Print

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

Anti-Theist

1 (1.2%)

Atheist

30 (35.3%)

Agnostic

15 (17.6%)

Unsure

3 (3.5%)

Heretic

7 (8.2%)

Blasphemer

2 (2.4%)

Pastafarian

3 (3.5%)

IPU Follower

0 (0%)

Frisbeetarian

3 (3.5%)

Teapot Watcher

7 (8.2%)

Other

14 (16.5%)

Total Members Voted: 85

[Jude]

Buddhists (at least some, AFAIK - there's a LOT of varieties of Buddhism) believe gods are also part of the cycle of reincarnation that everyone else is caught in - you could literally be reincarnated as a god, but that's not the thing you're supposed to strive for, since that wouldn't be escaping the cycle.

[Awayfarer]

I'm not voting because I don't like to be catagorized, and I don't like the idea that the myriad mental, emotional and physical processes that make a person can be summed up in a word or two.

My only concession is this: I try to live my life by the words of late George Carlin. Not all of them, just these..."Always do whatever's next."

So far its worked...

...actually I don't so much try to live my life by that, it just kind of works out that way.

[Anfold]

My only concession is this: I try to live my life by the words of late George Carlin. Not all of them, just these..."Always do whatever's next."

self fulfilling prophecy.

What is the meaning of life?

A. To not be dead.

[Makrond]

Heh, Wiccan. My parents are Wiccans, and I have to say it's a pretty awesome religion.

Also, neo-druids (based on the ones I've met, anyway) are a joke. I don't care who you are, you don't get to call yourself the 708th reincarnation of Arthur Pendragon. Nor his adoptive father Uther (I'm so sick of people saying Uther was Arthur's dad. If you're going to call yourself a legendary pseudo-mythological figure, at least get his relationships with other legendary pseudo-mythological figures right).

Also, I consider myself agnostic with leanings towards Wiccan and Buddhist philosophies (apparently they can coexist), and a touch of existentialism (creating meaning for yourself - it may be the work of a diety, it may not; ignoring the more ridiculous parts of existentialism, such as asserting you are a bird suddenly makes you a bird).

[Strife26]

I'm a rogue lutheran. If anyone really cares, I posted a long statement about in the Muslim thread.

This just occured to me:
We need a Christian Religon thread now.

Also:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Religon, the new Roll To Dodge!!   

[A_Fey_Dwarf]

Frisbeetarian here...

May all our souls get stuck to the roof.

[vanarbulax]

Technically an agnostic since the belief that there is no god despite any evidence you bring is as stupid as the belief that a god exists despite evidence against it (or lack of evidence for it). I voted atheist since agnostic tends to mean that you're seriously considering that there is a god, I seriously consider there is a god as much as I seriously consider that the GiantFlying Spaghetti Monster exists.

[Strife26]

Isn't it the Flying Spagetti Monster?

Yes, I did read and enjoy that book.

[Pnx]

Personally I'm in the very serious religion of Discordianism.

Hail Eris!

Anyone that says that Discordianism doesn't have any spiritual value just isn't looking hard enough.

[Jetman123]

Personally, while I'm not a communist and dislike Carl Marx's theories overall mainly because they expect too much incorruptibility of those in power, I have to admit he made some very, very good points. My favorite quote of his would have to be this:
(Minor paraphrasing I believe)
"Religion is the opium of the people. It removes the pain, but does not treat the source of the pain."

[Jude]

Marx had a lot of good points, as well as a great idea for a system that can never work because people are scumbags, and wouldn't be needed if they weren't.

But his shallow and one-dimensional analysis of religion, common to every other disaffected wanker ever, isn't really a high point.

[inaluct]

I think the point is that Marx said the opium of the masses quote in a sort of cool, unusually clear way.

And I have to say, if you honestly disagree with the idea that religion makes people feel better about their problems but doesn't really solve them, then you must have something wrong with you.

[Jetman123]

Okay, yes, maybe I phrased that a little badly, but he did strike on an important point there. Religion solves no problems. To me, it's a waste of time I COULD be using to actually solve those problems, and that's  one of the reasons why I'm an athiest.

[Idiom]

I'm religious and even I don't think religion solves problems.
I don't know why you all think it should anyway. We solve our own problems. Said this in another thread, but religion is a guideline of sorts as to how we should approach things.

My Bible does not make my bed for me. Nor does it get rid of my enemies for me. It says how I should deal with my problems for a better world, and doing such can be a headache on it's own to implement.

New! The clap bible!
*clap*
*It flips open to some random page*
"The winning lottery numbers! Alright! Thanks Jesus! This solves all my problems!"
*clap*
"Now make my bed!"
*Jesus appears and starts smoothing the sheets*
"Thanks Jesus!"
*Gesture of approval and vanishes*

I wish. Wait, no, I pray.
*clap*
Dang. Nothing.

[Awayfarer]

Personally, while I'm not a communist and dislike Carl Marx's theories overall mainly because they expect too much incorruptibility of those in power, I have to admit he made some very, very good points. My favorite quote of his would have to be this:
(Minor paraphrasing I believe)
"Religion is the opium of the people. It removes the pain, but does not treat the source of the pain."

One seemingly minor but critical distinction here: Marx said that religion was the "opiate" of the people. An opiate is a pain killer. The suggestion was that religion acted as such for the average person. The intent of that quote was not to compare it to something addictive. Not that the misquote is without merit, but it's definitely not what the man intended. 

Note to Makrond: Buddhism can coexist with most things. When Christianity was first introduced into China hundreds of years ago, the Chinese were very receptive to it. When word got back to the pope that the Chinese were converting... but still practicing ancestor worship in addition, the pope declared that they have to stop with the ancestor worship or they couldn't be Christians. The Chinese agreed, and dropped Christianity because they didn't like being told that they couldn't pick and choose. *

Historically, eastern religions are often not exclusive. You can be a buddhist and be anything else you want.

*(I've vastly oversimplified this but its roughly accurate.)