NationStates Jolt Archive

That's right, here we can bash atheists! That's right show those Godless commies who is the boss..

Actually, I am posting this to show support to rid this forum of the intolerance that has plagued it for many months and years now.We all lived in a civilized world, why not act like civilized people? WHy must we put down other people's beleifs? Seriously, how big of a person does that make you?


Any further comments are welcome

hahaha I was going to start this earlier.

hahaha I was going to start this earlier.

Yay i win then :D...what do i get?


a smiley thing :fluffle:

I think most of the aethists had to go to bed. Their moms dont like them staying up this late.

Damn those handsome, clever, sexually superior agnostics! Damn them all!

I think you might be a little bit sensitive.

When Atheists question religious beliefs, they do so for all sorts of reasons. But their reasons are not the point in question, their argument is.

Religions are a mystery to me, I guess I'm just not that way inclined. I have a number of times been asked by people to come to church and listen, and a few times I actually went, just to be nice. And all I could see was people who listened, and believed and so on, without any basis at all.

Maybe an Atheist just wants to find out how that sort of thing can be possible, how someone can deliberately not use his sense of rationality.

That being said - let them believe what they want. I don't want to see religious teachings influence what is taught in real classes. Evolution is real, ID is not. There should not be choice, just as there should not be choice whether or not to teach that the Holocaust really was a mass suicide.

When fetuses get aborted, that is the issue of the mother, and maybe the father. And them alone. There is no reason for anyone, religious or not, to interfere with that decision. The same thing goes for Schiavo-type suicide.

So all you as a Christian should do when people post threads that some might consider "religion-bashing" is to make sure nothing wrong is posted in them. It is not your job to try and refute science, and what we know about the world. Just try and present your belief in the correct way, and leave it at that.

Atheists cannot or don't want to believe things that have no basis. Christians can and do. You can't reconcile these views, nor can you argue about them. So don't.

By all means, indulge yourself. As an atheist I encourage the marketplace of ideas. I doubt anyone will come up with anything that will make me change my mind.

Yay i win then :D...what do i get?


a smiley thing :fluffle:
nope a cookie:p

That's right, here we can bash atheists!

No, I will not bash Atheists. I can only feel pity for them.

That's right, here we can bash atheists!

Go ahead, make yourself welcome. What's the worst that can happen? We suffer another crisis of faith and believe even less?

If someone were to tell me how great it is to be broke because their life is not corrupted by money, I would think they were full of shit. I tend to think the same thing when someone tells me how great their life is because of what they don't believe.

Go ahead, make yourself welcome. What's the worst that can happen? We suffer another crisis of faith and believe even less?

We could believe in less than nothing, though if two of us got together then basic multiplication would cause it to become a resurgence of faith.

Let's not bash them, say we didn't, and end up being thought of as better people by God instead of random senseless bashing?

And you people wonder why we dislike religion. This just made your cause harder for you to win.

When the OP of the thread you are obviously basing this thread off of states not only religion but also philosophies with it, this thread becomes a bit redundant

Hell objectivism was even included in the other post, seems pretty obvious that he ment non religions as well

We could believe in less than nothing, though if two of us got together then basic multiplication would cause it to become a resurgence of faith.

<0 + <0 = <0

...or did you mean something a bit more erotic by 'got together' and 'multiplication'?

And you people wonder why we dislike religion. This just made your cause harder for you to win.
Hey the other thread started against religion first ... they are just making a semi parody/coppy thread (I dont even know what the technical term would be)

Hey the other thread started against religion first ... they are just making a semi parody/coppy thread (I dont even know what the technical term would be)

I employ the term 'pastiche' for this kind of thing, but I don't know how widespread it is.

Hey the other thread started against religion first ... they are just making a semi parody/coppy thread (I dont even know what the technical term would be)
Then it's justifiable yet inappropriate flamebait.

Maybe an Atheist just wants to find out how that sort of thing can be possible, how someone can deliberately not use his sense of rationality.

Religious doesn't mean non-rational. You reveil your bigotry.

Evolution is real, ID is not.

Many legitimate scientists disagree with the second part. What about the fact that evolution to the extent that it has progressed in the time it has is statistically impossible? What about systems like echo-location?

When fetuses get aborted, that is the issue of the mother, and maybe the father. And them alone. There is no reason for anyone, religious or not, to interfere with that decision.

Not if that fetus is a human being. Now I don't know weather it is or not. But for me, this is not a religious issue. If the fetus is a person, then abortion should never be legal. If not, it's more hazzy. But I never thought of this in a religious context, and it's not my religion that causes me to think as I do. You don't have to be religious to realise that killing a person is wrong.

The same thing goes for Schiavo-type suicide.

Here we are in complete agreement.

So all you as a Christian should do when people post threads that some might consider "religion-bashing" is to make sure nothing wrong is posted in them.

This thread was in responce to a thread named "religion bashing."

It is not your job to try and refute science, and what we know about the world.

Christain doesn not mean anti-science. To me anyway, science reveals more to support the existance of God then to refute it, and the Bible encourages science and knowledge. To me, they are two paths to the same goal, two facets of the same thing, and go together like chocolate and peanut butter.

Atheists cannot or don't want to believe things that have no basis. Christians can and do. You can't reconcile these views, nor can you argue about them. So don't.

Wrong again. I am a Christain, and I don't believe in anything with no basis. Once again, your bigotry shows through.




In responce to the "religion bashing" "athiest bashing", why bash? Why not, just, you know, not bash? Wouldn't that be nice? Come on people. Let's try it!

Then it's justifiable yet inappropriate flamebait.

Thus the cunning employment of the term 'pastiche'. Pastiches have yet to be legislated against. Need I drag out such examples as the 'What would you do if someone hijacked your thread?' pastiche of the 'What would you do if someone hijacked your plane?' post as established precedent?

Yeah, this thread is pathetic. You aren't even attempting to argue against athiesm, so what is the whole point anyway?

Then it's justifiable yet inappropriate flamebait.
Could be ... hence why I refuse to participate in either one

I wish to debate/argue/understand and explore religion and non religion

Some religious people may feel it is bashing but whatever

I refuse to just blindly malign something such as religion or lack thereof

Hey the other thread started against religion first ... they are just making a semi parody/coppy thread (I dont even know what the technical term would be)

oppugnant maybe.

Did anyone bother to read the rest of it..or just post based on the first line? i said lets not really bash them, but rather stand up against this intolerance and promote people's individual beleifs

Yeah, this thread is pathetic. You aren't even attempting to argue against athiesm, so what is the whole point anyway?

Why should they start now? They've never tried to argue against in the past.

oppugnant maybe.
Maybe ... lol we should make a term for it if nothing else lol

Something like counterpoint-parody or counterpoint-copycat

No, I will not bash Atheists. I can only feel pity for them.

Why feel pity? of what affliction do I have?

Yeah, this thread is pathetic. You aren't even attempting to argue against athiesm, so what is the whole point anyway?


gosh...:headbang: read the post..i am making apoint..against idiots. :D

No, I will not bash Atheists. I can only feel pity for them.

I :rolleyes: with all possible force.

gosh...:headbang: read the post..i am making apoint..against idiots. :D

I got the point, and I agree with you, at least :)

Religious doesn't mean non-rational. You reveil your bigotry.
Indeed, if that's what you want to call bigotry. I never claimed to be neutral - actually, I think the world would be better off if we didn't have to deal with religions, but I realise that it's not my business to tell others what to believe.

Fact of the matter is that there is no actual, repeatable or any other sort of experiment or theory which can prove that anything supernatural exists, particularly an all-mighty god.
While some might take it as an "you can't prove I'm wrong, so therefore I'm right", others will read the opposite into it. And the only people who are actually correct and rational are agnostics.

I'm not agnostic, my character lends itself more to atheism than to anything else, so there we go: I'm not rational either.

And finally, just because no one ever seems to want to answer this question:
Can God microwave a Burrito so hot that he can't eat it?
Or in other words: It is impossible for an all-mighty entity to exist.

WHy must we put down other people's beleifs?
Well, if someone came along and said that they believe, literally, in Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, you'd think that's a bit silly, right?

And then if they said that you should believe in Snow White and the Seven Dwarves too, because if you don't, the Wicked Witch of the West will come and take you away and lock you in her dungeon for all eternity, you'd think they were crazy/idiotic/annoying/all of the above, right?

That's how I feel about religious people. I don't question anyone's right to believe in fairy tales, but I'll still laugh at them for it. It's as simple as that. And I don't apologize for it.

Maybe ... lol we should make a term for it if nothing else lol

Something like counterpoint-parody or counterpoint-copycat

It's a real word. It means tending to awaken hostility. It's not actually what you're looking for though.

Edit: Pastiche is probably the closest. But I don't think the intent here was satirical.

Well, if someone came along and said that they believe, literally, in Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, you'd think that's a bit silly, right?

And then if they said that you should believe in Snow White and the Seven Dwarves too, because if you don't, the Wicked Witch of the West will come and take you away and lock you in her dungeon for all eternity, you'd think they were crazy/idiotic/annoying/all of the above, right?

That's how I feel about religious people. I don't question anyone's right to believe in fairy tales, but I'll still laugh at them for it. It's as simple as that. And I don't apologize for it.


And God won't apologize for sending you to hell. See i can make rude remarks as well. And look did it get us anywhere? nope

It's a real word. It means tending to awaken hostility. It's not actually what you're looking for though.
Ill try to remember it :)

And finally, just because no one ever seems to want to answer this question:
Can God microwave a Burrito so hot that he can't eat it?
Or in other words: It is impossible for an all-mighty entity to exist.

Through our limited human understanding, yes, but God doesn't exist in those terms, and hence is not subject to that paradox. God is indefinable, because to define is to limit.

As you said, there is really no point in debating matters of faith, so let's all just be friends and respect each other :)

Through our limited human understanding, yes, but God doesn't exist in those terms, and hence is not subject to that paradox. God is indefinable, because to define is to limit.

Are you seriously advancing cognitive closure as evidence of the divine?

If I was to say to a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Voo Doo whatever, Wiccan, or someone of some other religous belief that I think a bunch of the stuff they believe in is fairy tales would I be bashing them? If I was to suggest that attempting to infuence local, state, or national, policy around a bunch of fairy tales is a bad idea would I be bashing the religous? If I suggested a certian religous view of some out group of people was ignorant and dehumanising would I be bashing. Is there any way to speak my mind without bashing.

And God won't apologize for sending you to hell. See i can make rude remarks as well. And look did it get us anywhere? nope
I love it when people threaten to sic their imaginary friends on me. It never fails to make me giggle.

My belief is that there are things of near infinite wonder out there somewhere. In a universe of this magnatude, there must be.

Do I think it's an elderly man wearing sandals sitting on a cloud who disapproves if I touch myself? Um...no.

Do I think my wildest imagination can even come close? Not bloody likely. So why burden myself with misapprehensions?

If I was to say to a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Voo Doo whatever, Wiccan, or someone of some other religous belief that I think a bunch of the stuff they believe in is fairy tales would I be bashing them? If I was to suggest that attempting to infuence local, state, or national, policy around a bunch of fairy tales is a bad idea would I be bashing the religous? If I suggested a certian religous view of some out group of people was ignorant and dehumanising would I be bashing. Is there any way to speak my mind without bashing.


Say it politely. Say i don't agree with it for this reason. DOn't say this is wrong and stupid and blah blah..cuz anyone can do that and thats just ignorant
do it politely...

I love it when people threaten to sic their imaginary friends on me. It never fails to make me giggle.


it never fails to make me laff when people try to make meaning of life through experiments and "theories" much like our so called 'myths' if you ask me.

If someone were to tell me how great it is to be broke because their life is not corrupted by money, I would think they were full of shit. I tend to think the same thing when someone tells me how great their life is because of what they don't believe.

Wow. That may just be the single worst analogy I have ever experienced. I applaud in stunned, stultified and head-shaking silence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neu Leonstein

Maybe an Atheist just wants to find out how that sort of thing can be possible, how someone can deliberately not use his sense of rationality.

Religious doesn't mean non-rational. You reveil your bigotry.

This is bigotry?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neu Leonstein
Atheists cannot or don't want to believe things that have no basis. Christians can and do. You can't reconcile these views, nor can you argue about them. So don't.

Wrong again. I am a Christain, and I don't believe in anything with no basis. Once again, your bigotry shows through.

This is bigotry and belief bashing.

In responce to the "religion bashing" "athiest bashing", why bash? Why not, just, you know, not bash? Wouldn't that be nice? Come on people. Let's try it!

I think you are just hyper sensitive Katzistanza.

<0 + <0 = <0

...or did you mean something a bit more erotic by 'got together' and 'multiplication'?

Depends. I can think of a sweet lady atheist or two I'd love to have horizontal heathen hijinx with.

Religious doesn't mean non-rational. You reveil your bigotry.

Not if that fetus is a human being. Now I don't know weather it is or not. But for me, this is not a religious issue. If the fetus is a person, then abortion should never be legal. If not, it's more hazzy. But I never thought of this in a religious context, and it's not my religion that causes me to think as I do. You don't have to be religious to realise that killing a person is wrong.

Christain doesn not mean anti-science. To me anyway, science reveals more to support the existance of God then to refute it, and the Bible encourages science and knowledge. To me, they are two paths to the same goal, two facets of the same thing, and go together like chocolate and peanut butter.



Wrong again. I am a Christain, and I don't believe in anything with no basis. Once again, your bigotry shows through.


Now I have no problem with someone not being able to spell, but to consistently blow the name of their own religion? Perhaps science isn't the subject we need to be discussing.

If someone were to tell me how great it is to be broke because their life is not corrupted by money, I would think they were full of shit. I tend to think the same thing when someone tells me how great their life is because of what they don't believe.

You don't know much about buddhism do you? Or for that matter any other type of western culture. Why don't you ask Ghandi how he feels?

Why don't you ask Ghandi how he feels?
Dead?

it never fails to make me laff when people try to make meaning of life through experiments and "theories" much like our so called 'myths' if you ask me.

Atheists see just as much meaning in life as religious people, the only difference is that we are internally skeptical about it. Any disscussion of the meaning of life for an atheist is based in the actual human condition. In other words, what life means to us, the actual living beings themselves.

Religious people are externally skeptical. They seek some meaning to life outside the thing itself. They are seeking some significance in the human condition as if it is being externally judged or has some purpose to other than the people actually living it. Which, I am happy to report it doesn't.

Oh, yah, and those experiments and theories, those are so we know what the hell is actually going on, and can have nice things, like cars and toilet paper.

Now I have no problem with someone not being able to spell, but to consistently blow the name of their own religion? Perhaps science isn't the subject we need to be discussing.

Mock not the dyslexics lest their dog strike you down.

Atheists see just as much meaning in life as religious people, the only difference is that we are internally skeptical about it. Any disscussion of the meaning of life for an atheist is based in the actual human condition. In other words, what life means to us, the actual living beings themselves.

Religious people are externally skeptical. They seek some meaning to life outside the thing itself. They are seeking some significance in the human condition as if it is being externally judged or has some purpose to other than the people actually living it. Which, I am happy to report it doesn't.

Oh, yah, and those experiments and theories, those are so we know what the hell is actually going on, and can have nice things, like cars and toilet paper.


Oh religion..its a social leveling mechanism..As important or more so than science.

Oh religion..its a social leveling mechanism..As important or more so than science.
In other words: The opiate of the masses?

If someone were to tell me how great it is to be broke because their life is not corrupted by money, I would think they were full of shit. I tend to think the same thing when someone tells me how great their life is because of what they don't believe.

Do the words 'oath of poverty' ring any bells?

Are you claiming that you consider monks and nuns to be 'full of shit'?

In other words: The opiate of the masses?


No in other words, it helps protect and organize society. If there was no religon, then there is no rules for people to live by, no hope for anyone, and it is a way to make sure no one group is able to take adavantage of another.

Oh religion..its a social leveling mechanism..As important or more so than science.

How's that work now?

Do the words 'oath of poverty' ring any bells?

Are you claiming that you consider monks and nuns to be 'full of shit'?

Umm :) I hope you don't mind me answering this but,,,,, yes.

Umm :) I hope you don't mind me answering this but,,,,, yes.

You are welcome to answer, but the question was directed as PasturePastry who seemed to be using this analogy as a way of arguing that all theists were somehow superior to all atheists/agnostics.

it never fails to make me laff when people try to make meaning of life through experiments and "theories" much like our so called 'myths' if you ask me.
Maybe someone else said something about trying to find the meaning of life, but it wasn't me. Go build your straw man somewhere else. I'm not interested in the meaning of life. I'm quite convinced there is none.

No in other words, it helps protect and organize society. If there was no religon, then there is no rules for people to live by, no hope for anyone, and it is a way to make sure no one group is able to take adavantage of another.
Lol yeah while I agree it is an organizing tool (which is why some view religion is a social or evolutionary benificial trait) it inharently is just a tool

For good or bad it is what it is ... only the naieve claim it only does good

No in other words, it helps protect and organize society. If there was no religon, then there is no rules for people to live by, no hope for anyone, and it is a way to make sure no one group is able to take adavantage of another.

You can make perfectly acceptable rules based upon rational self-interest (moreso than anything based upon religion I would argue). There is a whole field of study based around law and economics. It doesn't mention god once. You can even get people to do seemingly quite altruistic things that way.

I think you are just hyper sensitive Katzistanza.

I try not to be. Mostly I resent people making assumptions about me because I belong to a certain group.

Dead?

If I was drinking milk, it would have squirted out of my nose.

Ok no mention about god in laws? What about our legal system being based on jewish law...and also partially laws of the babylonians? does that not count? thou shalt not murder..yep never would imagine to see that anywhere in modern law :D

Ok no mention about god in laws? What about our legal system being based on jewish law...and also partially laws of the babylonians? does that not count? thou shalt not murder..yep never would imagine to see that anywhere in modern law :D
One does not NEED religous backing to make laws

Only an idiot would discard an idea just because of its source

But that does not make the origional source right nor nessisary

I'm done with this thread, because I really didn't want to debate, which is what this is ganna turn into.

Peace to you all.

I'm done with this thread, because I really didn't want to debate, which is what this is ganna turn into.

Peace to you all.
You did not want to debate in a debate forum? lol alright

I'm done with this thread, because I really didn't want to debate, which is what this is ganna turn into.

Peace to you all.


heh..everything turns into a debate in here anymore. I could say my name is thomas, and i am sure some one would be like."well technically the name thomas derives from didymus" and argue that...i am positive

Ok no mention about god in laws? What about our legal system being based on jewish law...and also partially laws of the babylonians? does that not count? thou shalt not murder..yep never would imagine to see that anywhere in modern law :D
Oh, right. Because only the ancient Hebrews had laws against murder. It never occurred to any other civilization that maybe it would be a good idea to not let people kill each other.

Oh, right. Because only the ancient Hebrews had laws against murder. It never occurred to any other civilization that maybe it would be a good idea to not let people kill each other.


yeah but I am sure you will see they are all in alignment with religious beleifs...coincedence?

No in other words, it helps protect and organize society. If there was no religon, then there is no rules for people to live by, no hope for anyone, and it is a way to make sure no one group is able to take adavantage of another.
To be quite honest, if that is the goal of religion, it has failed dismally.

There has never been hope for the lower strata of society. Indeed, only in relatively recent times, with religion falling away have poor people been able to make it.
In practice, all religions (even Buddhism...if Tibet wasn't Buddhist, we'd not consider it any different from Iran) have been used as a tool by ruling classes to justify very real worldly realities concerning social hierarchy.

You should read Thomas Aquinas. So much admittedly smart work, just to end up saying "The Church is boss, and the Princes are boss, and if you don't agree, you go to hell!"

heh..everything turns into a debate in here anymore. I could say my name is thomas, and i am sure some one would be like."well technically the name thomas derives from didymus" and argue that...i am positive


Well technically the name thomas derives from didymus so actually your name is Frank.

Well technically the name thomas derives from didymus so actually your name is Frank.


I <3 you :D

Ok no mention about god in laws? What about our legal system being based on jewish law...and also partially laws of the babylonians? does that not count? thou shalt not murder..yep never would imagine to see that anywhere in modern law :D

It's not based on jewish law. And even though there are some similarities - which I can only assume the jews adopted for the same reasons we did, and not because god actually told them, there are still even more differences.

The lack of a temple and burnt offerings for one.

yeah but I am sure you will see they are all in alignment with religious beleifs...coincedence?

Some religious beliefs require killing people for no reason. How does that square with your alignment?

It's not based on jewish law. And even though there are some similarities - which I can only assume the jews adopted for the same reasons we did, and not because god actually told them, there are still even more differences.

The lack of a temple and burnt offerings for one.


Ok forget the jews...I am trying to say that most modern laws are derived from religious practices and beliefs

yeah but I am sure you will see they are all in alignment with religious beleifs...coincedence?
No coincidence at all. See, it works like this:

"Y'know, I don't really want to be murdered. That would really suck. And I'm guessing no one else wants to be murdered either. Hey, I have an idea! Let's make it a rule that no one is allowed to murder anyone else! That way, everyone wins and no one loses!"

See? Instant morality, no God required. And almost certain to happen whenever you put a large group of people together.

I think you might be a little bit sensitive.

When Atheists question religious beliefs, they do so for all sorts of reasons. But their reasons are not the point in question, their argument is.

Religions are a mystery to me, I guess I'm just not that way inclined. I have a number of times been asked by people to come to church and listen, and a few times I actually went, just to be nice. And all I could see was people who listened, and believed and so on, without any basis at all.


*Sorry Neu if this seems like I am picking on you, it's not the intent.

What I see here is what is most typical of most athiests I know; they are not most vocal about disbelieving God in general, but in the Christian God. I Appreciate Neu's honesty, but I do not share in his "exclusion for exclusions sake" argument. You cannot dismiss one idea, and embrace another unless they BOTH are subjected to the same criteria. Whilst he himself, may not have a basis for belief, he hasn't a basis for disbelief either. ATHEISM is more than just a suspension of belief, it is blatantly denying one lifestyle in favor of another. -(Also with no basis for doing so.)

While it may be fair to suggest that you do not understand all the details of any given religion, Most (not saying all) atheist go beyond mere apathy towards Theology; and border on intolerence, and predjudice. If they were really were neutral and objective with their opinions as they would have us believe, they really wouldn't need to say anything, now would they?

*Sorry Neu if this seems like I am picking on you, it's not the intent.

What I see here is what is most typical of most athiests I know; they are not most vocal about disbelieving God in general, but in the Christian God. I Appreciate Neu's honesty, but I do not share in his "exclusion for exclusions sake" argument. You cannot dismiss one idea, and embrace another unless they BOTH are subjected to the same criteria. Whilst he himself, may not have a basis for belief, he hasn't a basis for disbelief either. ATHEISM is more than just a suspension of belief, it is blatantly denying one lifestyle in favor of another. -(Also with no basis for doing so.)

While it may be fair to suggest that you do not understand all the details of any given religion, Most (not saying all) atheist go beyond mere apathy towards Theology; and border on intolerence, and predjudice. If they were really were neutral and objective with their opinions as they would have us believe, they really wouldn't need to say anything, now would they?

People make up stuff. I have never seen a religion that didn't look made up therefore I doubt that I ever will see a religion that dosn'tt look made up.

Man made God is my stance. No need to suspend disbelief. I see therfore it is Fairy tales.

No coincidence at all. See, it works like this:

"Y'know, I don't really want to be murdered. That would really suck. And I'm guessing no one else wants to be murdered either. Hey, I have an idea! Let's make it a rule that no one is allowed to murder anyone else! That way, everyone wins and no one loses!"

See? Instant morality, no God required. And almost certain to happen whenever you put a large group of people together.

Stop making people cooperate in rationally mutual self-interest. It makes Baby Jesus urp onto his bib of thorns.

Ok forget the jews...I am trying to say that most modern laws are derived from religious practices and beliefs

I am a practicing Christian, and I respectfully disagree with your opinions. If you ask me, it doesn't need to be that way, either. Does it somehow make God less relevant that He was not behind the foundations of all legal systems?

Take my case - I attend a very religiously conservative university. I just finished taking a final in American Heritage. We learned, in a book written by two of the university professors, that the fundamentals of American government and law are from Anglo-Saxon traditions, and their ensuing enshrinement into principles of English common law. Enlightenment philosophy, decidedly separate from religion, also played a huge role with such masterworks as Locke's treatises, Montesquieu, etc. Not to discard, of course, classic readings of Plato and Aristotle. All had a role. Also of note is how the text mentioned that establishment of a society based solely on "Christian virtue" will not make for a suitable system of government, medieval Europe being the great example of that. And to top it all off, the text argues in favor of the capitalist solution to problems of government, humanity governed by the principles of self-interest, not Christian meekness or sacrifice.

Being religious doesn't mean you have to be irrational about the relationship of religion to law and government ;)

Bash not, that ye be not bashed.

;)

I've seen some pretty stupid things in this thread [from both sides] and I feel it necessary to even it out a bit with my proverbial two cents. Ready? Good.

First of all, I don't have any significant moral beef with what my neighbor should happen to think about how the world was created. The contents of his mind are his own business and frankly, I don't have a right to tamper with them. That said I definately have a right to challenge them should the opportunity arise--but with that in mind no amount of coercion, physical or ethereal can force a change in his thinking, which is why it's generally pointless to engage in lengthy debates with folks who happen to have different opinions as to how everything got started in this universe.

Faith is a profoundly personal experience; it can't just be spread around as the feelings it perpetuates vary widely from person to person and in some cases [like with yours truly] it's not present at all--at least not in the traditional sense. People have faith in many different things; [i]most have faith in God or whatever their chosen diety is; others have faith in things like themselves, others, their good china, and so on and so forth. I, for one, prefer to put my faith in myself, for a myriad of reasons which I will not get into right now.

The main problem I have with religion is that it asks me to take things on faith; it asks me not to know my moral judgements but to feel them in some sort of capacity I've never been able to understand. Assuming for the sake of argument that you ['you' referring to the moment to any Christians, Muslims, Jews, Pagans, etc. who might be reading this] actually do feel the presence of your God or Gods, you need to understand before discussing the issue at length with others that what one feels is hardly a universal response, and it's certainly not something that can be forced on the community at large. You can't force people to feel things on the power of your ideas alone, since to do so would be to suggest that we as humans have the power to dictate our emotions to others; a power which we most certainly do not possess.

I have never been able to discern the nature of reality by the sheer power of my emotions ; had that been the case I would have aced every test I've ever taken on the strength of my boredom and disgust alone. One can no more ask for a [i]rational disproval of God than they can ask for a rational proving of God [hence the "Prove God!" "Disprove God" cries we hear on these forums and countless places elsewhere], which means the only thing I have left to turn to is my emotional responses, since [aside from instinct] emotions are the only thing left for me to use.

Strictly speaking, the assertion of the existence of a God or Gods is a logically arbitrary statement. One can [using reason] no more prove the existence of God than he can prove that a race of gremlins live on Venus' surface. It's pointless to get in a shouting match over it because in the case of both arguments, cognitively, nothing has been said. Note that I'm not saying that such arguments are inherently false, since a false statement actually has to have some relationship with established data, and none currently exists which points to the existence [or absence] of God beyond a shadow of a doubt. If it did, we'd probably all be singing a different tune. Once again, the lack of cold hard evidence is what prompts believers to take the proverbial 'leap of faith,' which simply isn't something I'm prepared to do in light of the current evidence.

All in all, my only problems with religion arise when one attempts to make such beleifs policy, or tries in some other way to force me to adhere to their own morality. Do that, and you will discover in me a lifelong nemesis. As long as you can keep quiet about it and let my "afterlife" be my own business [just like this life ought to be] then we'll get along just fine.

Ok forget the jews...I am trying to say that most modern laws are derived from religious practices and beliefs

Arguably it is the other way around. To ensure that people would actually bother to obey laws, some people thought up the argument "god wants you to, and he knows all". This works much better for most people than just giving rational arguments - most humans are too shortsighted to truly understand that something which seems to hurt you ("do not steal from others, even though it could make you rich quickly") can in fact be beneficial ("if stealing is illegal, people won't steal from you as much either").

But an allpowerful creature, looking closely at what you are doing ? That intimidates allright. We still use santa on our kids for the same reason...

WHy must we put down other people's beleifs? Seriously, how big of a person does that make you?

Any further comments are welcome

This is a general debate forum. It's silly to complain when people debate in it.

Stop it.