Patriotism = Parochialism
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)Posted by: uNz[i]
In the past, I've had reservations about posting in this section, but I no longer give a damn what people might think of me and my cranky opinions.
This is a topic that's been percolating in my brain for quite a long time, and I guess its time to pour a cup of conversation coffee...
In the past, I've considered myself to be a global citizen first, and an Australian second.
However, earlier today in the Lounge, Hobbes brought out the nationalist in me, (definition 1) which got me thinking.
I'm going to kick off with some definitions.
(Thanks to dictionary.com)
Patriotism (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=patriotism)
1. Love of and devotion to one's country.
2. n : love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it [syn: nationalism]
Okay, and the definition of nationalism is...
Nationalism (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nationalism)
1. Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation.
2. The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.
3. Aspirations for national independence in a country under foreign domination.
Parochialism (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parochialism)
1. Of, relating to, supported by, or located in a parish.
2. Of or relating to parochial schools.
3. Narrowly restricted in scope or outlook; provincial: parochial attitudes.
Provincialism (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=provincialism)
adj.
1. Of or relating to a province.
2. Of or characteristic of people from the provinces; not fashionable or sophisticated: “Well-educated professional women... made me feel uncomfortably provincial” (J.R. Salamanca).
3. Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.
And my point is?
I see all of these isms every time I read a paper or turn on the news.
they strike me as a thinly veiled xenophobia, or at the very least, apathy regarding anything that isn't locallized.
Not the kind of environment that could encourage a lasting global peace.
Is it possible for humanity to rise above all the fussin' an a-feudin'?
Is it too much to hope that all nations lay down thier flags and guns to work together, and all that tree huggin' hippy crap?
Does humanity attach too much importance to a piece of wind blown cloth and a patch of dirt?
Your responses and/or views please.
Posted by: sArA
Ultimately...we humans are too close to the animal to be ready to eradicate the need to territorialise our space.
Most people do not think globally, they think about themselves and the continuation of their own way of life.
There is no real chance of humanity becoming united in planetary harmony until we meet people from other worlds, then we can play the same territorial game that makes us feel secure. Us and Them.
Until then....don't see it myself.
Posted by: bigboab
']
Is it possible for humanity to rise above all the fussin' an a-feudin'?
Is it too much to hope that all nations lay down thier flags and guns to work together, and all that tree huggin' hippy crap?
Sadly no. :( As long as the attitude of 'What is mine is mine's and what is yours is mine's' is abound.
Posted by: Biggles
The kind of chauvinistic nationalism that is common to the modern era is relatively new historically and is probably no more than a passing phase politically.
However, one only has to the look at the way people are suspicious of the next village or the neighbouring county to see that tribes of humans are deeply territorial. It is unlikely that this trait is going to change anytime soon. There have in the past been those (kings, leaders and politicians) who have exploited this trait to considerable personal advantage - on the whole this has rarely been a good thing and it often leads others to fight fire with fire.
Posted by: uNz[i]
Sara - That "leave it to the aliens" thing is humankinds biggest cop out to date.
Anyway, it won't work for one of 3 reasons, 1.nerdy, 2.paranoid and 3. disbelieving
1. According to all the nerdy Sci Fi books and TV series I've seen, as long as we're fighting each other, the aliens won't deem us worthy of visiting. Therefore, catch 22.
2. Who's to say the Aliens aren't warlike too?
3. Aliens probably don't even exist.
Bottom line, looks like we'll have to do it under our own steam.
That's probably a good thing anyway. If you want something done right, do it yourself.
The "Us and Them" game brings about the exact opposite of security, which should be obvious to anyone with a brain in thier head. As does the "whats yours is mine too" game.
So why does such behaviour persist? Is it merely because one government wants to sell weapons to another government? This is the only reason I can see for continuing on as we have, and this scares me.
When it comes to having faith in people, I've found in most cases you can rely on the individual to do the right thing by thier fellow man.
So why is it when it comes to nations, you just know they'll do exactly the wrong thing 9 times out of 10?
Posted by: j2k4
Nothing happens overnight, nor even in a lifetime.
We will all probably be long gone before anything approaching true globalism comes to pass.
Perhaps it would be useful to point out any of the small signs that we are on the road to that end; apart from the most obvious one, that being the U.S. hasn't yet self-destructed...
Lest I allow my cynicism to get the best of me, I will point out that, in the very roundest of terms, the U.S. would prefer other nations to achieve "global" status aided and abetted by democratic nations, but with the impetus born of having "gotten there", by and large, of their own accord.
Even the largest, most powerful nations cannot merely confer such status by fiat-individual nations must "choose" the option, so to speak.
uNz[i]-
I am very much aware of your sense and perception of the parochial nature of statements made by the like of Hobbes (who wears his nationalist tendencies on his sleeve, the cad), but, if you and your computor were somehow magically transported to, say, the Sudan, you might feel the same about Australians.
It is one thing to believe others think themselves superior; it is quite another to accord them that belief absent their consent.
I believe firmly that many here think of me thus, and it pains me, believe it or not.
Posted by: TheDave
maybe it's cos i'm in england but i always thought patriotic people twats.
this isn't a dig at j2 but he does get caught up in it. when i see patriotic flag-wavers i just wanna punch em in the face, that includes twats waving the union
...uh-oh :unsure:
-------------------------edit--------------------------
so i got some biscuits and did some thinking.
i don't mind flag-waving. i don't mind national pride or national identity. what i hate is national elitism.
Posted by: hobbes
maybe it's cos i'm in england but i always thought patriotic people twats.
this isn't a dig at j2 but he does get caught up in it. when i see patriotic flag-wavers i just wanna punch em in the face, that includes twats waving the union
...uh-oh :unsure:
That is a pretty pathetic attitude Dave.
Why should pride in ones' country be a bad thing?
Being patriotic is not following and agreeing with everything your government does, being patriotic means believing in the core principles on which your country was founded- life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and how well these principles are fulfilled.
For me, America has provided an opportunity to succeed and I am my own rate limiting factor. I am not censored, monitered or oppressed. I feel free to do as I please and I am grateful for such an opportunity.
Being patriotic sometimes means speaking out against your government if they are not fulfilling their job to provide what the Constitution decreed. In fact, in our own Constituition, it states that if the government does not provide what it was intended to, it is recommended that the people revolt against it.
I think you probably are irritated at those who wave the flag and kiss the soil and never even think to question the actions of their government. I'll join you in punching these people.
EDIT:Well then, just forget the above then. :lol:
Posted by: TheDave
maybe they should idiot proof posts on here
"are you sure you want to post this?"
ok
"really?"
yes
"i mean it is kind of silly"
post it
"oh well, your reputation..."
ok
Posted by: hobbes
Uniz,
I think Sara was referring to an actual overt alien encounter. It is only then that we will act as a unified planet. Our animal nature will make us work together to save our skins from the alien invasion.
Kind of like Iraq. People who ordinarily would be fighting one another, are working together to rid a common foe, the US.
I think Sara summed it up quite nicely. We are all animals who place our personal security first.
We may talk abstractly about "doing the right thing" and "everyone should just get along", but if you are asked to give up the things you take for granted (food, computer, toilet, electricity, car, etc) strictly for the sake of thinking globally and redistributing the wealth to those poorer areas, then you will see the the selfish animal emerge. Then you will see revolution.
Posted by: bigboab
Patriotism is refusing the offer of cheap tea from your colonial masters and betters. Then dumping the said tea in Boston harbour. :rolleyes:
@Hobbes sorry you did not win an Oscar for your part in 'I Wabbit'. :(
Posted by: Busyman
It is easier to unite when you uniting for something. This is very evident in the black community of America. If whites here were still acting the way they did from 60's and earlier then we'd be more tightly knit. Now some of my young brothas and sistas don't have a clue.
Common ground = unison
Many things get in the way of uniting like money, culture, etc.
For the record I am an American first, global citizen second.
Many Americans see their country as being the best place to live. They think the freedoms that they have outweigh the amount of crime they have to deal with.
America wants other countries to be like it as well.
Posted by: j2k4
It is easier to unite when you uniting for something. This is very evident in the black community of America. If whites here were still acting the way they did from 60's and earlier then we'd be more tightly knit. Now some of my young brothas and sistas don't have a clue.
As an aside-
If you believe whites aren't acting as they did previously, why would your younger brethren need these clues you speak of? :huh:
Other than that, great post. :)
Posted by: Busyman
As an aside-
If you believe whites aren't acting as they did previously, why would your younger brethren need these clues you speak of? :huh:
Sorry j but that's a dumb question.
You may as well say...
"Why is it necessary to teach history?"
Posted by: sArA
Uniz,
I think Sara was referring to an actual overt alien encounter. It is only then that we will act as a unified planet. Our animal nature will make us work together to save our skins from the alien invasion.
Kind of like Iraq. People who ordinarily would be fighting one another, are working together to rid a common foe, the US.
I think Sara summed it up quite nicely. We are all animals who place our personal security first.
We may talk abstractly about "doing the right thing" and "everyone should just get along", but if you are asked to give up the things you take for granted (food, computer, toilet, electricity, car, etc) strictly for the sake of thinking globally and redistributing the wealth to those poorer areas, then you will see the the selfish animal emerge. Then you will see revolution.
Precisely :)
Posted by: bigboab
A Man's A Man For All That
Is there for honest poverty one who hangs his head and all that?
The coward slave we pass him by we dare be poor for all that!
For all that! And all that! Our toils obscured and all that,
Their rank is but the guinniea's stamp, the man's the gold for all that!
But though on homely fare we dine wear hodden-grey and all that
Give fools their silks and knaves their wine; a man's a man for all that.
For all that and all that. their tinsel ,show and all that.
The honest man though e're so poor is king of men for all that.
See yond snob they call,'the lord' who struts and stares and all that
Though hundreds worship at his word he's but a goof for all that
For all that and all that; his ribbon,star and all that
The man of independant mind he looks and laughs at all that.
A Prince can make a belted knight, a marquis ,duke and all that
But the honest man's above their might,good faith he won't befall that
For all that and all that their dignities and all that,
His pith of sense and pride of worth are higher rank than all that.
Then let us pray that come it may as come it will for all that
That sense and worth o'er all the earth shall be the goal for all that
For all that and all that; its coming yet for all that,
That man to man the whole world o'er shall brothers be for all that
Robert Burns(1759-96)
Posted by: uNz[i]
A Man's A Man For All That
Is there for honest poverty one who hangs his head and all that?
The coward slave we pass him by we dare be poor for all that!
For all that! And all that! Our toils obscured and all that,
Their rank is but the guinniea's stamp, the man's the gold for all that!
But though on homely fare we dine wear hodden-grey and all that
Give fools their silks and knaves their wine; a man's a man for all that.
For all that and all that. their tinsel ,show and all that.
The honest man though e're so poor is king of men for all that.
See yond snob they call,'the lord' who struts and stares and all that
Though hundreds worship at his word he's but a goof for all that
For all that and all that; his ribbon,star and all that
The man of independant mind he looks and laughs at all that.
A Prince can make a belted knight, a marquis ,duke and all that
But the honest man's above their might,good faith he won't befall that
For all that and all that their dignities and all that,
His pith of sense and pride of worth are higher rank than all that.
Then let us pray that come it may as come it will for all that
That sense and worth o'er all the earth shall be the goal for all that
For all that and all that; its coming yet for all that,
That man to man the whole world o'er shall brothers be for all that
Robert Burns(1759-96)
Thanks for that Boab. Wonderful stuff. :)
People are all fundamentally the same, no matter where in the world you may go.
We all breathe air, we all laugh and we all use the toilet.
So why do we still insist on creating divisions amongst ourselves based on points of philosophy, theology and mere geography?
Such conflicts are just a waste of life, potential and energy, and pointless to boot, imho.
Posted by: Busyman
']Thanks for that Boab. Wonderful stuff. :)
People are all fundamentally the same, no matter where in the world you may go.
We all breathe air, we all laugh and we all use the toilet.
So why do we still insist on creating divisions amongst ourselves based on points of philosophy, theology and mere geography?
Such conflicts are just a waste of life, potential and energy, and pointless to boot, imho.
Well if we had the same government and cultures then what you say would make sense.
That fact is everything isn't necessarily a division created for the purose of dividing. Some shit just boils down to clashes.
I might think British humor is not funny.
I might think Saddam Hussein treats his people like shit.
I might think your religion teaches evil things...
Such is life...
Posted by: Biggles
.
America wants other countries to be like it as well.
This latter part I have never quite understood. Why would it matter?
As a Scot I feel a great sense of belonging - but I wouldn't push the bagpipes and kilt on others. :)
The sentiments expressed by Burns, however, stands good. A man is a man despite the perceived differences or airs and graces he may adopt. He was writing in the 1790s when slavery and serfdom were still common and his views were considered "radical" by some. Strangely, given the era, he was immediately popular in his home country despite his womanising and ridicule of the Kirk (perhaps because of them :whistling ).
This does not mean we all have to be the same though.
Posted by: Rat Faced
- but I wouldn't push the bagpipes and kilt on others.
Especially if your the one buying them...
That wasnt a dig at Scots btw.. it was a dig at the price of them
:dry:
Posted by: bigboab
Cows around the world have pretty much the same attitude towards life and each other.
People do not.
Are we talking Bovine here JP? :rolleyes:
Posted by: Busyman
This latter part I have never quite understood. Why would it matter?
Very simple...there's less division.
Regardless of what some say, clashing cultures, religions, blahblahblah create division. Similarities = less clash.
Posted by: Arm
PAtriotism is teh ghey. :01:
Posted by: hobbes
People are not all the same, that is PC bunkum.
People from around the world have entirely different attitudes, whether one likes to accept it or not. One man's sexism is another man's normal way of life. One man's suicide bomber is another man's martyr. The list goes on and we all know it.
These similarities of which people speak - we all breath and eat and sleep and crap and procreate, so do cows.
Cows around the world have pretty much the same attitude towards life and each other.
People do not.
I think that people are people.
1. Security of personal space- this is my home home and no one can take it way.
2. Security of the individual- I am special/worthy and people value my opinion.
3. Security of sex- I am desired.
Sexism and other opinions are merely an opinion. One can secure oneself without an agreement on "sexism" an such. These are a societal appetizer, not something which an individidual needs to secure his place in society.
All people desire the same set of securities. How they actually achieve them and justify them are matters of regional or religious style.
Posted by: j2k4
I think that people are people.
1. Security of personal space- this is my home home and no one can take it way.
2. Security of the individual- I am special/worthy and people value my opinion.
3. Security of sex- I am desired.
Sexism and other opinions are merely an opinion. One can secure oneself without an agreement on "sexism" an such. These are a societal appetizer, not something which an individidual needs to secure his place in society.
All people desire the same set of securities. How they actually achieve them and justify them are matters of regional or religious style.
We love it when you talk dirty.
Posted by: hobbes
Sorry, I did not express myself very well.
In my view people's attitude towards other people is a matter of great import. It is also my view that this varies tremendously around the world. What I would see as sexism, or demeaning behaviour e.g. a woman walking 4 steps behind her husband and always wearing a veil, would be seen by others as perfectly normal. People's attitude, in the USA for example, is very independent of the state. However in other countries they are very obedient (for lack of a better word).
Sorry I'm doing a bad job of expressing again, I have been rather busy.
There are enormous cultural differences between people around the world and no matter what the causes are they do exist. People are not all the same, other than on a very basic, animalistic level.
We could of course all become the same, but then whose same should we go for. I quite like mine, which I believe is very similar to yours. However it is a fair bet that we are not members of a particularly large group, on a world population scale.
This is precisely why I view religion as devisive.
Relgion addresses the situation: "life is hard, life is cruel, but in the end, if I behave correctly, will things be "ok"?
So religions have sprung up, all over the planet, in order to appease this fear.
Since God does not sit visibly in the clouds above our realm and has no E-mail address, independent cultures have constructed rather arbitrary lore that describe who he is and what he desires of us.
Now that the world is more a global community, these regional interpretations cause conflict. The God one is brought up to fully believe in is contradicted by the God of another culture.
Can we abandon our God, can we compromise and decide on a global God? Absolutely not. Only our God is real, the rest are all just lost souls prying to an impotent God.
Religion is what separates us and causes hate, just the opposite of what it was intended to do.
People are animals, the ONLY difference being is that we know that we are going to die. It is this unique knowledge that makes us make up religions to ease our fear of death. Otherwise, we are just animals, desiring animal things.
People are people and are separated by religions that are based on a rather arbitrary belief in what God desires of us.
Posted by: Busyman
This is precisely why I view religion as devisive.
Relgion addresses the situation: "life is hard, life is cruel, but in the end, if I behave correctly, will things be "ok"?
So religions have sprung up, all over the planet, in order to appease this fear.
Since God does not sit visibly in the clouds above our realm and has no E-mail address, independent cultures have constructed rather arbitrary lore that describe who he is and what he desires of us.
Now that the world is more a global community, these regional interpretations cause conflict. The God one is brought up to fully believe in is contradicted by the God of another culture.
Can we abandon our God, can we compromise and decide on a global God? Absolutely not. Only our God is real, the rest are all just lost souls prying to an impotent God.
Religion is what separates us and causes hate, just the opposite of what it was intended to do.
People are animals, the ONLY difference being is that we know that we are going to die. It is this unique knowledge that makes us make up religions to ease our fear of death. Otherwise, we are just animals, desiring animal things.
People are people and are separated by religions that are based on a rather arbitrary belief in what God desires of us.
You make that sound like religion is the end all be all of divisiveness. It is not.
TOO MANY things divide people. Culture, religion, race, skin color, wealth and lack of it, status, location, countr.....
If everyone was the same religion there would still be division.
If white supremacists wiped out the "other" races they'd would come up with a reason to fight themselves.(see above i.e. TOO MANY...)
The difference between people and animals is that we can ask "why". It does not boil down to "we know we are going to die." Children are not in touch with their inevitable demise until they ask "why".
Posted by: hobbes
So all Atheists have the same beliefs, culture, social conscience. They are also devoid of hate.
That's an interesting position.
"Atheism" IS a religion. They have "faith" that God does not exist, they have no proof of this but they still believe it.
religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
But this is merely a specious deflection from my valid points before.
Religion divides people in our new global community.
As BM says, it is not the only thing, but it is the only thing that is not amenable to education. Divisions caused by racism or ethnicity are easily overcome when these people come to live and work together. "Oh, you have the same desires and aspirations as I do".
There are white supremists who will cling to their beliefs regardless any evidence put forth. These people are usually of the lowest socioeconomic group and it is this "supremist religion" which gives them the sense of self-worth. Yeah, I'm trash, but at least I'm white.
People are quite simple. They have the requirements of security as I described before. And when that security is not there, they just make stuff up about God or Whites being superior to Blacks, to delude their fragile psyches' and make things right.
Posted by: hobbes
Can one believe in a negative and then call it a religion. I don't think so, however I sit to be corrected..
If I tell you that God does not exist and cannot under any circumstance exist, then that is a religion. A set of beliefs based on faith.
I find pure Athiests as ridiculous as literal Fundamental Christians.
I think in doubting the existence of Zarquon, you are more the Agnostic. Why do you believe that Jesus is the son of God and not that Zarquon is the Almighty? You don't even know why? You think one sounds silly and the other is a fact.
On one hand, without any proof what-so-ever you can fully accept your Catholic religion, then take the humorous attitude, "Well from where I'm sitting I see no evidence of Zarquon and his troupe of raging Zebras He, he". If you were raised in a Zarquonian family, in a Zarquonian town, you would probably but posting the exact opposite. "He He, those silly Catholics."
Well, from where I, sitting I see no evidence that Jesus is the son of God or Zarquons' zebras.
Faith based beliefs are arbitrary in regard to what they want to accept as true and rigid and they don't play well with others (people who think differently).
My bottom line is that people really are just people.
Posted by: manker
If religion is merely a set of values that one holds true based on an acceptance of views that one finds palatable then this encompasses too much. For example I support a particular sports team mainly because my Dad did and I was named after a couple of the players. I drive a specific vehicle because people have told me that they're safe and reliable. I have no idea if this is correct as I've little idea, or interest, in automobiles - I just accept it as I trust the people that have informed me.
A mad female American scientist truly believes that the pyramids were built using kites, the people around her also believe that this is so even tho' there is no evidence of this. I assist people with their finances - they blindly follow my advice and accept my word with no question (mostly :dry: ) but I'm not their God.
This is not religion. Just as Atheism isn't religion.
I can agree that the definition of the word can be thought of as encompassing these things but, really, religion is something that requires more than just a belief and an adherence to a set of values in which they have faith. That definition is much too broad.
Conventional religion, which I believe is central to this topic, is entirely different to following following a doctrine religiously - this is not central to this topic and is probably highly irrelevant.
Religious operations either get recognised by the country in which they function, or they do not. A lot of thought and deliberation goes into the process so for someone to assert that definition of a religious ethos is such a basic proceedure is patently guilty of oversimplification.
In my opinion religion has to involve the belief in the supernatural, at the very least. This precludes Atheism.
Posted by: hobbes
If religion is merely a set of values that one holds true based on an acceptance of views that one finds palatable then this encompasses too much. For example I support a particular sports team mainly because my Dad did and I was named after a couple of the players. I drive a specific vehicle because people have told me that they're safe and reliable. I have no idea if this is correct as I've little idea, or interest, in automobiles - I just accept it as I trust the people that have informed me.
A mad female American scientist truly believes that the pyramids were built using kites, the people around her also believe that this is so even tho' there is no evidence of this. I assist people with their finances - they blindly follow my advice and accept my word with no question (mostly :dry: ) but I'm not their God.
Your interest in a sports team is based on a relationship to that team by virtue of a common name. That is not faith and support of a soccer team is not associated with a philosophy.
The car you drive is based on the recommendation of people you have confidence in. That is not faith, that is confidence. Faith would be placing the names of all available cars in a hat and randomly drawing one, knowing that God will guide your hand to chose the best one.
It is critical to understand that faith is fully vested belief without any form of external validation.
People that come to you for financial assistance follow your word as you have the training to best guide them. They don't question your judgement in the same way that patients don't tell a surgeon how to operate. That is what you have a diploma for. Now if you were to tell me you just sit on the street playing guitar for change and people just walk up to you and tell you to invest their money, that would be a different story.
This is not religion. Just as Atheism isn't religion.
I can agree that the definition of the word can be thought of as encompassing these things but, really, religion is something that requires more than just a belief and an adherence to a set of values in which they have faith. That definition is much too broad.
Religious operations either get recognised by the country in which they function, or they do not. A lot of thought and deliberation goes into the process so for someone to assert that definition of a religious ethos is such a basic proceedure is patently guilty of oversimplification.
In my opinion religion has to involve the belief in the supernatural, at the very least. This precludes Atheism.
The definition of "religion" provided before is not mine, but that of Merriam Webster. If you don't wish to consider Athiesm a religion, it does not matter a whit. I will gladly rephrase my wording, as I did in my prior post, to "faith based" sets of values or beliefs. I still think Athiesm does fit under "religion" because it addresses the supernatural, but if you don't think it is a religion, that is your choice and quite fine with me.
dfdfhga
Posted by: manker
Ah yeah, I remember the discusssion before on here regarding how faith is different to confidence. I don't necessarily subscribe to it tho'. For instance:
Christian folk may well believe in God because of the historical value of the bible - if the writers can accurately depict the pertinence of the Book of Dreams then they have confidence in the writers in accurately depicting Jesus' life. Thus Christianity isn't necessarily based on total blind faith.
This backs up my point that a religion doesn't fit the Mirriam Webster definition. It should also include a belief in the supernatural, at the very least.
Edit: The definition to which you refer does apply to following a doctrine religiously but cannot apply to conventional religion.
Posted by: hobbes
Ah yeah, I remember the discusssion before on here regarding how faith is different to confidence. I don't necessarily subscribe to it tho'. For instance:
Christian folk may well believe in God because of the historical value of the bible - if the writers can accurately depict the pertinence of the Book of Dreams then they have confidence in the writers in accurately depicting Jesus' life. Thus Christianity isn't necessarily based on total blind faith.
This backs up my point that a religion doesn't fit the Mirriam Webster definition. It should also include a belief in the supernatural, at the very least.
Edit: The definition to which you refer does apply to following a doctrine religiously but cannot apply to conventional religion.
Faith is defined as belief without proof, the "total" and "blind" is implicit in the definition. I personally think that Jesus preached a philosophy which he felt came from God. Based on the Bible, I have some confidence that Jesus actually walked the Earth. However, documentation that Jesus existed to me is completely separate from the belief that he was immaculately conceived and was preaching the actual words of God. That is the leap of faith.
The world, the universe, our bodies are amazingly complex and it is fully understandable to me that people think someone created this and we are not an act of random chance. Given that the Earth has thousands of religions, all with differing views makes me confident that no one religion is correct and the others wrong. Particularly when each religion has followers of equal faith. Religions are man-made constructs to appease our fear of death.
Whether one decides that athiesm is a religion or not is immaterial to the point I was making.
All conventional religions and all those that live their life guided a by "faith" live in a rigid world that is not amenable to compromise, and that is a bad thing. You may not wish to view examples I have given as a "religions" because you have your opinion as to what the definition should be. I personally don't care to bother making a distinction between "equivalents" as it is the immutablilty of thought which I find troublesome, not the label one afixes to something.
Posted by: hobbes
No, I am absolutely convinced that Zarquon does not exist, other than in the novels of DNA. So I am not a Zarquon Agnostic. As such, given your position then my absolute belief that he does not exist is a religion, in the same way. That's just pish.
I just find it so ironic that you can fully accept the Christian God and fully reject Zarquon and yet both are equally proven.
You are just acting as you were trained by your parents. I guarentee that you would be saying the same about your Christian had you grown up in a Zarquon state.
There is absolutely no objective criteria for your faith in your Christian God over Zarquon.
As I stated in the post above, if you don't wish to believe that Athiesm is a religion, that really has no bearing on the point I was making. It is like pecking at the crust, but ignoring the meat of the pie.
Athiests and Catholics suffer from the same rigidity of thought, thus they are equivalents to me. You can quibble labels if you wish.
Posted by: manker
Faith is defined as belief without proof, the "total" and "blind" is implicit in the definition. I personally think that Jesus preached a philosophy which he felt came from God. Based on the Bible, I have some confidence that Jesus actually walked the Earth. However, documentation that Jesus existed to me is completely separate from the belief that he was immaculately conceived and was preaching the actual words of God. That is the leap of faith. If faith is the belief without proof then I refer you to the people who ask me for advice, sure they know I have qualifications but they have no proof that I will be able to advise them properly on their problem. They go home with their minds put at rest because they are sure I'm going to deal with their affairs properly.
Their personal circumstances regarding their company at that particular time are unique and are not the same as any you'll find in a text book - they have faith in me and believe that I will. Yet I am not their God. This is the same with any service industry.
This is the same as Christians believing in the accuracy of the immaculate conception story because the same writers told them accurately of the Book of Dreams. They have seen some of the bible to be proven irrefutably, therefore there is a reason for confidence in the authors - if they saw and accurately recorded the exchanges between Joseph and the Pharaoh - why, the resurrection could also have been observed and recorded thusly.
The bible was accurate in that part, I have faith it will be accurate in this other part.
manker did work okay for me last year, I have faith he will do it okay again this year.
Where is the distinction?
The distinction is that I'm not supernatural and God is.
Hence religion must contain a belief in the supernatural.
The world, the universe, our bodies are amazingly complex and it is fully understandable to me that people think someone created this and we are not an act of random chance. Given that the Earth has thousands of religions, all with differing views makes me confident that no one religion is correct and the others wrong. Particularly when each religion has followers of equal faith. Religions are man-made constructs to appease our fear of death.I quite agree. I am pointing out that faith is interchangable with having confidence in someone or something.
Whether one decides that athiesm is a religion or not is immaterial to the point I was making.That is, though, what I took issue with.
All conventional religions and all those that live their life guided a by "faith" live in a rigid world that is not amenable to compromise, and that is a bad thing. You may not wish to view examples I have given as a "religions" because you have your opinion as to what the definition should be. I personally don't care to bother making a distinction between "equivalents" as it is the immutablilty of thought which I find troublesome, not the label one afixes to something.That's just it, conventional religion has a totally different meaning to the definition you quoted earlier. That is my point.
I duno why I did that split up and in purple, hrm.
Posted by: hobbes
At least you have admitted that your "point" was pish, at least in your own way.
Oh and thanks for saying that all of my belief system is based on what my parents taught me, rather than me having thought a bit about it myself and came to my own conclusions. Remarkably condescending, even for your good self.
What of people who were born into atheistic households, but later decide in adult life that they believe in God, or even join a religion. Were they taught by their parents too.
Your arguments move between the specious and the sublime. However they are invariably well written and it's to your credit.
My point was, i think valid. People who are faith driven are inflexible because they believe in things which are simply made up and cannot be negociated. When people of different faiths have conflict there can be no search for middle ground, things are black and white. I find this type of thinking troublesome.
You merely wanted to quibble about the definition of words, which is a rather trivial issue. I think Atheism is a religion, as it address the God issue. Whether you think it is or not is immaterial to my point.
As for people who convert religions or who are born again. I really don't like to let the exceptions to define the rule.
Posted by: hobbes
Manker,
Probably most religious scripture are based in some sort of reality, and will contain some historical content that is real. The breech is whether one thinks that this is the work of God or man.
How does one objectively favor the stories in the Bible over all other religious texts?
Take Noah's Ark. If you examine that story it would not work. All the fish in the sea would die from dilution of the salinity,what did the animals on the ship eat for 2 years(?) and how did Noah live to be 500 years old? My Islamic co-worker tells me that according to the Bible,Adam and Eve were about 96 feet tall. If you understand mechanical engineering, you know that the very shape of the human body precludes this. The tallest man on record was Robert Wadlow at 8'11" and he basically could not support his giant body, dying at the age of 22.
Now, you may say that Noah's Ark is an allegory, but then that means you are allowed to look at the Bible and pick and chose what you think God meant by the inclusion of this story in the Bible.
I don't want to argue Bible stories because that has no point.
I just wonder how come it gets the credit for being the word of God and all the others are somehow wrong.
Posted by: vidcc
on the BIO channel right now is a documentary called "face to face". It is about the conjoined Shappell sisters Lori and Reba. They are joined at the head.
The reason I am writing about this is because one of them said something that hits the nail on the head when asked if they get along.
"We have no choice, we either compromise or hit a stalemate and move onto something else. I don't think people around the world realise that the reason they don't get along is because they choose it to be that way. If you take away that choice then perhaps there would be a better world"
She wasn't making a political statement, just a comment on the reality of her life situation.
Religious, political beliefs or differing cultures are not reasons for the way we interact with each other........ but they certainly may be excuses
Posted by: Busyman
Without religion the world would be shittier than it already is.
Regardless of what atheists believe about the strength within, those that are religious have that extra layer of conscience that an atheist does not.
That's logic for something illogical.
The time I got snuck on the basketball court what stopped me from waiting outside of one the fella's house at night and blowing his brains out?
It's easy for one, especially an atheist, to say, "I wouldn't because it's wrong."
When in an emotional state like I was what the fuck do I care?
There are many things you do wrong on any given day. Belief in God, in most cases, means you REALLY believe he is watching what you do and the bottomline is IT KEEPS MORE THINGS IN CHECK THAN WOULD BE KEPT IN CHECK SANS THE BELIEF.
People rightly so will complain about 9/11, Israel and Pakistan fighting, etc because it involves religious differences.
REALLY imagine an atheistic world.
Posted by: hobbes
Without religion the world would be shittier than it already is.
Regardless of what atheists believe about the strength within, those that are religious have that extra layer of conscience that an atheist does not.
That's logic for something illogical.
The time I got snuck on the basketball court what stopped me from waiting outside of one the fella's house at night and blowing his brains out?
It's easy for one, especially an atheist, to say, "I wouldn't because it's wrong."
When in an emotional state like I was what the fuck do I care?
There are many things you do wrong on any given day. Belief in God, in most cases, means you REALLY believe he is watching what you do and the bottomline is IT KEEPS MORE THINGS IN CHECK THAN WOULD BE KEPT IN CHECK SANS THE BELIEF.
People rightly so will complain about 9/11, Israel and Pakistan fighting, etc because it involves religious differences.
REALLY imagine an atheistic world.
I'm actually insulted by the above comments. As one who does not believe in God or an afterlife, you will find that I act just as politely/morally as one doing so because they fear Gods' wrath. I don't need your "security blanket" and quite frankly, I'm terrified that you need one to keep control of yourself.
I understand that for a society to work we must have rules about interaction. If we all obey these rules I can be sure that my house will be mine when I get home. If society imposes laws and penalties, these can keep in line, as in Athiestic China.
Imagine a world in which we drop all the stories about exactly who God is and exactly what he wants and just go with a "God concept". It dictates that we are placed here by some God as a priviledge and we should treat the Earth and our fellow mankind kindly and fairly.
This would end all the bickering about manmade documents. As I stated before, the unitarian church already exists and allows people to focus on their union as humans one and allows the individual to define what God means to him.
Do I need devine intervention to come forth with a set of commandments to tell me right from wrong. No, not at all. If you are acting selfishly, you are not acting morally, simple as that. I mean when you read the 10 commandments, is any of them not obvious? Do you say, good thing we have a list or I would be lying and cheating and never thought it wrong?
But rather than just accept a less personal God concept, mankind seems to require a "cookbook" they can follow and when they die they will get exactly what the book states. Too many cookbooks can spoil the broth.
Posted by: hobbes
Nice tactic, if it doesn't fit your hypothesis then ignore it.
Oh and that post was a tad badly written, however I won't let the exception detract from the rule.
The exceptions can be explained, but if the concept is already apparent then why bother. I have yet to hear of an succesful agnostic in a healthy relationship who turned to Christ in no apparent crisis. The converters are those who have hit rock bottom in life, from drugs, alcohol, death in the family, and they are desperate for something, someone, anything, to take them by the hand and tell them it will be ok. Very susceptible lot are the emotionally crushed.
I'm glad you agree that my point was correct, or did you just choose not to comment on it?
And I believe you meant poorly written unless, of course, you are commenting on my penmanship.
Has it every occurred to you that people who post material you do not agree with are actually making honest, valid points and not using clever turns of phrases or tactics. You seem to think that labeling things in such a way makes it so. It does not.
Posted by: Busyman
I'm actually insulted by the above comments. As one who does not believe in God or an afterlife, you will find that I act just as politely/morally as one doing so because they fear Gods' wrath. I don't need your "security blanket" and quite frankly, I'm terrified that you need one to keep control of yourself.
I understand that for a society to work we must have rules about interaction. If we all obey these rules I can be sure that my house will be mine when I get home. If society imposes laws and penalties, these can keep in line, as in Athiestic China.
Imagine a world in which we drop all the stories about exactly who God is and exactly what he wants and just go with a "God concept". It dictates that we are placed here by some God as a priviledge and we should treat the Earth and our fellow mankind kindly and fairly.
This would end all the bickering about manmade documents. As I stated before, the unitarian church already exists and allows people to focus on their union as humans one and allows the individual to define what God means to him.
Do I need devine intervention to come forth with a set of commandments to tell me right from wrong. No, not at all. If you are acting selfishly, you are not acting morally, simple as that. I mean when you read the 10 commandments, is any of them not obvious? Do you say, good thing we have a list or I would be lying and cheating and never thought it wrong?
But rather than just accept a less personal God concept, mankind seems to require a "cookbook" they can follow and when they die they will get exactly what the book states. Too many cookbooks can spoil the broth.
Please get off the high horse bones 'cause I sure ain't on it.
If you feel insulted that's really just too bad.
There are atheists that live just fine morally and there are Christians that don't.
Big deal.
No one said that you needed intervention. Some other folks do or it just simply helps.
You don't do "wrong" things because you believe it's just wrong; you believe it's selfish.
A religious person may believe the same but...under different circumstances, you have to be a plain atheist idiot to NOT believe that a person may halt their own human urge to...let's say....kill someone if they believe that, past your law, they believe they are going to hell in the afterlife.
I haven't knocked your atheism in the least yet you are gettin' all offended and shit. Boo-hoo :cry:
:dry:
What the hell do you think would stop my off-the-high-horse selfish ass from cappin' you in a dark alley simply because I don't want to deal with you further?
It certainly wouldn't be my conscience and the law may catch up with me afterwards but alas then it's too late bubba.
You'd then be the nothing that you have faith in.
Posted by: hobbes
What the hell do you think would stop my off-the-high-horse selfish ass from cappin' you in a dark alley simply because I don't want to deal with you further?
It certainly wouldn't be my conscience and the law may catch up with me afterwards but alas then it's too late bubba.
You'd then be the nothing that you have faith in.
Humans are the only animals that curb their "selfish" instincts because they understand that at some point they may need the assistance of others.
I don't shoot you because I may turn around and be shot. A lawless world filled with the selfish gratification of our animal urges would have no security.
And security, in several different facets(self esteem, home, the future, financial), as already discussed in this thread is what humans desire most.
If people don't kill because they fear God's wrath, then they completely missed God's message about loving and forgiving in the first place. They are certainly going to feel his wrath come judgement day based on how they approach life. They might as well kill, it will make no difference in the end.
Posted by: bigboab
Being religious does does not necessary make you a good person. Just as being non-religious does not necessary make you a bad person. It is in your genes. You are either good or bad. Nothing will change that. Please dont talk about reformed characters, the majority given the opportunity return to their old ways.
The only people who are truly reformed are people who have developed their bad ways through through 'custom and usage' and did not know any other way.
Posted by: hobbes
Some religious people will not compromise. Neither will some Republicans, some black people, some women, you tar every religious person with the same brush. Frankly your generalisations are beneath you.
I can only apologize for offending you, it was not my intention. Sometimes when we discuss things as generalizations it can insult an individual who does not fit the trend.
My goal is not to offend or trick, just discuss things as my experience has taught me.
I cannot deny my belief that brainwashing is a very powerful tool used by many religions and abused by many religions (suicide bombers)to recruit and control people.
That is my experience growing up in St. Louis where many people are born and raised Catholic and never see a public school.
I strongly believe that "faith" is intimately related to "loyalty and home". I think we all have a strong connection to our place of birth and our country. Our hometown became part of the fabric of who we are, our country as well. I remember that we would say the "Pledge of Allegiance" every morning in pre-school and kindergarten and the person who's birthday it was got to hold the American flag.
These events and re-enforced beliefs permeate a very liquid mind and when this mind hardens at 6 or 7, these beliefs are trapped forever within and they are beliefs which are very difficult to alter.
I use 6 or 7 because it is said that if a child that learns a new language before this age he will pick it up without flaw, after this age, he will speak with an accent as some center in the mind has closed.
I think faith is one of those things that are set in the mind at a young age through continued and consistent re-enforcement and gets solidified therein.
For myself, although I have lived in Texas for 9 years and I live in a town where the basketball team has won 2 NBA titles, I don't view myself in any way as a Texan, I just live here. I like basketball, but I am completely indifferent to the Spurs. I live and die by my Missouri Tigers basketball and St. Louis Cardinal baseball because they have been with me since I can remember.
Interestingly, the St. Louis Cardinal football team left our city in 1987, they were my team. We later got a new team called the Rams, and although they are the St. Louis Rams, I really don't have any passion for the team, because they are not the Cardinals. I did not grow up supporting the Rams. I root for the Rams, but even when they lost the Superbowl to the Patriots, I was like "oh well". Mind you, the Cardinals NEVER made it to the SuperBowl in their history, so getting to the SuperBowl is a huge accomplishment.
I cannot explain to you why I have such passion for Cardinal baseball,
I just do. It is not objective or logical and there is no way you could talk me into being passionate for a different team. It is a feeling lodged into my solidified psyche, just as I feel that your "faith" is in you.
I personally don't even understand the term "faith" as it was not part of my upbringing. My parents never mentioned God, either in a good nor bad way. If I were to convert today, I would never actually have "faith", but more just hope that the religion I was practicing was right.
Posted by: Busyman
Humans are the only animals that curb their "selfish" instincts because they understand that at some point they may need the assistance of others.
I don't shoot you because I may turn around and be shot. A lawless world filled with the selfish gratification of our animal urges would have no security.
And security, in several different facets(self esteem, home, the future, financial), as already discussed in this thread is what humans desire most.
If people don't kill because they fear God's wrath, then they completely missed God's message about loving and forgiving in the first place. They are certainly going to feel his wrath come judgement day based on how they approach life. They might as well kill, it will make no difference in the end.
I get what you are saying about security but you fail to my point.
If I want to kill you I don't give a fuck about security unless it's to save my own ass.
I would hope you had stepped outside of your atheist thinking.
Belief that there is a higher power other than the law watching over what you do can and does halt many adverse things from happening.
It's logical.
It may stop a person from killing the rapist/murderer that killed their daughter.
It may help someone get through their parents get being killed in a car accident.
You can't be this much of an arrogant idiot. Say it ain't so.....
1. People are raised in a faith and brainwashed as children.
2. People who convert later in life are "those who have hit rock bottom in life, from drugs, alcohol, death in the family, and they are desperate for something, someone, anything, to take them by the hand and tell them it will be ok"
3. Religious people will not compromise with other religions.
I, for example, fit none of those.
You have to excuse hobbes. He's a college graduate and sometimes books take away some of the common sense. :dry:
Posted by: hobbes
I get what you are saying about security but you fail to my point.
If I want to kill you I don't give a fuck about security unless it's to save my own ass.
I would hope you had stepped outside of your atheist thinking.
Belief that there is a higher power other than the law watching over what you do can and does halt many adverse things from happening.
It's logical.
It may stop a person from killing the rapist/murderer that killed their daughter.
It may help someone get through their parents get being killed in a car accident.
You can't be this much of an arrogant idiot. Say it ain't so.....
I, for example, fit none of those.
You have to excuse hobbes. He's a college graduate and sometimes books take away some of the common sense. :dry:
Well people in Russia and China aren't randomly killing each other and they aren't worried about God. So I guess you're wrong. :dry: Religious people kill all the time to save their own ass. What do you think is going on in Iraq. Being Christian certainly didn't seem to stop Bush.
I must apologise for being a college graduate. You see in college, the content of the books is largely forgotten, it is the ability to sift through information and seperate the wheat from the chaff which is important. Actually, I have never claimed to be a college graduate, are you just making stuff up?
By the way, how many times do i have to post that I am agnostic before you actually understand that?
Posted by: Busyman
I cannot explain to you why I have such passion for Cardinal baseball,
I just do. It is not objective or logical and there is no way you could talk me into being passionate for a different team. It is a feeling lodged into my solidified psyche, just as I feel that your "faith" is in you.
I personally don't even understand the term "faith" as it was not part of my upbringing. My parents never mentioned God, either in a good nor bad way. If I were to convert today, I would never actually have "faith", but more just hope that the religion I was practicing was right.
It sounds to be like you are more indifferent to non-atheists than I would be to an atheist or any other religion. I've known folks like you for years and would love to see your thoughts on you deathbed....you know...to see how little faith you have.
People like what they like for different reasons. You could have liked Cardinal baseball because you saw a good play and kept watching...who knows. I couldn't stand basketball when I was grwoing up until I saw Jordan and realized that regardless of the sport, he was simply amazing. I then proceeded to learn how to dunk and do a reverse before I could make a jump shot.
I think soccer is the most liked sport in the world due to it's age and it being easy to pick up as far as actually playing. I personally am a homer. I like the team of the city from whence I came. In baseball I rooted from the Orioles since they were the closest (Balitomore). Since I'm not a big fan, I will root for the Nats, now that we have a team again. (btw I might be doing their sound for at least 20 games; that and the Redskins (8 games))
If you do not understand faith then you are at a loss. Faith can make one strong when otherwise weak. Even simply not understanding it may give others a one up on you. I have many things about the human psyche besides just getting it out of a book.
If people would buckle down and think about why we do the things we do (specifically), they would realize it ain't all genetics.
Posted by: Busyman
Well people in Russia and China aren't randomly killing each other and they aren't worried about God. So I guess you're wrong. :dry: Religious people kill all the time to save their own ass. What do you think is going on in Iraq. Being Christian certainly didn't seem to stop Bush.
I must apologise for being a college graduate. You see in college, the content of the books is largely forgotten, it is the ability to sift through information and seperate the wheat from the chaff which is important. Actually, I have never claimed to be a college graduate, are you just making stuff up?
By the way, how many times do i have to post that I am agnostic before you actually understand that?
Well you just said you were a college graduate. That's enough for me.
People kill for a reason. How the hell do you know that folks in China don't belive in God? :blink: This what I'm about. You don't actually know shit. Does this mean you know the guy walking down your street has faith? Your books fail you. I guess your wrong.
Who said anything about random killing? Laws do work...to an extent. Faith is the same. A devout Christian can still lose their mind after mental trauma. You put faith as an absolute failing by pointing out the same shit I've heard before....
"He was Christian yet murdered people." ...........nothing profound...heard it before. :dry:
Posted by: Busyman
If you want to look at the sources of suffering in the world today I would venture that big business, greed and the excessive consumption of the worlds resources would be better places to start.
...and hobbes may point out that some of those people are religious therefore faith means nothing?.......... :blink:
Posted by: vidcc
As a graduate myself I guess all that extra "lernin" has clouded my ability to see common sense so if you disagree with this please put it down to that.
There is no absolute. The fear of God may be the suppression of crime for some, however there are some that use God to justify their crimes. A while ago we had a thread asking why it's ok for someone to say God told them to do good but that person is considered mad if they use "God told me to kill them" in their trial defence.
An atheist may not fear retribution from God but it is amazing how many "believers" are in prison.
The BTK suspect is a prime example. A leader of his church and indeed it has been found that most (but not all) serial killers are devout believers. This is of course dismissed as "hijacking" religion by the same people that jump on the fact that these killers have a few porno mags.
My waffle here is really just an extension of my only other post on this thread.... The reason we don't live in total world harmony is not because of religion, political beliefs or differing cultures...those are just used as an excuse to justify the fact that we just don't want to get along
Posted by: Rat Faced
Im on Hobbes side on this.. ( I only read 1st 4 pages, so i dont know how its developed since then)
Atheism is as much a religion as any other.. ie Based on Faith and not evidence.
Its not the only "Negative" religion... Satanism wouldnt exist without Christianity for example, as it requires the Christian Devil (the bases of this is basically, "God forgives all, so keep the other fella happy" ) to exist.
If only 1 person believes in Zarguon, then its a religion. The fact that it was started by an author is immaterial, so was Scientology which is quite a large church now.
As there is no evidence, then its as valid a belief as any Religious faith, including my own.
To say that the Bible has "Historical Value" is laughable.
Its known that the Books it contains were picked and edited by a bunch of Romans that wished to maintain the status quo of Rome at that time, and that some of the things stated are untrue... such as Mary Magdolen (who, all evidence seems to suggest was an appostle, not a whore.. something the Vatican now admits is probably true).
The Bible is useful if read as JPaul looks at it, as parables/a guide to live your life by and not the "Literal Word of God" or a History Book... JPaul, my apologise if I have misinterpreted your feelings on how the Bible should be looked at, and i am not in any way trying to attack your personal faith in Catholicism which i know are sincere.
Paul
Posted by: hobbes
Busyman,
I live and observe, just like you. I have supplemented my personal experience with additional formal education so I get the synergy of the two. I do not report what I read in a book, books are fallable, hypothesis get overturned, opinions are just that.
I learn and observe and I base my conclusions on this.
As to the Cardinals, I can't remember a thing about how well they played when I was young. I do remember that my parents would give me a pack of baseball cards every morning while they slept in to keep me entertained. I could not read but I could recognize the Cardinal logo. I would take those cards and ask them if the player was Bob Gibson.
As to my deathbed, I am going to be terrified of ceasing to exist. I will honestly tell you that I have 100% assurance that I will not go to hell or heavan. This does not even cross my mind in the darkest hours. My thought is that if I am wrong about God, he will understand because he created me and understands why I came to believe as I did.
I fear dying and ceasing to exist. Forgotten by the world which moves onward without missing a beat.
Posted by: hobbes
George Bush claims to be a Christian, therefore all Christians are responsible for any actions he takes or policies he makes. I thought you knew that.
Where the fuck did this statement come from?
Posted by: hobbes
Well you just said you were a college graduate. That's enough for me.
People kill for a reason. How the hell do you know that folks in China don't belive in God? :blink: This what I'm about. You don't actually know shit. Does this mean you know the guy walking down your street has faith? Your books fail you. I guess your wrong.
Who said anything about random killing? Laws do work...to an extent. Faith is the same. A devout Christian can still their mind after mental trauma. You put faith as an absolute failing by pointing out the same shit I've heard before....
"He was Christian yet murdered people." ...........nothing profound...heard it before. :dry:
The #1 "religion" in China is Atheism.
"meh" to the rest.
Posted by: hobbes
I wrote it then pressed "submit reply"
Well, you probably shouldn't of, it was shite.
Posted by: Snee
Re: religion
Meh, as long as we are all allowed, from the start, to believe in what we wish to believe in, then I have no problem with religion or the lack of it.
I don't think everyone has that option today tho', I think that some communities, whether it be christian communities or islamic or something else entirely don't allow for people to form their own opinion. And that is in essence the problem I have with religion, I don't mind the ideals as guidelines, as long as they are good, but when the word of god's representatives becomes absolute, then we are in trouble.
I think, like hobbes appears to do, that atheism is a kind of religion, some people might not like the idea but I feel that any conviction with regards to something that can't be proven during our lifetime is a form of religion.
I don't see any part of the bible as containing any astonishing and irrefutable truth, sure it may on occasion seem as prophecy, but any text that's been around for as long as the bible has is bound to touch base with reality at some point, it's just a matter of calculating the odds.
Maybe religion has made the world better, in primitive societies it has been a means to, and a template for, civilization. It offers a reward for conforming with the rules of society and in some cases an (imagined?) punishment, and faith does go deeper than mere threats.
But I'm not sure it's that good for advanced societies, as it slows us down and sometimes hurts us, it may be a matter of not allowing abortions, or jihads getting started, or not allowing certain research because the holy scripture of your choice says no.
Who knows were we had been today without it, maybe we could have spare parts made when we had hurt our bodies beyond repair for instance, if it hadn't been for religion having so much power over society. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but on occasion I do feel that religion is like crime, if everyone acts on their own the impact on society isn't that bad, but if it becomes organized...
Believe what you want, but don't let it dictate everything you do, or everything society does.
I think I agree a little bit with everyone in this thread. :unsure:
Posted by: hobbes
I post shite a lot, why should that particular instance be any different.
I'm going to Biggles birthday party in the lounge. He's got a lava lamp you know.
Posted by: bigboab
People kill for a reason. How the hell do you know that folks in China don't belive in God? :blink: This what I'm about. You don't actually know shit. Does this mean you know the guy walking down your street has faith? Your books fail you. I guess your wrong.
The following demography may have given Hobbes a clue.
The following entry in demographic details:
CHINA
Area: 9,596,596 sq km.
Population: 1,273,111,000.
Capital: Beijiing.
Government: Single-party Communist.
Ethnic Groups: Han Chinese 92%, 55 other minority groups.
Languages: Mandarin Chinese ( Official).
Official Religion: atheism.
Currency: Renminbi yuan.
Posted by: Snee
But boab, atheism was forced on them, who knows what they really believe in?
Posted by: MCHeshPants420
The following demography may have given Hobbes a clue.
The following entry in demographic details:
CHINA
Area: 9,596,596 sq km.
Population: 1,273,111,000.
Capital: Beijiing.
Government: Single-party Communist.
Ethnic Groups: Han Chinese 92%, 55 other minority groups.
Languages: Mandarin Chinese ( Official).
Official Religion: atheism.
Currency: Renminbi yuan.
It's only "officially atheist".
Religions there include: Taoism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity.
There are 20 million Christians in China for instance.
btw Before the Communists took over the major religions co-existed peacefully in China quite at odds with Hobbes' theory.
Posted by: Snee
Whoever wrote that saw atheism as a religion.
Posted by: bigboab
But boab, atheism was forced on them, who knows what they really believe in?
It was probably Taoism followed by Buddism. Christianity sits about 2% of the populutaion at the moment. This will increase with advent of democracy.
Posted by: bigboab
Whoever wrote that saw atheism as a religion.
I have only looked at two sources to date:
http://www.vision4china.net/china/religion.htm
and
Philips World Atlas.
both give the official religion of China as atheism.
Posted by: hobbes
It's only "officially atheist".
Religions there include: Taoism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity.
There are 20 million Christians in China for instance.
btw Before the Communists took over the major religions co-existed peacefully in China quite at odds with Hobbes' theory.
It is actually not at odds with my theory at all. I said that anyone who subscribes to faith based thought is not able to be flexible when it comes to a matter that contradicts their teaching. They have accepted immutable teaching which has a potential for conflict and serves to separate people.
Posted by: MCHeshPants420
It is actually not at odds with my theory at all. I said that anyone who subscribes to faith based thought is not able to be flexible when it comes to a matter that contradicts their teaching. They have accepted immutable teaching which has a potential for conflict and serves to separate people.
So what about the Buddhists, Confucianists and Daoists in China then? They had no problems embracing each other's different religious teachings.
Posted by: Snee
That's because they are a bunch of :hug:
Posted by: hobbes
So what about the Buddhists, Confucianists and Daoists in China then? They had no problems embracing each other's different religious teachings.
Good for them, that is a healthy way to express a belief in a higher power as I discussed before in describing the unitarian church. People are bound under a belief in a higher power and people of different actual religions pray together.
I think this would be ideal. Sort of assemble the wisdom of all the religions without getting hung up on the particulars.
1 planet- 1 religion.
Of course, I still wouldn't believe, but then again, that is just me.
Posted by: Illuminati
So what about the Buddhists, Confucianists and Daoists in China then? They had no problems embracing each other's different religious teachings.
There is a critical difference between those religions and others.
Each of those three are based on following the teachings not of an deity but of philosophers in the past - Confucianists based on Confucius's teachings, Daoism on those of a small group of sages (such as Lao-tzu), and Buddhism based on Siddhartha Gautama's. Likewise, their teachings are based towards the development and spiritual enlightenment of one's self.
Most other religions are based towards one or several supernatural entities who deserves respect and worship. The teachings are arguably more socially friendly - Be good to others as well as to yourself - But in a lot of these cases, the followers of these religions do these because they are told to by the almighty, not because it is their nature to.
However, like Hobbes says, I would love to see the united religion idea carried out, or at least the chance for everyone to see the same way with each their own differences (after all, we all think different from each other ;))
Posted by: Busyman
But boab, atheism was forced on them, who knows what they really believe in?
It's only "officially atheist".
Religions there include: Taoism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity.
There are 20 million Christians in China for instance.
btw Before the Communists took over the major religions co-existed peacefully in China quite at odds with Hobbes' theory.
Uh oh the above posts contain common sense and book knowledge. :ohmy:
Someone is using the noggin. ;)
Posted by: Busyman
Im on Hobbes side on this.. ( I only read 1st 4 pages, so i dont know how its developed since then)
Atheism is as much a religion as any other.. ie Based on Faith and not evidence.
Whether it's a religion was never really an issue for me. Call it a religion..great...uh sure...I'm on his side too. :unsure:
Posted by: Busyman
George Bush claims to be a Christian, therefore all Christians are responsible for any actions he takes or policies he makes. I thought you knew that.
We are on the same page.....
Posted by: hobbes
We are on the same page.....
Please explain how this post makes any sense? You are saying that George Bush is not a born again Christian and he is lying too us to further his political career.
Crack head to born again Bible thumper. Sounds convincing to me.
http://www.moviemalls.com/images/indexhomealonepic1.jpg
Do you think he was selling us a line? :devil:
Bush considering his political future decides on campaign slogans:
America, I won't sell you a line, but I might buy one. ;)
or
I'm born again and I love God. Family values and all that.
I think somebody may have advised him wisely.
Posted by: Busyman
Please explain how this post makes any sense? You are saying that George Bush is not a born again Christian and he is lying too us to further his political career.
Crack head to born again Bible thumper. Sounds convincing to me.
http://www.moviemalls.com/images/indexhomealonepic1.jpg
Do you think he was selling us a line? :devil:
Bush considering his political future decides on campaign slogans:
America, I won't sell you a line, but I might buy one. ;)
or
I'm born again and I love God. Family values and all that.
I think somebody may have advised him wisely.
Jeez man...read my and JP's posts in context then come back to me.
Read what it says..You are all explaining this and that which doesn't warrant explanation.
Buy a vowel or something. :1eye:
Posted by: bigboab
Jeez man...read my and JP's posts in context then come back to me.
Read what it says..You are all explaining this and that which doesn't warrant explanation.
Buy a vowel or something. :1eye:
Go to your bed. this is far too late at night for you to be up. I wont tell you again. :ph34r:
Good Night. :)
Posted by: Busyman
Go to your bed. this is far too late at night for you to be up. I wont tell you again. :ph34r:
Good Night. :)
Damn man what's funny is I did shortly after that post. :lol:
I was just on the computer without doing something else at the time (except trying to watch Bill Maher)...very unusual.
Posted by: hobbes
Jeez man...read my and JP's posts in context then come back to me.
Read what it says..You are all explaining this and that which doesn't warrant explanation.
Buy a vowel or something. :1eye:
Context is simple.
You said that answering to a higher power prevents people from acting on their selfish desires.
Bush sent troops to kill people despite being a Christian. This means he is killing people in spite of God's order not to. His belief in God stopped nothing.
Jp then stated that this means that somehow I was blaming all Christians for Bushs' action.
That conclusion is illogical. I mean there is absolutely nothing in my posts that would infer that, nothing.
How can you agree with such an illogical statement?
Posted by: hobbes
Oh and you didn't realise I was being facetious. Arse off, arsey.
At the time, I felt it was giving the impression to others reading the thread that I was somehow smearing all Christians because of the actions of Bush.
My point was that people seem to do what they want, despite mouthing a devotion to a God that strictly forbids killing.
If you were simply interjecting a comment that Christians were getting shit because of the actions of Bush and that is what BM is agreeing with, I am fine with that.
I simply wanted to make it clear that I was not casting such aspersions.
The thread was running a bit hot at the time.
Posted by: Rat Faced
Bush sent troops to kill people despite being a Christian. This means he is killing people in spite of God's order not to. His belief in God stopped nothing.
Strictly speaking, the commandment is:
Thou shalt not kill..
Says bog all about getting someone else to do it for you...
:whistling
Posted by: hobbes
Strictly speaking, the commandment is:
Thou shalt not kill..
Says bog all about getting someone else to do it for you...
:whistling
So he has God on a technicality. He pwns! :01:
Posted by: hobbes
Hobbes,
There is no need for me to add another bizarre view to the collection you have already expressed in this thread.
What has been bizarre, I am at a loss.
Posted by: hobbes
It doesn't seem bizarre to you, or presumably you wouldn't have posted it.
Stating that something is "bizarre" does not make it such. An example with supporting evidence is only appropriate.
Posted by: hobbes
@BM,
I actually think you may be correct that as a general rule that a God figure does influence those in desperate situations. They can put their faith in God and tough it out rather than act out.
I think for most people, they would still behave, as a society of chaos goes against our innate desire for security, but those desperate people would no longer have any comfort for their pain.
I would like to think that people act within a self-imposed conscience, as I do, and not because of fear of punishment, but perhaps that is a luxury I have because I am fortunate to have a secure home and job. Perhaps if I were starving, I wouldn't be such a stickler about stealing.
Like Jpol reacted against my generalization (which I still believe)about people coming to know and adhering to a religion based on community and brainwashing, I reacted to you pointing out that people "behaved" because they are aware of a higher authority.
I tend to agree with your rule generally, but for me personally, the rule doesn't work, as for Jpol he does not feel he is brainwashed.
So just like Jpol, I don't like people telling me "how I think" or "how I can to believe what I do." Mea culpa, I am just a man.
There are probably 100 million Atheists (I halved the number given) in China behaving themselves but perhaps there are other variables involved. After my emotional response to your statement, I realized that I have said the same thing myself. Keeps the sheep calm.
So to sum up:
I think religion does keep the desperate from acting desperately, but I think that conflicts between different religions are a shame because they trash all the wisdom and philosophy to argue over details. It really strikes me as profoundly ironic, that those things which were originally created to bring order to chaos and teach people to get along, can and are a source of separation among people.
As a person who is not going to ascribe to ANY religion, I look at conflict based on religion, whether it be global or just kids beating up another because he is a "damn Jew", as pitiful and pointless. I wish we could have a unified religion in which we focused more on how to get along as a planet, and not on the details in some book.
Posted by: bigboab
You appear to have mellowed a bit today Hobbes. Have you perchance begat last night? :cool:
Posted by: hobbes
You appear to have mellowed a bit today Hobbes. Have you perchance begat last night? :cool:
A gentleman does not discuss such things. http://ghettobaby.net/Emoticons/081403emotes/hump.gif
Posted by: Rat Faced
If the community and way you are brought up doesnt influence your religion...
Can someone explain to me how Catholics beget Catholics, CofE Beget CofE, Jew beget Jews etc etc etc in 99.99% of cases..
that leaves .1% that actually "Find" a religion that they werent brought up to believe in (ie Brainwashed)..
That doesnt mean they are wrong... just that it is what they were brought up to believe in...
The Earth must be flat, i was brought up that way... :whistling
Posted by: hobbes
If the community and way you are brought up doesnt influence your religion...
Can someone explain to me how Catholics beget Catholics, CofE Beget CofE, Jew beget Jews etc etc etc in 99.99% of cases..
that leaves .1% that actually "Find" a religion that they werent brought up to believe in (ie Brainwashed)..
That doesnt mean they are wrong... just that it is what they were brought up to believe in...
The Earth must be flat, i was brought up that way... :whistling
The Earth may be flat but your words have sharp edges ;)
Posted by: vidcc
I agree with Busy that having God in ones life probably does influence people. I do however wish that it would be acknowledged more by those with faith that having God sometimes influences some to do do wrong. He has stated clearly that not all people of faith are "angels", but not admitted that some people do bad thing specifically because of their faith (or at least not clearly as far as I can tell)
I'm sure everyone could point to many atrocities committed in the name of god both on individual and institutional levels, let's not pretend that "religion" means good 100% of the time.
I am interested in the idea of what the world would be like without "god". It has been suggested that it would be a violent place with murders being considered acceptable because we wouldn't know the meaning of right and wrong.
I find this an interesting viewpoint seeing as man has worshipped for such a long time and yet there is no peace in the world.
I am with Hobbes on the religion thing.
Belief in God is not the problem, however following differing religions often is.
Posted by: hobbes
Vidcc,
I believe that God was created by man to bring order to chaos.
I don't think the average man, that understands his own mortality, can live in our cruel world without a God to make things right.
I too, would love to think that my death was a transition to paradise, but my mind cannot buy the fairy tales which are clearly man-made, that offer such hope.
I wish I could, really, I do. I cannot imagine the beauty of a lack of fear of death or even an antipation of death, so that I could enter an eternity in heaven.
People often don't appreciate that there is no happiness in being a "non-believer" and that we desperately want some salvation, but we cannot buy in to silly man-made stories.
If there were some drug that would convert me to a religion and faith, I would take in a heartbeat.
Posted by: vidcc
People often don't appreciate that there is no happiness in being a "non-believer" and that we desperately want some salvation, but we cannot buy in to silly man-made stories.
I believe when we die that is it. But i don't fear this. Why you ask? it is because i am not fearing the "unknown", which is what the fear is based on. I accept the nothing.
This doesn't mean that i want to die or that i am ready to die, I want as much time as i can get. It just means that i am "at peace" with the inevitable.
Posted by: bigboab
Even 'adopting' a religion does not grant you the hereafter you desire. Your fate is predestined. Irrespective of your conduct in this life you will go where you were predestined for. :)
I read that in a religious 'tract' somewhere and for the love of me I cant remember where. I think it was the Bible, but I am not sure.
Posted by: hobbes
I believe when we die that is it. But i don't fear this. Why you ask? it is because i am not fearing the "unknown", which is what the fear is based on. I accept the nothing.
This doesn't mean that i want to die or that i am ready to die, I want as much time as i can get. It just means that i am "at peace" with the inevitable.
Well Vidcc, I am not so brave. I am absolutely terrified of death. Not because I fear punishment, I just have no desire to cease to be and quickly be forgotten.
Posted by: bigboab
Who made the post before this one? :lol: :lol:
Posted by: hobbes
Who made the post before this one? :lol: :lol:
Me, Hobbes, you don't remember do you.
Hobbes
Hobbes
Hobbes
Don't you forget it!
Posted by: bigboab
Me, Hobbes, you don't remember do you.
Hobbes
Hobbes
Hobbes
Don't you forget it!
I hope you are not one of the nurses in the home for the demented I end up in.
:lol: :lol:
Posted by: hobbes
I hope you are not one of the nurses in the home for the demented I end up in.
:lol: :lol:
I have your bath ready. I hope you like ice cold water.
http://www.uwstout.edu/solutions/bgclinic/images/nurse-ratchet1.jpg
Posted by: Rat Faced
He prefers Sponge Baths...
Posted by: hobbes
He prefers Sponge Baths...
Sponge Bath is gay, Boab may get more of a cleansing than he expected.
http://www.lausd.k12.ca.us/Kennedy_HS/students/spring_2003/sponge_bob.jpg
Posted by: vidcc
Sponge Bath is gay, Boab may get more of a cleansing than he expected.
http://www.lausd.k12.ca.us/Kennedy_HS/students/spring_2003/sponge_bob.jpg
sponge boab :unsure:
Posted by: Busyman
To those that say "well they profess this religion yet still do bad things," ...no shit...it goes without saying.
Also there are those that blow up buildings in the name of religion...again no shit.
If man created God to stop chaos, then it must have been pretty bad. Dontcha think? :huh:
Many of you say it's bad now. I think it would be worse.
It's almost like when you get comfortable in job that always wish you had (making lots of money), yet after awhile you start complaining about it.
Answering to yourself isn't ebough in my book. There are too many differing personalities to say, "hey everyone stop being selfish because it's just not good, mmmk?"
I've seen too many folks change their life for the better, like the fella who stopped cheating on his wife.
He didn't catch a disease or anything; he got into religion.
I for one was not brainwashed. I did not grow up in a religious household at all.
One thing is for certain...if one is savvy enough, it's easier to take what you want at any given time than to ask for or earn it.
As I said before, kill the fella who get's on your nerves.
Take that $20 bill that the guy dropped at the store instead of letting him know he dropped it.
Fuck that bitch and then tell her to get the fuck out and never call her again.
When you are out of town, have a one stand with a woman even though you know your herpes is acting up. :sick:
That bum who really is hungry, wants a sandwich but fuck him 'cause he should get job. You hope he freezes.
@hobbes- none of these involves "desperate situations". They do involve selfishness but selfishness works for many.
Man is primal
I try not to do bad things because even before my belief in religion I just thought they were wrong and evil. When I got older I was enlightened to a degree about the mind works for many. I see the excuses that people have for the things they do, including myself.
People ARE NOT ROBOTS. Just because they follow the Bible for instance, it is not program code. A man professing religion doesn't necessarily believe it either.......
Posted by: bigboab
People ARE NOT ROBOTS. Just because they follow the Bible for instance, it is not program code. A man professing religion doesn't necessarily believe it either.......
Why then do most religious leaders in America say that the 'Moonies' are brainwashed. 'Mr Moon' maintains that he is the new 'Son of God'. Why should some people not believe him?
Posted by: hobbes
To those that say "well they profess this religion yet still do bad things," ...no shit...it goes without saying.
As I said before, kill the fella who get's on your nerves.
Take that $20 bill that the guy dropped at the store instead of letting him know he dropped it.
Fuck that bitch and then tell her to get the fuck out and never call her again.
When you are out of town, have a one stand with a woman even though you know your herpes is acting up. :sick:
That bum who really is hungry, wants a sandwich but fuck him 'cause he should get job. You hope he freezes.
@hobbes- none of these involves "desperate situations". They do involve selfishness but selfishness works for many.
Man is primal
As I said, only an asshole would do such things, I never would.
You have described a situation of complete chaos. Chaos is why man created God.
A desperate man may do desperate things, but a man who hurts others on a whim is not a respectable creature. A religion is meaningless to such an entity as he only cares about now and himself.
People who truly believe in religion are robots as the teachings are immutable.
Answering to oneself is the highest authority as God is a myth.
Man is primal, but he also understands that he may be the victim, and that he why he creates rules to promote safety for all. He seeks security.
Posted by: vidcc
God is a myth.
So that feminist with the speech impediment wasn't trying to tell me god is a woman. :unsure:
Posted by: Busyman
As I said, only an asshole would do such things, I never would.
You have described a situation of complete chaos. Chaos is why man created God.
A desperate man may do desperate things, but a man who hurts others on a whim is not a respectable creature. A religion is meaningless to such an entity as he only cares about now and himself.
People who truly believe in religion are robots as the teachings are immutable.
Answering to oneself is the highest authority as God is a myth.
Man is primal, but he also understands that he may be the victim, and that he why he creates rules to promote safety for all. He seeks security.
You say you wouldn't do such things yet I don't really know you.
I have simply maintained that there would be more of the afore mentioned chaos if there wasn't a belief in God.
Whether you believe in God is irrelevent to what may play a part in another's conscience.
It's pretty darn simple to me.
Posted by: sparsely
Does humanity attach too much importance to a piece of wind blown cloth and a patch of dirt?
those are often the only things that seperate us from the grotesque nakedness of Wal-Mart zombie buttertrolls.
Posted by: vidcc
You say you
I have simply maintained that there would be more of the afore mentioned chaos if there wasn't a belief in God.
This is basically saying that an atheist is more likely to commit crime....and that is quite frankly bollocks.
Posted by: bigboab
So that feminist with the speech impediment wasn't trying to tell me god is a woman. :unsure:
Are you trying to prove the theory that only people with impediments seek a higher authority in their life? :rolleyes:
Posted by: bigboab
I've seen too many folks change their life for the better, like the fella who stopped cheating on his wife.
He didn't catch a disease or anything; he got into religion.
When you quote instances of things like this you are going to get people who will quote instances to the contrary. Believe me I have seen plenty of them in my lifetime.
Posted by: Busyman
This is basically saying that an atheist is more likely to commit crime....and that is quite frankly bollocks.
WTF!!?? :wacko: :frusty: :helpsmile:
Very simple...
everyone - conscience
a real believer - an extra layer of conscience
I'm not talking about a perosn who just says they are believers. I'm talking about a person really believes. A person that really believes that their action have consequences past man-made law. I'm saying any of the hearing voices stuff.
Posted by: Barbarossa
a real believer - an extra layer of conscience
Well, it's more a case of fear I think...
Fear of eternal damnation and hellfire :devil:
Posted by: bigboab
a real believer - an extra layer of conscience
Can you not, in some cases, ease your conscience with a few Hail Mary's and 'dont do it again' platitudes.
Posted by: Busyman
Sorry folks but deterrence is fear.
The law isn't just punishment. It's "don't this shit 'cause this shit will happen".
An individual may not care about man's law nor God's if the right situation arises. Passion for something is a motherfucker even if ill advised.
Nothing may weigh on his conscience even if he has faith based belief.
I'm surprised that many just don't "get it" even if they don't believe.
Posted by: vidcc
It is bollocks.... and to use Busy's "life logic observation" I know many atheists/agnostics that are FAR more law abiding (including "moral" laws) than many of the "faith people".
It has nothing to do with "getting it"..... we get it...... but it's bollocks.
also I will add that not doing something because of fear of retribution is not being moral, not doing something because it is wrong is moral
Posted by: Busyman
It is bollocks.... and to use Busy's "life logic observation" I know many atheists/agnostics that are FAR more law abiding (including "moral" laws) than many of the "faith people".
It has nothing to do with "getting it"..... we get it...... but it's bollocks.
also I will add that not doing something because of fear of retribution is not being moral, not doing something because it is wrong is moral
Well there you have it.
From what you say...if we eliminate laws then crime will be unchanged.
You are so busy defending atheists/agnostics that you are making me chuckle. You sit there comparing some atheists to "faith people". People range from apples to oranges but your comparison is flawed since it not apples to apples and can never be. Where is this "we get it" shit? Speak for yourself. I didn't know atheists were of a hive mind. You could almost be Republican then. :lol: :lol:
Everyone's mental state, state of wealth, etc is different.
If a person is thinking of what the Bible says about getting revenge on someone when they were thinking about getting revenge and doesn't then that was a deterrent. Period.
So no you don't "get it".
Many things are deterrents besides religion but religion is still there as one.
You are remind me of the parent who fights to have prayer eliminated from schools. :dry:
Forget the "life logic observation" for a moment.
If someone put a camera on you and you knew they were watching and thought you be tortured for your non-law biding actions then you'd be less likely to commit them.
Now if you knew someone was watching and believed those things and still didn't care then you'd still break the law.
You still aren't a robot. The choice is yours. ;)
Posted by: vidcc
Another busy bollocks post
Posted by: Busyman
Another busy bollocks post
Hey I thought yours was shit too. I just kept my decorum while you did not....and I also made more sense than you did. ;)
Posted by: vidcc
you made no sense whatsoever...
the busy STFU is in order
Posted by: Busyman
you made no sense whatsoever...
the busy STFU is in order
What makes no sense? :unsure: Oh and go fuck yourself bitch.
Posted by: Barbarossa
From what you say...if we eliminate laws then crime will be unchanged.
Surely if you eliminate laws then the crime rate would immediately reduce to zero... :blink:
Posted by: vidcc
Forget the "life logic observation" for a moment.
If someone put a camera on you and you knew they were watching and thought you be tortured for your non-law biding actions then you'd be less likely to commit them.
Now if you knew someone was watching and believed those things and still didn't care then you'd still break the law.
well lets look at this theory directly here (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/14/atlanta.hostage/index.html)
this man believes in god and he knew the camera was on him when he did the initial deed.
every day believers commit crime and god is no deterrent....why? ... because they believe god will forgive them. So I say having religion is just as likely to make things bad.....just look at where this religious world is today.
Atheism is about not believing in god. It is not about thinking crime is "ok" because it will go unpunished.
Posted by: Busyman
Surely if you eliminate laws then the crime rate would immediately reduce to zero... :blink:
Good point.
Ok let's change crime to simply bad shit.
Posted by: Busyman
well lets look at this theory directly here (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/14/atlanta.hostage/index.html)
this man believes in god and he knew the camera was on him when he did the initial deed.
every day believers commit crime and god is no deterrent....why? ... because they believe god will forgive them. So I say having religion is just as likely to make things bad.....just look at where this religious world is today.
Atheism is about not believing in god. It is not about thinking crime is "ok" because it will go unpunished.
Uh dude...you ever thought that he was just a nutcase?
If he wasn't religious, it could have been anything else.
this man believes in god and he knew the camera was on him when he did the initial deed.
No shit.............
Now if you knew someone was watching and believed those things and still didn't care then you'd still break the law.
:dry:
So predictable. I'm surprised you didn't bring up the guy who killed seven people in a church.
Posted by: vidcc
if you wish to say that having no god will make the world worse then you have to accept that there is a valid opposite.
If you wish to say that having god in the world makes things better then you can't dismiss those that do bad things when they have faith as just being nutters.
You can't have your cake and eat it.
I put that example up for a reason and I even pointed out the reason I did.
every day believers commit crime and god is no deterrent....why? ... because they believe god will forgive them. So I say having religion is just as likely to make things bad.....just look at where this religious world is today.
This man had religion in his life, does he think he will burn in hell? no...because he messed up and looks now to god for forgiveness and knowing that he is sorry for what he did he knows he will be forgiven.
Pity he didn't look to god before he did it, but then the end result for him is the same as far as "the afterlife" is concerned.
So don't tell me that the world would be worse without god and expect me to ignore REAL cases in REAL life that go against your "theory"
Posted by: Busyman
if you wish to say that having no god will make the world worse then you have to accept that there is a valid opposite.
If you wish to say that having god in the world makes things better then you can't dismiss those that do bad things when they have faith as just being nutters.
You can't have your cake and eat it.
I put that example up for a reason and I even pointed out the reason I did.
This man had religion in his life, does he think he will burn in hell? no...because he messed up and looks now to god for forgiveness and knowing that he is sorry for what he did he knows he will be forgiven.
Pity he didn't look to god before he did it, but then the end result for him is the same as far as "the afterlife" is concerned.
So don't tell me that the world would be worse without god and expect me to ignore REAL cases in REAL life that go against your "theory"
People hope they will be forgiven. If everyone believed what you say then they would believe they absolutely wouldn't go to hell ever.
Very funny that you bring up a nutjob to prove your point which actually detracts from it. :lol: :lol:
I don't believe your "opposite" because man is too primal.
It takes less effort to take than to give. Just because you may think that being kind to another will get what you want doesn't mean the masses will.
There are many things that an atheist may not find immoral that most religions do.
Prostitution, drug use, premarital sex, drunkeness, womanizing, etc.
As long as it's not hurting anybody..right?
btw no one dismisses the bad things that people do while professing God.
People fuck up. I say there will be more fuck ups otherwise.
People lose sight of God just like they do with man's law.
I can't tell how many times I've heard a quote like "an eye for an eye" when justifying revenge but they never read on to the "turn the other cheek" part.
Posted by: vidcc
Very funny that you bring up a nutjob to prove your point which actually detracts from it. :lol: :lol:
btw no one dismisses the bad things that people do while professing God.
:rolleyes:
There are many things that an atheist may not find immoral that most religions do.
Prostitution, drug use, premarital sex, drunkeness, womanizing, etc.
As long as it's not hurting anybody..right?
Just how is that making the world worse?.....
I would never visit a prostitute, I bet many of faith have though.
I have never used "drugs"...I bet a fair few people of faith have.....
premarital sex? WTF????????? GTFO STFU
Drunkeness...I am teetotal but have nothing against booze
Womanising..... I refer to the famous "I have sinned" preacher...remember those tears?
I am a non believer yet I don't approve of your examples, with the exception of sex before marriage and a single man can chase as many single women as he likes. And seeing as those things wouldn't "destroy civilisation" ..... just what is the validity of your point?
Posted by: bigboab
It has been said in this thread many times. It is up to each individual as to what they want to believe or dont want not to believe. Live and let live.
The one thing I have issue with are people coming to my front door expounding their particular religion. I dont go to their place of worship and tell them I think 'The king has no clothes'. It is even worse when you are half way through 'setting up' a DVD Recorder and you have to start from scratch again. :lol:
Posted by: Busyman
:rolleyes:
Just how is that making the world worse?.....
I would never visit a prostitute, I bet many of faith have though.
I have never used "drugs"...I bet a fair few people of faith have.....
premarital sex? WTF?????????
Drunkeness...I am teetotal but have nothing against booze
Womanising..... I refer to the famous "I have sinned" preacher...remember those tears?
I am a non believer yet I don't approve of your examples, with the exception of sex before marriage and a single man can chase as many single women as he likes. And seeing as those things wouldn't "destroy civilisation" ..... just what is the validity of your point?
...oh just something I pointed out...you know....the premarital sex and all and what not. :whistling
Regarding your first quotes of yourself and I, your right....I don't dismiss it. Other's don't either. I think that's how it makes the news and stuff. :wacko:
Posted by: vidcc
...oh just something I pointed out...you know....the premarital sex and all and what not.
How do you explain that your examples are not all moral values for all religions? Some religions have drugs as part of their ceremonies.
But then seeing as "moral values" in regard to religion are based on man made ideas anyway what makes you think that they wouldn't be taken up if religion didn't exist?
Regarding your first quotes of yourself and I, your right....I don't dismiss it. Other's don't either. I think that's how it makes the news and stuff. :wacko:
Perhaps you think I mean the crime is dismissed.
I am talking about dismissing the connection with the criminal having religion.
The BTK killer was a church leader...... this fact was considered irrelevant and he "hijacked" religion as a cover. Tell me that the same people that say that would be so dismissive if he had a house full of porn or a collection of "texas chainsaw massacre" type movies.
Posted by: Busyman
How do you explain that your examples are not all moral values for all religions? Some religions have drugs as part of their ceremonies.
But then seeing as "moral values" in regard to religion are based on man made ideas anyway what makes you think that they wouldn't be taken up if religion didn't exist?
Perhaps you think I mean the crime is dismissed.
I am talking about dismissing the connection with the criminal having religion.
The BTK killer was a church leader...... this fact was considered irrelevant and he "hijacked" religion as a cover. Tell me that the same people that say that would not be so dismissive if he had a house full of porn or a collection of "texas chainsaw massacre" type movies.
Wow..
It sounds to me you're saying that because the BTK killer "hijacked" religion as a cover that the world would be better without religion.
Posted by: Busyman
I don't do that, I never have and I never will.
Me Mam used to keep pamphlets by the door. When anyone came and offered her some she would say that of course she would take it, they could also take one of hers.
They didn't expect that.
That's pretty slick. I like that.
When Jehovah's Witnesses came to my door, on occasion I'd let them in and we'd have talk.
I wanted to know what they believed and the subtle nuances of their religion.
Posted by: vidcc
Wow..
It sounds to me you're saying that because the BTK killer "hijacked" religion as a cover that the world would be better without religion.
No i am saying that when questioned on the subject of him being a church leader people of faith say he hijacked it as a cover.
In other words they are saying his crimes couldn't possibly have anything to do with faith...... = dismissing any connection.
I am saying religion doesn't = morality adn Atheism doesn't = immorality
Posted by: bigboab
I don't do that, I never have and I never will.
Me Mam used to keep pamphlets by the door. When anyone came and offered her some she would say that of course she would take it, they could also take one of hers.
They didn't expect that.
I will give that a try JP. Just for the look on their faces. :lol:
Posted by: bigboab
You could adapt the theme, make it something interesting.
Your DVD set-up instruction might be a good thing.
Copies obviously.
I'll have to go out to the wheelie bin to get it so I can make copies.:lol: :lol:
Posted by: bigboab
Anything would do.
Does Mrs bigboab have a knitting pattern.
Yes.
A stitch like nine, saves time. :lol: :lol:
Posted by: hobbes
Hobbes
"Answering to oneself is the highest authority as God is a myth."
I would venture that for someone to post this they would be an Atheist, not Agnostic. Or have I missed the meaning.
If I was brainwashed then I would believe exactly the same as my parents did, I do not. I have spoken to many people, read thing and made my own decisions on what I believe to be the truth.
God, as described by organized relgions is a myth, of this I have no doubt. God,as an unknowable creator, could exist because, as I have explained before, there is just so much around us that looks planned and science really is quite deficient is explaining such things currently.
I think that if God exists, he is not personal, he just got the ball rolling. He didn't write a book and he doesn't talk through prophets. I didn't wake up one day an agnostic, I kind of wandered my way there as I thought about the various religions and I discarded them reluctantly. Hobbes wants to go to heaven, too.
Agnosticism is basically where I got stranded. I don't recruit people to my "church" because it sucks. I could never by in to religion despite spending 5 summers at a fundament Christian camp. These people really lived the life and I had a great time. But still, you know that private place ins