 15/03/2019 at 16:52, woodview said:

That's the impression I got. He'd have to confirm or deny it himself.

How?  Which specific words or sentence suggested that?

[danot 10]

23 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Sorry, I didn't reply because I went away for the weekend.  But I'm happy to now.

 

You have of course invented a lot that I didn't say, and then responded to it, as you often do.

 

I didn't try to, nor did I suggest, taking anything away from people.  That was all in your head.

 

Nor did I say that it somehow mattered to me what they believe (I mean, it does, if it starts to impinge on me, but otherwise it doesn't).

It's not difficult to understand is it, I explained the basis for it, false hope, there, understanding complete.  Respecting other peoples delusions, well, respect is something you earn.  So I'll respect their believe so long as they don't feel like we have to discuss it and it has no impact on me.   Tolerate as well for that matter.

 Exactly how are you being tolerant and respectful of their 'delusional false hope's' if you're telling them that their hopes are delusional and asking that they respect you for it?

Edited March 18, 2019 by danot

[RootsBooster 24]

1 hour ago, danot said:

 Exactly how are you being tolerant and respectful of their 'delusional false hope's' if you're telling them that their hopes are delusional and asking that they respect you for it?

I can't speak for Cyclone on this but in my case, I don't tend to respect irrational or ridiculous beliefs.

I do respect people's right to have those beliefs, however I don't think that they should come with any special privileges or protection.

[danot 10]

11 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

I can't speak for Cyclone on this but in my case, I don't tend to respect irrational or ridiculous beliefs.

I do respect people's right to have those beliefs, however I don't think that they should come with any special privileges or protection.

Do you see face covering as a religious privilege that shouldn't be protected from being banned? 

[Delayed 461]

23 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

I can't speak for Cyclone on this but in my case, I don't tend to respect irrational or ridiculous beliefs.

I do respect people's right to have those beliefs, however I don't think that they should come with any special privileges or protection.

Fair enough but how about being adult and not referring to beliefs as delusional?

[Cyclone 10]

If you say that you believe in Santa then you're delusional, but a sky pixie who created the world and his son who came back as a zombie, you don't want those to be called delusions?

37 minutes ago, danot said:

Do you see face covering as a religious privilege that shouldn't be protected from being banned? 

Is this 20 questions?  Why should I even consider answering what is obviously a leading question?

1 hour ago, RootsBooster said:

I can't speak for Cyclone on this but in my case, I don't tend to respect irrational or ridiculous beliefs.

I do respect people's right to have those beliefs, however I don't think that they should come with any special privileges or protection.

That seems fair.

People have the right to believe whatever they like, so long as it harms no one else.

But I don't think any belief comes with an automatic requirement for respect from anyone else.

2 hours ago, danot said:

 Exactly how are you being tolerant and respectful of their 'delusional false hope's' if you're telling them that their hopes are delusional and asking that they respect you for it?

I didn't ask for respect...  You're getting confused.

If people want to discuss their beliefs then they have to be prepared to defend them right, that would include against people who think that they sound delusional and that the hope of a second chance in an "after" life is a false hope.

How can you discuss the concept of an afterlife if you disagree with it, without calling it a false hope?

[danot 10]

1 minute ago, Cyclone said:

If you say that you believe in Santa then you're delusional, but a sky pixie who created the world and his son who came back as a zombie, you don't want those to be called delusions?

Is this 20 questions?  Why should I even consider answering what is obviously a leading question?

I don't want to discuss Santa, sky pixies or zombies, I'm more interested in this tolerance and respect you mentioned earlier.  You said "respect has to be earned", adding that you're willing to respect people's delusions (scoff) providing it doesn't impinge on you and they don't try talking about it with you, 

 

By calling religious people  'delusional', and desciing their faith as 'false hope', you're being both intolerant and disrespectful. 

 

Regarding my so-called leading question. RootsBooster openly stated he thinks religious peopeople deserves no special privilegesor protect, so it's hardly a leading question. Surely, having read the comment, it follows that I can then ask if religious face covering fits within this criteria. It's not a trick question. 

 

 

[Cyclone 10]

I think you've got the wrong thread then.  This thread is about why religion has retained its appeal.

 

And I'm fairly sure that I said something about unless it impinges on me or I have to discuss it...  Almost those exact words.  Perhaps you don't want to discuss it?  In which case, cease posting about it.

 

Perhaps you can ask him.  I see no reason to answer your leading questions though.  On an interesting point though, I wear a balaclava when it's cold.  Covering your face is not illegal.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Cyclone