Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MagmaMcFry]

Also, if there were a rule that it isn't proper to be happy, and you stopped being happy because you like the person who told you that rule, wouldn't you be happy because you made your friend happy because you followed his rule?

[kaijyuu]

Human tend to functional somewhat decently when we live in large interdependent groups.

I'll take issue with this, unless your definition of "somewhat decently" is much more lenient than mine. Humans in large groups tend to act like preschool children, arguing over who gets the toys, not knowing how to share, hitting each other, and being unwilling to clean up their own messes.

Humanity's "baseline morality" has kept us alive, but it's also allowed things like war, prejudice, and hate to run rampant. I believe the less we rely on instinctual "common sense" and the more we mutually discuss things and participate in introspection, the better of we'll be. Human beings are balls of cognitive dissonance and that can only be solved by examining what we believe in detail.

[Loud Whispers]

I'm not saying that is good, bad, or anything about atheists or theists. I'm just saying that one cannot have morality or values based only on the type of evidence you defined, that you need to just go out on a limb, take a leap of faith, and say "Hey, happiness is a good thing". That is, in itself, a belief not staved by evidence, and is therefore faith, as per the earlier definition.

Nope, all part of our biological leash. It's why humanity shares the same emotions.

[lemon10]

And when's the last time you saw someone disagree morally with their God? Believing in God doesn't help you not be a dick if God agrees with you.

A lot of times.
Sure, if you are a power hungry asshole, then you probably won't go "Hey, what I am doing is wrong, and I will go to hell for it", however if you are A) Gay and heavily religious, or even B) Just a rather evil dude (eg. a study/survey showed that CEO's that believed in hell (but the belief in heaven was irrelevant) acted better, then those that didn't (I don't know how accurate the study was or anything however), if you are planning on murdering someone, then you will probably think "Hey, this might get me sent to hell", it won't make that big of an impact, but it will make an impact nonetheless.

Also, if there were a rule that it isn't proper to be happy, and you stopped being happy because you like the person who told you that rule, wouldn't you be happy because you made your friend happy because you followed his rule?

Obviously not, because then you would be happy, which means that you aren't not happy, which means that you are breaking his rule.

[vagel7]

Humanity's "baseline morality" has kept us alive, but it's also allowed things like war, prejudice, and hate to run rampant. I believe the less we rely on instinctual "common sense" and the more we mutually discuss things and participate in introspection, the better of we'll be. Human beings are balls of cognitive dissonance and that can only be solved by examining what we believe in detail.

Yet religion has not stopped war, prejudice or hate. It has in fact added fuel to those flames. Look at the crusades, bloody and hard wars fought for a tiny strip of land, in one crusade children were sent because the church believed that children are pure. No matter the fact that Christians believe that we are all born in sin and will forever be sinners.
Prejudice is something that we see from fundamentalists and yes, there are a lot of fundamentalists in Christianity, the Evangelicals and Born Again Christians being the majority. They take the Bible by the word and they do what god tells them to and as such are prejudice towards for example homosexuals. I really don't want to bring atheism(it is not a religion) into this, but any dislike that an atheist may have towards a homosexual does not come from some fairytale.
Hate is very strong in Islam where the Quran orders to exterminate the non-believers, force them to the narrow part of the road and not greet them first. Terrorism from the Middle East comes from this, as they believe that they must cleanse our society. Hate is also in Christianity, the most of it seen near abortion clinics in the US. The clinics have escorts and locked doors with reinforced glass because the religious flock outside the doors harasses the patients and is a physical threat. For example the clinic bombings and murders in the eighties in the US.

Religion is not the key.

[Frumple]

Please, please don't spout that terrorism bullshit. It's only tangentially related, if at all, to actual Islamic faith and is almost entirely linked to societal and historic factors. The majority of the world's Muslim population isn't much different from the majority of the rest of the bloody human race.

Regardless as to if religion is or is not the key, that kind of misrepresentation and blatant ignorance helps no one and nothing.

[vagel7]

Muhammed used force to convert the muslim world to himself. At the start of his prophet career he was banished from his city. Years later he came back with a following and converted them by sword. Islam is a faith of war and intolerance. The society and historical factors come from religion.

Religion formed the entire world and it's time is long past. The time to believe in mythical creatures and fairytales is over.

[Reudh]

Humanity's "baseline morality" has kept us alive, but it's also allowed things like war, prejudice, and hate to run rampant. I believe the less we rely on instinctual "common sense" and the more we mutually discuss things and participate in introspection, the better of we'll be. Human beings are balls of cognitive dissonance and that can only be solved by examining what we believe in detail.

Yet religion has not stopped war, prejudice or hate. It has in fact added fuel to those flames. Look at the crusades, bloody and hard wars fought for a tiny strip of land, in one crusade children were sent because the church believed that children are pure. No matter the fact that Christians believe that we are all born in sin and will forever be sinners.
Prejudice is something that we see from fundamentalists and yes, there are a lot of fundamentalists in Christianity, the Evangelicals and Born Again Christians being the majority. They take the Bible by the word and they do what god tells them to and as such are prejudice towards for example homosexuals. I really don't want to bring atheism(it is not a religion) into this, but any dislike that an atheist may have towards a homosexual does not come from some fairytale.
Hate is very strong in Islam where the Quran orders to exterminate the non-believers, force them to the narrow part of the road and not greet them first. Terrorism from the Middle East comes from this, as they believe that they must cleanse our society. Hate is also in Christianity, the most of it seen near abortion clinics in the US. The clinics have escorts and locked doors with reinforced glass because the religious flock outside the doors harasses the patients and is a physical threat. For example the clinic bombings and murders in the eighties in the US.

Religion is not the key.

Skull-shattering facepalm through my face.

Religion has bad and good parts. The quran does not command muslims to hate, the people in charge of certain sects do. Just as with Christianity and a myriad other religions.

Eg: Wahabiism. They're viewed with distrust and fear by the Shia and Sunni because they're very extremist.
The same can be said of well... fundamentalism in the States.

You seem to be letting the deeds of a few mar the deeds of the many.

I agree that religion is an issue but it's not right to tar an entire religion with one brush when in reality a very small percentage is the issue.

Every muslim or christian I have met have been possibly the nicest people I've ever met. Most of them were at uni, but still...

I stress this:

Extremists do not represent a religion.


Did Christianity not forcibly convert others? Did Christianity not murder men woman and children in the name of crusades?

Did the popes of that era say "The more non-believers you kill, the better your chances of eternal bliss?"

Did anyone not Christian in pretty much every country face punishment for being a heretic?

[vagel7]

It is when the extremists overpower the mainstreamers in a religion, as we see now, that it is bad. The extremists are making the most moves in politics and as such are moving to represent their religion in politics. What I see as strange is that Vatican, the Christian throne, is itself not extremist.

[MonkeyHead]

It is when the extremists overpower the mainstreamers in a religion, as we see now, that it is bad

Question 1: Point me in the direction of a current example where a mainstream religion is being overpowered by extremist elements. It sure is not Islam.

Question 2: Was it "bad" when the west meddled with the Iran/Iraq war, or in the Afghanistan/USSR conflict, or in any other examples where people could be manipulated to our benefit? Is it only "bad" when people take power for themselves according to thier held ideals rather than being given it?

The extremists are making the most moves in politics and as such are moving to represent their religion in politics

Question 3: Could you give me an example to point out where a religious extremist group is making the most moves in a political field? I am struggling to think of any off the top of my head.

Question 4: People have always let thier religion (or religion as a whole) affect thier politics. A countries laws and heritage often reflect the religions that shaped the histroy of thier country, be they Christian, Bhuddist, Jewish or Islamic. This is not new. Consider statements ike "In God We Trust". Look at Turkey - a secular nation with an Islamic heritage. Its religion has shaped its politics but is is far from a threatening entity. Is it only wrong/bad if the veiw represented is not one you can identify with?

What I see as strange is that Vatican, the Christian throne, is itself not extremist

Question 4: Is the only reason you see this as not extremist is that it is a point of veiw that matches your own viewpoint? I mean, from an outside standpoint (be it a different branch of Christianity, Islam, Bhudism, Hinduism or whatever) it is easy to see how decrees banning condoms and unusual behaviour in the face of sexual abuse allegations could be portryaed as "extremist behaviour".

Context: I am a Nihilistic Atheist. Whilst I dislike religions I also accept that I have in no way shape or form the right to tell others what to think or beleive. I respect those who hold any sort of faith in the same way I respect anyone who has a similar world veiw to my own. I just feel you need to help me understand the points you are trying to make here - I am not saying you are wrong, I just want to know where you are coming from.

[G-Flex]

It is when the extremists overpower the mainstreamers in a religion, as we see now, that it is bad. The extremists are making the most moves in politics and as such are moving to represent their religion in politics. What I see as strange is that Vatican, the Christian throne, is itself not extremist.

The Vatican isn't "the Christian throne". Not all of Christianity is Roman Catholic.

Also, a lot of people certainly would call them extremist in some ways. Apostolic succession is a little out-there, as is that whole "ex cathedra" thing, and their views on sexuality are even more severe and, frankly, outlandish, than most fundamentalist Protestants. They're certainly less extremist in other ways, but really, it depends on the subject here.

[kaijyuu]

Humanity's "baseline morality" has kept us alive, but it's also allowed things like war, prejudice, and hate to run rampant. I believe the less we rely on instinctual "common sense" and the more we mutually discuss things and participate in introspection, the better of we'll be. Human beings are balls of cognitive dissonance and that can only be solved by examining what we believe in detail.

Yet religion has not stopped war, prejudice or hate. It has in fact added fuel to those flames. Look at the crusades, bloody and hard wars fought for a tiny strip of land, in one crusade children were sent because the church believed that children are pure. No matter the fact that Christians believe that we are all born in sin and will forever be sinners.
Prejudice is something that we see from fundamentalists and yes, there are a lot of fundamentalists in Christianity, the Evangelicals and Born Again Christians being the majority. They take the Bible by the word and they do what god tells them to and as such are prejudice towards for example homosexuals. I really don't want to bring atheism(it is not a religion) into this, but any dislike that an atheist may have towards a homosexual does not come from some fairytale.
Hate is very strong in Islam where the Quran orders to exterminate the non-believers, force them to the narrow part of the road and not greet them first. Terrorism from the Middle East comes from this, as they believe that they must cleanse our society. Hate is also in Christianity, the most of it seen near abortion clinics in the US. The clinics have escorts and locked doors with reinforced glass because the religious flock outside the doors harasses the patients and is a physical threat. For example the clinic bombings and murders in the eighties in the US.

Religion is not the key.

Did you just interpret my post as being supportive of religion as a moral guide?

I don't expect you to read the entirety of the thread, but if you go back and read my posts, it should be plain as day that I am NOT a theist (agnostic, and perhaps more sympathetic to theism ideas than most though).

Your examples are good ones for showing why having an arbitrary moral authority (god) does not stop things we can pretty much all agree are bad (violence and hate). I wouldn't say religion necessarily causes violence and hate, but it can enable it as much as it deters it.


Anywho, my post was a direct response to what I quoted, along with a jab at Magma McFry's assertion here:

People should adhere to conventions because they passed the "apply common sense" test, not because they're told to.

What I'm saying is we need to think about our morality, not go with instinct or "common sense" or whatever the hell you want to call it. Without introspection, and without putting our ideas out for discussion, we'll never, ever, EVER solve our moral issues. Thinking is key. Gut feeling is not, and could very well be harmful if not properly examined first.

[Domenique]

The Crusades didn't happen for religious reasons, it was just a cassus belli, a stated reason. It actually goes deeper. One of the reasons was the defence of Byzantium, but I've also read that it was the pope who wanted to expand his influence over Europe, to make Europe united under him.

[Reudh]

As a humanist atheistic buddhist, I see no reason for people to hate one another. Why bother?

[Hiiri]

As a humanist atheistic buddhist, I see no reason for people to hate one another. Why bother?

What's wrong with controlled hate? I hate child rapists, don't you?