Religion Strikes Again

I'm dizzy

There is a point to these kind of debates. Religious people, who used to think their ideas were non debatable, are now forced to face reality : there are tons of people around who think religion makes no sense.

And whoever is right doesn't matter that much; all this arguing leads a lot of people to questioning stuff. Thinking is the key. When everyone agrees with you, you have no reasons to think and nothing really evolves.

This is ironic because I get the idea that you enter most discussions with a closed-mind and have already decided that anyone who believes in a religion is a moron.

That would be a belief... and a stupid one.

Also, why would I want to debate without someone I consider unintelligent? Why on Earth would anyone try to converse with people they consider inferior? What do I have to gain from it? You need more questioning, my friend.

Why?

You are right, of course. I used to be one of those strictly religious people who refused to listen to anyone else, and it was debates similar to this one that caused me to stop and think. I suppose it's just that I've seen and heard so many of them where instead of listening, people just got mad. It's those debates that simply go round-and-round and accomplish nothing. If there is a debate where people are respectfully listening to each other and trying to learn what makes the other side tick instead of trying to prove that their side is correct, those debates certainly get people thinking and people evolving. Hopefully this will be one of those debates. :-)

You're right, religious zealotry is equally dangerous as someone who does something for the sake of themselves or based on the thought that there is no God to judge them.

However, the difference lies within the social circle they affiliate themselves with. When you carry the faith of a particular religion, you are within that community ring and therefore carry and give influence from those in the same circle. This is a widespread ring of followers and believers, as opposed to someone who did something and only had themselves to speak for.

I follow the "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" religion

No catches and really easy to learn!

I suppose I can see where you're going with this (cults) and I do agree that a religion can be dangerous because of the social and mental impressions but again, this is not normally the case, and well we don't even know the religion of this particular case so I'm still not sure it could apply. But on the flip-side I think that someone who did not follow a religion would be susceptible to other cons which might effect him in a different but still bad way. Of course this would still be the assuming the person is of ill mental health...

People will always get mad when 2000 years old ideas are put back in question, but those people are missing out on evolution... It's their loss.

Can you believe that 100 years ago, a man could not remove his shirt when the temperature got really hot outside? It was because people were not thinking for themselves, they would just follow the opinions of their religious leaders. Can you believe that even today, we cannot tolerate to see a woman in bikini in most public areas (let alone naked breasts) but whenever there's lots of water involved, somehow it's perfectly okay to show some skin? Nobody gets raped, we just look at the semi-naked guys and girls and find it pretty, as we should.

It's extremely unfair, in western society, to force women into suffering from heat, wearing bras and shirts, while men are usually able to remove their shirt without getting criticized very much. We have no rational way of justifying such inequality. We know very well that this could not be changed in a matter of days, it will take a lot of time before people adjust their minds.

It's a slow process called evolution. Instead of assuming things are wrong or right because some guy representing God said so, we use our own critical thinking, and we participate in the debate about what's okay and what's not okay. Religious people do it too, whenever they come to the conclusion that something needs to be dismissed from the Bible rather than treated literally. Natural selection is a consciousness raiser. We've reached this stage of human evolution and now we've got a lot of debating ahead. These small discussions, on a world-scale will eventually shape the future of humankind. Whoever thinks its a waste of time is clearly missing out.

Can you believe that just today, mere minutes ago someone would blatantly insult people just because they didn't believe they same thing as them? It seems that through some slow process people have lost any kind of manners or mutual respect for people different then themselves!

Hard to say. It really depends on one's grip on reality and how disturbed they were to begin with. On one side you got someone who believes whatever they do is correct and shall not be judged by anyone but God, or carry out an action under their own interpretation in the name of God. On the other side you got someone who believes they need nothing but their own self-justification to do whatever they please and have no fear or consideration of the consequences ahead of them.

If the fear or getting caught by God is what keeps someone from killing and stealing, I have to say that person is already a danger to society and should be kept in a mental institution.

Also, if you want probabilities, the statistics are already there. You just won't look at them.

Why did China not explode into chaos, considering they had no religion for quite a while? How come am I not in the street stealing people?

Because I somehow secretly believe in a judgment day but won't admit it to myself? No, but partly because in order to function in society, I know I'm supposed to obey rules.

Man-made rules.

Ultimately it comes down to how disturbed or ill the person was to begin with before any factoring conditions can be introduced. Religion or not, a sick *** will do something awful regardless. However, what worries me is that religion is a very widespread, generally accepted and mass influenza determining the outcome of not only people's behavior, but political policy outcome as well.

Which is something everyone would have to follow, whether you believe in it morally or not.

This is an extreme example, but one that stands:

If someone goes crazy, and decides it's within their interest to kill a homosexual man out of their own self-righteous reasoning. People would most likely dismiss them as being criminally insane and pay no mind to his reasoning.

However, if someone did the same thing but under a religious purpose and said they killed a gay in the name of God... Well, whether we like it or not, more people will probably listen, and even worse, some may take heed and gain influence to do the same.

That's not religion, it's philosophy. You don't need to believe in anything to come up with a sentence like that. A religion is "a set of beliefs", that's the definition.

If you removed all the beliefs (also known as b****hit) from religions, several of them would be quite attractive to me, actually. Although it wouldn't be religion anymore.

Please cite your sources. I am truly intrigued and wish to read further into this. Furthermore probability of what? lol

Edit: Also, the U.S.S.R. went without religion... and look what happened to them D:

I think the difference is religion's set of beliefs or dogma is static and resolute. Unchanging, unyielding and tend to be so complex they are often misinterpreted and twisted to something perverted and used by some to gain their own ends.

With philosophy or ideas, we can adjust the foundation to revolve as life changes among everyone, making it more suitable to the world as a whole, rather than those who strictly believe one thing, and one thing only.

Ya, I was too lazy to edit

But I see religion as a set of rules to live by, or that's what it means to me at least. So in a sense, it is my own 'religion' ~

I stray sometimes, but I try, and that gives me confidence to face whatever may happen when I die

This is an example of the Massive Brainpower Religious peepz have:

Nice one Kat~

/Applaud

A set of rules to live by. But rules made by whom? If you developed those rules for yourself, using critical thinking, then you deserve praise. If you're willing to adjust your self-imposed rules to better fit in a peaceful society, you deserve even more praise.

Your view of "religion" is not an issue in the world, as we speak. It has common sense in it and doesn't claim things that cannot be proven. You can keep calling it "religion", but it will confuse some people, since you're using the wrong word...

You may want to consider calling it "your philosophy" ... ^^;

Thanks for the rational comment/response.

The problem with women wearing even bathing suits in public without shirts on is that men are visual and would generally be aroused.

Also, about the rules placed by Moses in the Old Testiment, if you think about them logically they all make sense as to why we shouldn't do that. You can argue them whatever way you want, but every one of those acts brings about negative results in next to every case. The first three, and the one about the sabbath can be argued that they make no difference, but they have their place (keeping the sabbath day- or the day God rested after creating the universe- holy is about resting and believe it or not everyone seems to do this without knowing it. Taking a day off from work, not having school on Saturday or Sunday, are examples of how pretty much everyone keeps the sabbath holy.)

Pertaining to the OP, this family probably had its own problems before the husband changed the channel.

I would answer your question by saying that the religious person "should" be less violent..

But...

Historical evidence proves that the religious person, who believes in judgement day, will be the most violent person.

Atheists = Violent with words.

Theists = Violent with guns, bombs, and Airplanes!

My philosophy**

Stalin was an atheist... he killed millions of people.

Fact:

Religion has been the greatest obstacle for minorities, Women, and homosexuals to gain their freedom and rights.

Fact:

Religion has been the biggest(lol actually pretty much only until recent years) donor to the needy for the past several thousand years.

I will not argue with you. Stalin was Atheist.

But..

Some say Stalin was also a vegetarian.

Does that mean that all vegetarians are murderous people?

No.

Stalin's Atheism had nothing to do with what he did. He did not kill in the name of Atheism.

When the Al'Quida crashed planes into the World Trade Centers.. Who's name did they Shout?

"Praise Allah!"

This goes back to the Logical pathway between religion and atrocious acts that RELIGION creates.

"If I kill in the name of my god, I must be a good person!"

These statements have little to no relevance in the long run. Would be similar to saying: Hitler was a vegetarian, but committed genocide against countless Jews.