Religion when it had real power!

[dimreepr]

If I remember correctly a Catholic army (Spain) wiped out a whole Protestant village in Florida in the mid to late 1500s. I may have the time incorrect but the massacre happened... They killed everyone, even women and children, over dogma!

 

 

'In the name of' is the clarion call of all politicians, be they theist or otherwise.

[seriously disabled]

So when a Republican senator tries to ban gay marriage or thwart the teaching of evolution in schools, that's not religious?

This has nothing to do with what I said though.

 

Human behavior is complex but it has nothing to do with religion.

 

Religion is a human-made construction which has no objective or scientific basis in reality. Also science and especially physics, chemistry and biology heavily contradicts religion. So if scientific theories about the world are true than religion cannot be true. They cannot both be true. It's either science or religion and I think that rational people should pick science.

 

Also Christianity in immoral in my opinion because according to Christians the only way you can get to heaven is if you suck God's dick and do exactly what God wants you to do because otherwise you will suffer eternal torture in Hell.

 

Christianity is an immoral religion because it teaches conformity and instills terror in people about what will happen to them if they don't do what God wants them to do.

 

Besides many people in the past have murdered in the name of Christianity so Christianity as a religion also has blood in its hands.

Edited August 12, 2016 by seriously disabled

[dimreepr]

Besides many people in the past have murdered in the name of Christianity so Christianity as a religion also has blood in its hands.

 

 

Many people have saved people in the name of Christianity, so Christianity by your logic, also has love on it's hands; so what's the score?.

Edited August 12, 2016 by dimreepr

[Tampitump]

Christianity is an immoral religion because it teaches conformity and instills terror in people about what will happen to them if they don't do what God wants them to do.

I don't even think this is what makes Christianity immoral. Christianity is immoral because it based on the notion that an all-powerful, all-knowing deity holds imperfect human beings accountable for the "sins" of the first two individuals in existence. He holds them so accountable, in fact, that there is a place of eternal conscious torture in fire you will go to (by default when you are born) unless you submit fully to the revelation, observe the correct rituals, believe the correct things, etc. It plays on people's sexuality, fears of the unknown/afterlife, and ignorance. Whoever wrote these religions had to know that if people examined their claims critically in terms of evidence, they religion would be dead no time. That's why they have to play upon these fears and human prejudices and ignorance to even have a way to control people's lives. It is the most asinine thing I could ever imagine. But then again, there's the possibility my imagination is limited. Its absolutely amazing that this belief is considered sacred and proper in our cultures. When will we be able to look at someone and call them a dumbass without worry if they believe in this nonsense?

 

I find it really hard, impossible in fact, to look at the world and all of the competing, mutually contradictory religions in the world that claim to be the revealed word of God, and are at each other's throats about which imaginary friend is the real one, and think there is a god behind all of this that is even remotely competent or ethical, much less all-powerful, all-wise, or all-perfect.

Edited August 13, 2016 by Tampitump

[disarray]

So obviously people often use religion to validate their greed for land and resources, and examples abound. The problem is that one group adopts a particular ritual (e.g., baptism) or name for the deity (e.g., Jesus, Allah), decides how many gods there are (e.g., polygamy...and Muslims even condemn Christians for being polytheistic on account of the trinity), what the genealogical tree looks like (e.g., Isaac or Ishmael being the favored son of Abraham), etc. and then claims that every other doctrine is invalid and anathema.

 

Without claiming that they were spreading the (true) word of God, many of these colonialists would just have to acknowledge that they were just being domineering and greedy. It is similar to claims made that one race is inferior (in some cases because God allegedly made them that way) and then uses that claim to justify slavery and genocide.

 

I feel that a third form of self-validation is often made by the rich. Indeed, many, on some level of consciousness, assume that God has favored them and blessed them with riches, so that they don't feel many pangs of conscience when they don't (in practice) do much to help the poor, e.g., the general apathy towards the poor affected by hurricane Katrina.

[Memammal]

Religion is a human-made construction which has no objective or scientific basis in reality. Also science and especially physics, chemistry and biology heavily contradicts religion. So if scientific theories about the world are true than religion cannot be true. They cannot both be true. It's either science or religion and I think that rational people should pick science.

If it was possible to vote part of a post up and another part down, I would have. Let me just say that I agree with this part of the post, but not necessarily with the rest of it.

 

Christianity is immoral because it based on the notion that an all-powerful, all-knowing deity holds imperfect human beings accountable for the "sins" of the first two individuals in existence. He holds them so accountable, in fact, that there is a place of eternal conscious torture in fire you will go to (by default when you are born) unless you submit fully to the revelation, observe the correct rituals, believe the correct things, etc.

Absolutely and the really sad part of it is that each Christian generation will (knowingly or unknowingly) pass this insane (fictional) curse on to their own children, as well as others that they interact with within their social-cultural environment.

 

It plays on people's sexuality, fears of the unknown/afterlife, and ignorance.

I suspect that it impacts on much more than what you listed above. It is a sick and psychologically disturbing archetype of a paternal figure, further complicated by the suffering son.

 

Whoever wrote these religions had to know that if people examined their claims critically in terms of evidence, they religion would be dead no time. That's why they have to play upon these fears and human prejudices and ignorance to even have a way to control people's lives. It is the most asinine thing I could ever imagine.

With the exception of Islam within the Abrahamic religions, nobody sat down and wrote the scriptures with a deliberate plan of action to achieve what you described above (although it is conceivable that some of the OT scribes might had such ulterior motives). The theology behind Christianity, for example, developed from the dogma's of what was probably a minority Jewish sect, the Essenes preached by John The Baptist and Jesus, adapted by Saul of Tarsus, reinterpreted by Augustine of Hippo, Irenaeus, formalised by virtue of the Council of Nicaea, backed and enforced by Constantine and further manipulated through the ages up to the Reformation and beyond. This is a useful read: The History of Christianity. This is probably an entire discussion on its own though.

 

I find it really hard, impossible in fact, to look at the world and all of the competing, mutually contradictory religions in the world that claim to be the revealed word of God, and are at each other's throats about which imaginary friend is the real one, and think there is a god behind all of this that is even remotely competent or ethical, much less all-powerful, all-wise, or all-perfect.

Amen brother.

Edited August 13, 2016 by Memammal

[Tampitump]

If you take any kind of lesson on religion, or just research the history of it for yourself, it tends to make a lot of people angry. It is appalling to see how much utter societal retardation and destruction has been caused because a bunch of idiotic grown ups were convinced that their delusions were true. I makes me want to look at a Christian and spit right in their sweet, cute little face when they tell me "Jesus loves me." But I can't help but remain civil and just bask in how much more enlightened I am than they are. The best way to get rid of religion, to my mind, is just to stop calling ourselves "atheists", and just stop being tolerant of bullshit in our conversations by calling out nonsense whenever we see/hear it. Eventually, I mean EVENTUALLY, religion will go the fuck away and leave the human species alone. Just think of how much better it would be if the world required higher standards of evidence for their beliefs, and viewed spirituality as a metaphorical word describing the pursuit of achieving mental peace and well-being. We would be on the road to paradise. Fuck Heaven!

Edited August 14, 2016 by Tampitump

[MigL]

But that's just it...

Beliefs DO NOT require any standards of evidence.

 

The common ( google ) definition is:

1 An ACCEPTANCE that a statement is true or that something exists.

2 Trust, FAITH or confidence in someone or something.

 

I don't see 'standards of evidence' mentioned anywhere !

 

Why do you persist in trying to force your 'belief' of the meaning of BELIEF on others ?

[disarray]

The best way to get rid of religion, to my mind, is just to stop calling ourselves "atheists",

 

I guess I don't mind what people believe in terms of how the universe was created, but the problem comes when they make claims that abortion is wrong, for example, because god says so.....or that if one doesn't believe in their god that one will go to hell...or worse, that they are your friend and therefore (much like an intervention) are going to do you the favor of informing you about the truth (whether you like it or not).

 

But yes, calling oneself an "atheist" is almost inviting censorship in many social circles as it is part of many people's faith that those who don't subscribe to a or their religion can't possibly have any sort of moral foundation and are most likely sociopaths on some level. Furthermore, it is often assumed that one has firm convictions that their (beloved) god doesn't exist. Atheists, like homosexuals, are often presumed to be on some sort of 'crusade' to spread their beliefs, or rather anti-beliefs, and, in the case of atheists, to want to erase all forms of religious expression and morality from the country (e.g., by advocating separation of church and state).

 

Better, perhaps, to just say one is a nontheist...that one is not particularly adamant that there is no Christian or Muslim god that performs miracles anymore than one is adamant that Santa's reindeer can't fly.

 

Or better yet, pull out some sort of moral statement (e.g., humanist code) from ones hip pocket to reassure them that you are not out to destroy all that is sacred and good in this world, e.g.:

· We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.

· We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.

· We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance.

· We believe in supporting the disadvantaged and the handicapped so that they will be able to help themselves.

· We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together for the common good of humanity.

· We want to protect and enhance the earth, to preserve it for future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other species.

· We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.

· We are deeply concerned with the moral education of our children. We want to nourish reason and compassion.

· We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others.

· We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in the place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in the place of fear, love instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality.

· We believe in the fullest realization of the best and noblest that we are capable of as human beings.

from https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/12

Edited August 15, 2016 by disarray

[MigL]

That's way too much to inscribe on two small stone tablets.

If you wanted to fit all those statements, the tablets would be way too heavy for Moses to carry down from Mt. Sinai.

 

( sarcasm is the best I can do at 5 am )

[dimreepr]

Tampitump, on 14 Aug 2016 - 02:06 AM, said:

The best way to get rid of religion, to my mind, is just to stop calling ourselves "atheists"

 

 

Getting rid of religion won't change anything, a secular society is just as capable of torture, genocide and various other atrocities; it's all too easy for us to brow beat good, honest people, from our ivory tower of knowledge.

 

Just look at the numbers, the vast majority of all the religious people in the world today are just ordinary people going about their daily lives believing something you don't.

 

It's all too easy to create a target of hate for anyone, just cherry pick the worst of their history.

[seriously disabled]

Today money is more important to people than anything else I think. Modern societies revolve around money and money makes the world go round.

 

Most people today are like immoral and mindless zombies anyway.

 

The vast majority of people these days are immoral idiots who will do everything they can to get the most money possible (a quick buck), even if it means violating the rights of hard workers.

 

Lets face it. The people in Western Capitalist societies have no morality or ethics whatsoever.

Edited August 15, 2016 by seriously disabled

[dimreepr]

Nice rant, but how is it relevant to the thread?

[Prometheus]

Today money is more important to people than anything else I think. Modern societies revolve around money and money makes the world go round.

 

Most people today are like immortal and mindless zombies anyway.

 

The vast majority of people these days are immoral idiots who will do everything they can to get the most money possible (a quick buck), even if it means violating the rights of hard workers.

 

Lets face it. The people in Western Capitalist societies have no morality or ethics whatsoever.

 

 

Religion has good elements and bad elements: let's try to keep the former and discard the latter. Capitalism has good elements and bad elements - guess what we should try to do?

[seriously disabled]

Religion has good elements and bad elements: let's try to keep the former and discard the latter. Capitalism has good elements and bad elements - guess what we should try to do?

Capitalism doesn't have any good elements in my opinion, only bad elements.

 

Also religion is based on the false premise that people need religion or a God to behave morally. And I believe that is false. Humanity is more important than any God therefore religion is bad in my opinion.

 

What makes the modern world so cruel and shitty is that no one cares about each other except when they can get money out of the person.

 

Also the lust for money has replaced beneficial and altruistic human social interactions.

Edited August 15, 2016 by seriously disabled

[dimreepr]

Capitalism doesn't have any good elements in my opinion, only bad elements.

 

 

What would you replace it with?

 

 

What makes the modern world so cruel and shitty is that no one cares about each other except when they can get money out of the person.

 

Also the lust for money has replaced beneficial and altruistic human social interactions.

 

 

 

I know, why don't we use foliage instead of money, that way we'd all be incredibly rich.

[John Cuthber]

 

Tampitump, on 14 Aug 2016 - 02:06 AM, said:

 

 

Getting rid of religion won't change anything, a secular society is just as capable of torture, genocide and various other atrocities;...

 

It turns out that people are not very keen on hurting others- even in war.

What you need to do is convince your soldiers that the other side is "not human".

Being able to declare that "God says they are not human" works very well indeed.

 

Perhaps you would like to list the secular societies that have gone in for " torture, genocide and various other atrocities;..."

A society with one loony dictator doesn't count.)

[Prometheus]

Capitalism doesn't have any good elements in my opinion, only bad elements.

 

Also religion is based on the false premise that people need religion or a God to behave morally. And I believe that is false. Humanity is more important than any God therefore religion is bad in my opinion.

 

Capitalism has given the masses comforts previously only enjoyed by the rich. Having lots wrong with a system doesn't mean it is all wrong.

 

Theism isn't necessary for a religion. Again, i agree there is plenty wrong with religion, but that isn't the same as it all being bad.

 

Perhaps you would like to list the secular societies that have gone in for " torture, genocide and various other atrocities;..."

A society with one loony dictator doesn't count.)

 

America and China.

[dimreepr]

Perhaps you would like to list the secular societies that have gone in for " torture, genocide and various other atrocities;..."

A society with one loony dictator doesn't count.)

 

 

USA count?

[Moontanman]

 

 

USA count?

 

 

Not exactly a secular society...

[John Cuthber]

 

 

USA count?

Possibly.

It depends on a few factors.

For example, if it's still got "In God we trust" written on stuff does it count as secular?

Are the atrocities perpetrated more (or less) against one religious group than another?

 

China is certainly more interesting. I have seen communism described as a religion with Mao as a God-figure but I don't think that quite holds out.

 

However I think that China a (relatively) slight extension of the "loony dictators don't count" issue- they have a loony dictatorial party.

[Moontanman]

Possibly.

It depends on a few factors.

For example, if it's still got "In God we trust" written on stuff does it count as secular?

Are the atrocities perpetrated more (or less) against one religious group than another?

 

China is certainly more interesting. I have seen communism described as a religion with Mao as a God-figure but I don't think that quite holds out.

 

However I think that China a (relatively) slight extension of the "loony dictators don't count" issue- they have a loony dictatorial party.

 

 

I think it's a bit more important to ask how secularism could lead to the approval of torture/murder/abuse.

[John Cuthber]

 

Capitalism has given the masses comforts previously only enjoyed by the rich. Having lots wrong with a system doesn't mean it is all wrong.

 

 

That would be a better argument if the rich were not, in absolute and relative terms, richer than the masses and getting increasingly so as time goes on under capitalism.

 

The only time (recently) that the masses caught up with the rich was under (relatively) Left wing governments in the 60s and 70s.

[Prometheus]

That would be a better argument if the rich were not, in absolute and relative terms, richer than the masses and getting increasingly so as time goes on under capitalism.

 

The only time (recently) that the masses caught up with the rich was under (relatively) Left wing governments in the 60s and 70s.

 

I only claimed that the material lot of most people in Western societies has improved under capitalism, nothing about the gap between rich and poor. I made this point only to highlight that capitalism isn't unmitigated pure evil, even if the good it does is a accidental.

[disarray]

 

Capitalism has given the masses comforts previously only enjoyed by the rich. Having lots wrong with a system doesn't mean it is all wrong.

 

Theism isn't necessary for a religion. Again, i agree there is plenty wrong with religion, but that isn't the same as it all being bad.

 

 

America and China.

So moderation: I don't know if there are or have been any purely capitalistic or socialistic (or whatever) socieites...The question is a matter of proportion. That's largely the reason that countries hold elections, typically between left and right leaning political candidates.

 

Saying that theism isn't necessary for religion seems like a oxymoron.

 

Again, what is needed is moderation. Ecumenical movements that encourage religions to accept other religions is a major step in the right direction. Secondly, progressive movements that acknowledge scientific advancements is another. I am not Catholic, but even that dogmatic institution has been moving, albeit slowly, in these two ways.