Jump to content


Why has religion retained its appeal?

Vaati

This is the final warning this thread will get, any further bickering, baiting or posts that break the forum rules the thread will be closed. Accounts will be suspended.

Message added by Vaati

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

What is that assumption based on?

 

Significant and long-lasting emergent behaviour such as our obsession with oil (fuel, plastics, etc), our fondness for cattle farming, the ever-encroaching expansion of our population, our tendancy toward tribalism (we can't even like both of our own football teams in Sheffield), I think it would be dangerous to assume that they would have a positive reinforcing effect.

Well, if these behaviours haven't been reinforced by positive effects, why have we carried on doing them I wonder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Phanerothyme said:

Well, if these behaviours haven't been reinforced by positive effects, why have we carried on doing them I wonder?

You know an appeal to popularity doesn't mean something's right or good, right? Worse than that, it's a logical fallacy. 

Do you think people continue to carry out FGM because it's reinforced by positive effects?

 

In answer to your question, I'd say it's due to selfishness, arrogance and ignorance. The continuation of theistic beliefs is typically a perpetual chain of indoctrination going down through each generation, before children are given chance to develop their skills of critical thinking.

Edited by RootsBooster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

I'm unable to find any examples of airlines or laws that forbid burkas on planes

You won't find any. You'll probably struggle finding any examples or laws that forbid hoodies on planes too, but we weren't talking about burkas or hoodies, we were talking about none religious face concealing headwear weren't we? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

I have never seen  "... 'New's' on the TV...in Iraq/syria etc... you often see women wearing Niqabs going into buildings and blowing them selves up, along with the occupants of the building."

Which channel would screen this?

How often do they show this?

When was the last time? Where?

 

How sad/odd/typical that this religious discussion has been brought down to Islam bashing.  Can't you religious people get on with each other?

You have NEVER SEEN?...Well it's about time You opened Your eyes.!

 

The BBC. Quite Often Dear.

 

Last week.

 

Syria.

 

2 minutes ago, danot said:

You won't find any. You'll probably struggle finding any examples or laws that forbid hoodies on planes too, but we weren't talking about burkas or hoodies, we were talking about none religious face concealing headwear weren't we? 

Would a 'Clown mask'   be considered 'None Religious'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FinBak said:

But when you watch the 'News' on the TV...in Iraq/syria etc... you often see 'women'(Could be men) wearing Niqabs going into buildings and blowing them selves up, along with the occupants of the building.

 

Where do you draw the line?

No you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, danot said:

You won't find any. You'll probably struggle finding any examples or laws that forbid hoodies on planes too, but we weren't talking about burkas or hoodies, we were talking about none religious face concealing headwear weren't we? 

We were actually talking about you or I not being able to cover our faces in public.

So do you have any examples of laws, policies or occasions when it was forbidden for someone to cover their face on a plane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Phanerothyme said:

I think it's dangerous to assume that a significant and long-lasting emergent behaviour in a large population of complex organisms  is a flaw of any kind.

It's likely to have a purpose, or perhaps more accurately, a positive reinforcing effect - whether that's on  the individual or society (or both and to what extent) I don't know.

 

 

Religion is a passionate interest. It's nothing more than that really.

 

You'll see the faithful congregating at their places of worship on their designated days to worship their gods of choice, wearing appropriate attire and regalia to signify their chosen faith, singing aloud as one in praise of their gods, showering them with money.

 Some feel so passionately about their faith that they won't hear anything contrary towards it, with some believing it's a passion worth killing for, even dying for, and this is only football.  With religion, you're talking about the mother of all passion. It has no equal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, FinBak said:

 

 

Would a 'Clown mask'   be considered 'None Religious'?

Unless its a religious event/occasion that features clowns. Yes. But in either instance, nobody's going to wear a clown masks otherwise.  Are you forgetting the 'clown craze' public order offence warnings last year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

We were actually talking about you or I not being able to cover our faces in public.

So do you have any examples of laws, policies or occasions when it was forbidden for someone to cover their face on a

There are certain places and establishments in the public domain that won't allow none religious face concealing headwear to be worn.  Surely you're not wanting to argue there isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, danot said:

There are certain places and establishments in the public domain that won't allow none religious face concealing headwear to be worn.  Surely you're not wanting to argue there isn't.

This has been going on several pages now and you've struggled to show this so far. 

You went on to make a very specific claim about not being able to cover your face on a plane yet failed to provide any evidence. Now you appear to be back-pedalling somewhat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

This has been going on several pages now and you've struggled to show this so far. 

You went on to make a very specific claim about not being able to cover your face on a plane yet failed to provide any evidence. Now you appear to be back-pedalling somewhat.

I know you can't wear a crop top on Thomas Cook flights. Well, one person couldn't.

 

BBC News - Thomas Cook plane crop top passenger 'told to cover up'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47558766

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

This has been going on several pages now and you've struggled to show this so far. 

You went on to make a very specific claim about not being able to cover your face on a plane yet failed to provide any evidence. Now you appear to be back-pedalling somewhat.

No. I'm not back-peddling at all. Why would I need to produce evidence when it's self-evident that restrictive measures prevent us from doing it. If I am wrong about this and airlines do allow passengers to board their planes with their faces concealed, if it's far more common than I actually realise, it shouldn't be too difficult for someone  to find evidence that shows I'm wrong.  Maybe a photograph or something. I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong. 

Edited by danot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.