NationStates Jolt Archive

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

http://www.smiley.cz/assets/images/2007/futurama-brain-slug.jpg
Pretty much sums it up, 'cept for the sex part. Might take a smidge longer for a pic on that one.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

Is not intolerance for religion. It´s more or less a hunger for trying to understand why Christians believe so blindly. That´s all.

I suspect a lot of abuse by priests. It is more widespread than the media portrays.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?
I'll tolerate beliefs which have a basis in reality, not so for religion.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

It's the opiate of the masses...
;)

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

It's a scapegoat.

its opinions you can voice in the anonymity of online forums that you wouldnt feel comfortable saying to people's faces (in the same way)

Sexual frustration?

its opinions you can voice in the anonymity of online forums that you wouldnt feel comfortable saying to people's faces (in the same way)

Meh, I don't talk any differently IRL than I do on forums.

'Cause religion killed my dad.

It's the opiate of the masses...
;)

AP got to you too!!!???:eek:

AP, all in good fun.;)

because if you know anything about it, religion is worthy of hate. The harm done by religion far outweighs any good done, and that's assuming that their is no god. According to the bible, Jehovah stacks up unfavourably to Hitler.

its opinions you can voice in the anonymity of online forums that you wouldnt feel comfortable saying to people's faces (in the same way)

Pretty much. The Internet is a wonderful way of seeing how people really think. That's what makes it so horrifying.

lots of pro-opium advocates who insist on only taking the real thing and accepting no cheap substitutes

Is not intolerance for religion. It´s more or less a hunger for trying to understand why Christians believe so blindly. That´s all.

Believing something blindly is a human trait. Examples outside the established religions would be Communism(Utopia) and some shades of the Environmentalist movements.

AP got to you too!!!???:eek:

AP, all in good fun.;)

Well, I did pick up and read the Communist Manifesto by his suggestion...

Well, I haven't actually read all the way through it yet, Karl Marx's writing style is rather painful...

Because its shoved down our throats on a daily basis. I bite back whenever it is.

Well, I did pick up and read the Communist Manifesto by his suggestion...

Well, I haven't actually read all the way through it yet, Karl Marx's writing style is rather painful...

Little secret, I´m re-reading it again. I´ve forgotten so much from that book.:p

Just because you have a bad experience of faith doesnt mean you have to give up on it altogether. Religion is not based completely on lies and bad teaching as you(most of you) all seem to think. Myself, i was born a catholic, however i questioned my faith and the blind belief, but this didnt mean i had to give up on religion altogether, rather i just looked for a belief that better suited me and i found fulfilling.

so why do you all give up on faith completely? you can have balance

Because its shoved down our throats on a daily basis. I bite back whenever it is.

As opposed to all the other horse crap that is shoved at us on a daily basis?

AP got to you too!!!???:eek:

AP, all in good fun.;)

Lol, it won't be socialism that destroys religion, the bourgeois will have destroyed it long before that.

Lol, it won't be socialism that destroys religion, the bourgeois will have destroyed it long before that.

Surprisingly, I agree. Someone, I think Schumpeter, said that capitalism wouldn't last, not because of any world revolution but because of its own irreverance for institutions. To a degree, I think he was completely right.

Meh. I wouldn't consider myself intolerant of religion as much as I am staggered by the stupidity and desperation to which to incites people.

Lol, it won't be socialism that destroys religion, the bourgeois will have destroyed it long before that.

This is the first time I have to say I agree with you, AP.;)

As opposed to all the other horse crap that is shoved at us on a daily basis?

Nothing with the force and blind conviction that the religious assualt me with :p

Lol, it won't be socialism that destroys religion, the bourgeois will have destroyed it long before that.

religion is dead already. fundamentalism has been making a hilarious and yet frightening last ditch attempt to save it, but they can't hang on to their children in the face of bourgeois society.

People on this forum are concerned about politics and corruption. (That's an understatement.) One of the most popular methods of oppression is religious oppression.

Believing something blindly is a human trait. Examples outside the established religions would be Communism(Utopia) and some shades of the Environmentalist movements.

That's because your mistaking the liberal movement with the genuine socialists who are completely different.

That's because your mistaking the liberal movement with the genuine socialists who are completely different.

True Communism would be Utopia. No?

True Communism would be Utopia. No?No, a utopia would be no government at all because everyone would be naturally happy and nothing bad would happen. That's why it's called a utopia.

People on this forum are concerned about politics and corruption. (That's an understatement.) One of the most popular methods of oppression is religious oppression.

The most popular method of oppression is economic.

Why do you all seem to give up on all forms of faith altogether? its not blind belieft if u make the choices yourself, yet all too many ppl seem to just choose to abandon religion altogether, why though? why give up on faith COMPLETELY? its been relevant for millenia, and it differenciates us from the animals, so why are u so keen to give up on any form of it?

No, a utopia would be no government at all because everyone would be naturally happy and nothing bad would happen. That's why it's called a utopia.

What I am getting at is Communism is born out of the idea of Utopia. That is why it has never worked right. Problem is that humans are interjected into the equation and that is where it gets screwed up.

religion is dead already. fundamentalism has been making a hilarious and yet frightening last ditch attempt to save it, but they can't hang on to their children in the face of bourgeois society.
Exactly, next few decades will be interesting to see how it goes in that way.

The French revolutionaries thought religion would be initially replaced by a kinda 'rational deism' and eventually liberal atheism generally, although personally I do not see the future as everyone becoming self-identifying 'atheists', I see it more as religion becoming total irrelevant and just science and rationalism just taking root without anyone really noticing, people will just step by step (as is happening now) abandon certain parts of religion until real religious belief does not exist in any meaningful way.

Conservatism generally (as the political arm of religion) will also decrease.

True Communism would be Utopia. No?

Depends what you mean, I see communism in a scientific way, as an abolish of class relations through economic manipulation of society. Many 'leftists' don't really understand that and 'communism' for them exists in no reality except for their own philosophical fantasies.

I think people don't hate religion as much as they hate talking about it. I don't care what religion (or lack of) people have I just don't usually like discussing it most of the time because it rarely gets more then a few posts without it falling apart. There's a quote about religion I picked up some were that goes something like this: religion is like masturbation, keep it to your self damnit.

What I am getting at is Communism is born out of the idea of Utopia. That is why it has never worked right. Problem is that humans are interjected into the equation and that is where it gets screwed up.
Maybe for some this is true, Pol Pot comes to mind with abolishing credit, mercantile value relations and trying to create a 'primitive utopia' over night (literally Zero day - we are starting over), the results of that were not pretty and the progressive Vietnamese socialists had to overthrow Pol Pot to stop such a disaster.

You need to understand what socialism as an economic theory is before branding things as a 'utopia'.

the thread is about religion not the economic theories of socialism? little more relevant please

Why do you all seem to give up on all forms of faith altogether? its not blind belieft if u make the choices yourself, yet all too many ppl seem to just choose to abandon religion altogether, why though? why give up on faith COMPLETELY? its been relevant for millenia, and it differenciates us from the animals, so why are u so keen to give up on any form of it?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Humans are Animals.

I wonder how many times bourgeois has been said on these forums.

I wonder how many times bourgeois has been said on these forums.

Irrespective of the answer, I'd place a fair bet AP has used it the most.

Depends what you mean, I see communism in a scientific way, as an abolish of class relations through economic manipulation of society. Many 'leftists' don't really understand that and 'communism' for them exists in no reality except for their own philosophical fantasies.

I think you see Communism in a different light than many that profess to it's greatness. As you stated in the last part of your comment many leftists do think of Communism in that manner. This is where I am applying the notion that Communism for many is Utopia therefore never really attainable.

I wonder how many times bourgeois has been said on these forums.

I wonder how many times 'nation', 'people', 'religion' or any other amount of descriptive words have been used...

Pretty much. The Internet is a wonderful way of seeing how people really think. That's what makes it so horrifying.

once you develop a thick skin its fascinating.

but it does kinda ruin your opinion of humanity. its like seeing right inside some peoples' heads.

I wonder how many times 'nation', 'people', 'religion' or any other amount of descriptive words have been used...

ahh but those you listed are common place in the English language. Bourgeois is not a everyday word for 99% of English speakers hence my mild jab at it's use on NS.

I think you see Communism in a different light than many the profess to it's greatness. As you stated in the last part of your comment many leftists do think of Communism in that manner. This is where I am applying the notion that Communism for many is Utopia therefore never really attainable.

For many this is true, but you'll generally only find it among anarchists or many angry decentralist types. I believe Marx said that utopian socialism (as opposed to scientific) comes from ignorance, in Marx's day the ignorance was because of lack of information etc, these day it's too much information and fools reverting to the most easy explanation.

once you develop a thick skin its fascinating.

but it does kinda ruin your opinion of humanity. its like seeing right inside some peoples' heads.

Very true. If you really want to get into the depths of the net you should look at sites like 4chan. Makes one see people in a whole different light.

That's because your mistaking the liberal movement with the genuine socialists who are completely different.

I doubt many of NSG's socialists would consider you a "genuine socialist."

I doubt many of NSG's socialists would consider you a "genuine socialist."
That's probably because most of them are utopians, classic post-soviet utopianism. You'll occasionally see them saying something like 'Marx wasn't a communist' and their view of 'socialism' is some abstract form created through their own subjective prejudiced bias, 'socialism' has no material base, no economic theory, it's just a nice sounding name and some cultural hatred.

Maybe for some this is true, Pol Pot comes to mind with abolishing credit, mercantile value relations and trying to create a 'primitive utopia' over night (literally Zero day - we are starting over), the results of that were not pretty and the progressive Vietnamese socialists had to overthrow Pol Pot to stop such a disaster.

You need to understand what socialism as an economic theory is before branding things as a 'utopia'.

Maybe the problem is that humans are corruptible. If we picked something pure, like say, a jackalope, to lead us we would have a lot less problems in this world. It doesn't matter what economic system you follow, if it involves giving a small group of people nearly all the power, it will end in disaster. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. One of the stages of cummunism is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, if I rember correctly. Very rarely do transitional dictators give up power.

For many this is true, but you'll generally only find it among anarchists or many angry decentralist types. I believe Marx said that utopian socialism (as opposed to scientific) comes from ignorance, in Marx's day the ignorance was because of lack of information etc, these day it's too much information and fools reverting to the most easy explanation.

Even with today's vast knowledge at many people's fingertips ignorance still persists. Humans generally look for the easy way out. Seems to be in our genes.

Maybe the problem is that humans are corruptible. If we picked something pure, like say, a jackalope, to lead us we would have a lot less problems in this world. It doesn't matter what economic system you follow, if it involves giving a small group of people nearly all the power, it will end in disaster. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. One of the stages of cummunism is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, if I rember correctly. Very rarely do transitional dictators give up power.

QFT


Jackalope's are our savior.

Even with today's vast knowledge at many people's fingertips ignorance still persists. Humans generally look for the easy way out. Seems to be in our genes.
Hmmm, interesting.

I have met a few socialist alliance people like that, when I mention economic theories they 'tone out', i guess 'socialism' for them is waving a red flag and saying how evil John Howard was.

Maybe the problem is that humans are corruptible. If we picked something pure, like say, a jackalope, to lead us we would have a lot less problems in this world. It doesn't matter what economic system you follow, if it involves giving a small group of people nearly all the power, it will end in disaster. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. One of the stages of cummunism is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, if I rember correctly. Very rarely do transitional dictators give up power.
I agree to an extent, but like many others your mistaking Marx's 'dictatorship' as meaning tyranny, Marx simply meant political power, in this case political power controlled by workers.

Religion is easy to attack.

Find a contradiction or cruelty in the holy scripture.
Assume all followers of that religion believe the holy scripture is true.
Therefore they believe the contradiction or cruelty.
Therefore the religion and/or the followers are immoral or stupid.

Voila. Instant argument. Just add angst.

Religion is easy to attack.

Find a contradiction or cruelty in the holy scripture.
Therefore the religion is immoral or stupid.

Voila. Instant argument. Just add angst.

Fixed

I agree to an extent, but like many others your mistaking Marx's 'dictatorship' as meaning tyranny, Marx simply meant political power, in this case political power controlled by workers.

How many workers? Dictatorship is defined as all or nearly all the political power in the hands of the few. So if it was controled by the workers, wouldn't a better term be a Democracy of the proletariat? I always assumed it was intented to be a short-term placement of power shortly after a red revolution. Despite being corrected on something, I still don't like the idea of communism.

Hmmm, interesting.

I have met a few socialist alliance people like that, when I mention economic theories they 'tone out', i guess 'socialism' for them is waving a red flag and saying how evil John Howard was.

Most people in general tune out to economics. Numbers hurt their heads. Alright now I think you see the point I was trying to make. As well as I understand where your coming from.

Religion is easy to attack.

Find a contradiction or cruelty in the holy scripture.
Assume all followers of that religion believe the holy scripture is true.
Therefore they believe the contradiction or cruelty.
Therefore the religion and/or the followers are immoral or stupid.

Voila. Instant argument. Just add angst.

/thread

Fixed

Thank you for providing an example of the low quality of debate against religion in these forums.

How many workers? Dictatorship is defined as all or nearly all the political power in the hands of the few. So if it was controled by the workers, wouldn't a better term be a Democracy of the proletariat? I always assumed it was intented to be a short-term placement of power shortly after a red revolution. Despite being corrected on something, I still don't like the idea of communism.

Dictatorship implies dictation or direction of course, dictatorship in this case simply means the state generally I believe. The term dictatorship wasn't a loaded buzzword in the 18th century as it is now. For example the Greeks used the term 'tyranny' in a totally descriptive way with no emotional connotations.

By large I agree with the idea power can corrupt when placed in the hands of the few, but you should know that political parties can be very democratic and open in their structure.

Andaras, since you're here, I'll ask a question I've been wondering: do you think communism is slightly messianistic? That is, do you believe communism promises...not an utopia, exactly, but the best of all possible worlds when it comes? Or do you think it is simply an inevitable fact, like "there will be a full moon tomorrow." I've heard both, I'm curious what you think.

Dictatorship implies dictation or direction of course, dictatorship in this case simply means the state generally I believe. The term dictatorship wasn't a loaded buzzword in the 18th century as it is now. For example the Greeks used the term 'tyranny' in a totally descriptive way with no emotional connotations.

By large I agree with the idea power can corrupt when placed in the hands of the few, but you should know that political parties can be very democratic and open in their structure.

Yes, but No matter how open a party starts, it can always become closed. Look at the Republicans in the US and the Soviets towards the end of the 70 on.

So if it was controled by the workers, wouldn't a better term be a Democracy of the proletariat?

Simple answer: Yes. Marx wasn't always the best at making his terms easily understood.

Somewhat less simple answer: No, not with respect to the point Marx was making about states and class society. In Marxist theory, a state is always a vehicle for exclusive class rule: in capitalist society, it is the rule of the capitalists, in socialism it is the rule of the workers. Insofar as the "dictatorship of the proletariat" represents exclusive, even if majoritarian, rule, it remains a "dictatorship" in that it is a dictatorship of a class over others: the public as a whole does not rule (though formal democracy is maintained.)

Of course, Marx did not think we could do any better within the framework of class society. Class antagonisms are too fundamental--especially at a point of revolutionary change. Only when a classless society has been established can we have true democracy and freedom.

That's how the argument goes, anyway.

Is not intolerance for religion. It´s more or less a hunger for trying to understand why Christians believe so blindly. That´s all.

He/she said Religions, you automatically went to Christians, I guess we know where your bigotries are.

Andaras, since you're here, I'll ask a question I've been wondering: do you think communism is slightly messianistic? That is, do you believe communism promises...not an utopia, exactly, but the best of all possible worlds when it comes? Or do you think it is simply an inevitable fact, like "there will be a full moon tomorrow." I've heard both, I'm curious what you think.
I am remembering a good discussion I had with Trot (whats his name?) in the Communist Manifesto anniversary thread some weeks ago, if I can find the thread that would be good.

Anyways I think you'll find plenty of utopians who think of communism in that way, keep in mind that these people will never had read Marx or been exposed to his robust economic theories for the development of socialized relations in society.

The answer is two fold, socialism is both just and desirable, but it's also inevitable, but the only reason it is inevitable is because it is just and desirable. The Marxist view is that society is changed by the material motivation of people, Marx observed that the class relations of capitalism (as opposed the class relations of say feudalism) would result in socialism.

So just as feudalism created it's destroyer (the bourgeois), so has capitalism created the proletariat, whom will supplant it.

So yes Marxism is scientific, but human civilization is by common sense going to be changed by the men who inhabit it, and their wishes and desires for a better life.

That's how I think of Marxism, yes socialism is inevitable, but it will be people who bring it on. Economic relations influence society in certain directions, but those directions can only be taken once individuals take advantage of them. That's the role of the political communists.

Because the good people of NSG, bless their hearts, are grounded in their ways. Many believe if science doesn't tell them its true, then it can't be true. Many don't understand what "faith" truly means. To know something is true because it fills your heart and body to point where you know it's true and it's good enough for you. And there is no reason to have to defend that belief to anyone, especially to try to do so with science. For the doubter, no amount proof will be enough, for the believer, no amount of proof is necessary. So go, believe in God, pray and don't worry about what people may say, its not worth it.

In answer to the messianic bit, not saying 'revolution is inevitable' is not an excuse to sit on their arse and do nothing, men make revolution, revolution isn't going to come down from the sky one day like the Second Coming.

In answer to the messianic bit, not saying 'revolution is inevitable' is not an excuse to sit on their arse and do nothing, men make revolution, revolution isn't going to come down from the sky one day like the Second Coming.

Welcome back, i've missed you. :fluffle:

*snip*
That was helpful, thank you.

Seeing Sovietstan's post reminded me of the original intent of this thread. I'll stop stealing it now, and let you all get on your way.

Soviestan aren't you religious?

We're all godless homosexual Communist Witches that eat aborted fetus's (fetusi?)

That was helpful, thank you.

Seeing Sovietstan's post reminded me of the original intent of this thread. I'll stop stealing it now, and let you all get on your way.

Actually I've found that the best debates come from topics which debates which have nothing to do with how a thread started.

That was helpful, thank you.

Seeing Sovietstan's post reminded me of the original intent of this thread. I'll stop stealing it now, and let you all get on your way.

Ahh but it was a good tangent that the thread went.

Ahh but it was a good tangent that the thread went.

'Twas, 'twas. We talked about communism in a calm and collected fashion. I learned something new. No one used :upyours:, :gundge:, :mp5:, or :sniper:. All in all, a good discussion.

Okay, break's over. Back to producing the intellectual manure that fuels the Internet's existence.
OMG!!! wut teh heck is wrong with u??! :upyours::upyours::upyours:

Do you want an honest answer?

I hate religion (at least in its mainstream manifestations) because religion hates me and many other undeserving people, and neither the condescending generosity of the conservatives nor the evasive apologetics of the liberals make up for that well enough.

Do you want an honest answer?

I hate religion (at least in its mainstream manifestations) because religion hates me and many other undeserving people, and neither the condescending generosity of the conservatives nor the evasive apologetics of the liberals make up for that well enough.
That doesn't make much sense. Religion isn't a person, it can't hate you anymore than capitalism, or democracy, or the idea of soccer. What you mean is religous people hate you, which does make sense even if I don't think it is true.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

Oh, where to begin. Probably because organized religion is the single biggest deterrent to spiritual growth, intellectual growth, emotional growth and progress known to man. Maybe because the current state of affairs in the Middle East is a direct outgrowth of organized religion. Possibly because the practitioners of organized religion worship everything but God. Other than that, I can't really say.

Oh, where to begin. Probably because organized religion is the single biggest deterrent to spiritual growth, intellectual growth, emotional growth and progress known to man. Maybe because the current state of affairs in the Middle East is a direct outgrowth of organized religion. Possibly because the practitioners of organized religion worship everything but God. Other than that, I can't really say.
That is a very real problem. I wouldn't generalize it to all followers of organized religion because that's just silly, but religion idolatry is certainly a stumbling block to many people.

Oh, where to begin. Probably because organized religion is the single biggest deterrent to spiritual growth, intellectual growth, emotional growth and progress known to man. Maybe because the current state of affairs in the Middle East is a direct outgrowth of organized religion. Possibly because the practitioners of organized religion worship everything but God. Other than that, I can't really say.

I agree, take the Palestine question, the solution is simple - partition, what poisons the debate is religion, both the religion of the Jihadists and the Zionists who think the land was given to them by God.

Religion isn't a person, it can't hate you anymore than capitalism, or democracy, or the idea of soccer.

Stop being such a literalist. ;)

What you mean is religous people hate you,

No, that's not what I mean. Religious people may or may not indulge in the hatred their religions propagate.

The point is that the doctrines and traditions of the mainstream organized religions promote bigotry. (It's not really about "me" so much as it's about the general case. People who hate me unjustifiably generally make me laugh, because I've been lucky enough to avoid much harm. People who hate others, and cause them suffering, and worst of all make them hate themselves, infuriate me beyond all reason.)

To steal from somebody else:

Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider a capacity for it terrifying.

Because religious belief is irrational, and the whole point of boards like this is to hone one's skills in logical reasoning and debate.

the whole point of boards like this is to hone one's skills in logical reasoning and debate.

No it's not, but it's a nice side effect.

Because people who are attracted to playing a game like NationStates probably don't like submitting their moral independence to a set of beliefs and rules known as religions.

Why would a group of Halo-gamers like guns? Because they like playing games where you shoot guns.

Why would a group of NS-players dislike religion? Because they like to be the Master of their own Domain...and not be told what to do by some pesky God or gods ;)

Because religious belief is irrational, and the whole point of boards like this is to hone one's skills in logical reasoning and debate.

Which is why you'll rarely if ever see the kinda 'religious people' we talk about on forums like this, and if we do it will be in 1 word trolls who just run away afterwards.

Why would a group of NS-players dislike religion? Because they like to be the Master of their own Domain...and not be told what to do by some pesky God or gods ;)

This is also a good answer :)

I'm Agnostic myself...

Because Generalites are somewhat more intelligent than average.

Well, there seems to be two answers to the question.

Either:

One, you tend to get a lot more (Militant) atheists on this board due to a wide range of resons, but mostly being the age demographic I'm willing to bet. And after getting pounded on in real life and finding like minds on this board start to figure that this is now their time to pound back about how all Christians or religion-of-the-week (Though it almost always seems to be Christians) are X or do Y or believe Z or are stupid poo poo heads because of X, Y or Z... after stating how pissed off they are that those of a religious bent tend to treat all atheists as if they were one and not individuals with individualtic beliefs and how they would NEVER do that in return.

Or

Two, This is a debate board and most people here will gladly argue over the color of grass at the drop of a hat and religion is probably the biggest spark you can make in a tinder dry forest containing a gunpowder factory.

Whether I go with one or two depends upon the threads currently in general and how annoyed I'm feeling at the moment.

It's mostly just Christianity and occasionally Judaism, though. NSers love Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.

I am an atheist but I don't hate religion. I dislike anyone who is prepared to believe something irrational just because their book says it's right. I find people who are not prepared to examine their own lives and attitudes reprehensible.

the reason I'm not religious is the same reason I don't believe in the veracity of astrology, spiritualism or the tooth fairy. No proof, just circular logic and a lot of people getting a free ride by being holy men.

For more, get yourself a copy of the God Delusion.

I was raised in a Catholic but I always knew that God doesn't exist.

I don't hate religion, I'm fascinated by them, but I also despise them.

It's just that they are no more relevant.
We needed them to sacralise the law, in ancient times, when we couldn't find a better way to organise a society and our governments haven't a best method to control social anger.

I need proof.
They are not.

I am an atheist but I don't hate religion. I dislike anyone who is prepared to believe something irrational just because their book says it's right. I find people who are not prepared to examine their own lives and attitudes reprehensible.

the reason I'm not religious is the same reason I don't believe in the veracity of astrology, spiritualism or the tooth fairy. No proof, just circular logic and a lot of people getting a free ride by being holy men.

For more, get yourself a copy of the God Delusion.
I prefer Hitchens to Dawkins.

For more, get yourself a copy of the God Delusion.

The problem with Dawkins, in my opinion, is that he is about as zealous in his atheism as many fundamentalist preachers are in their theism. His personal crusade against religion makes him a poor choice for an unbiased look at the foundations and reasons for religious belief.

I am an atheist but I don't hate religion. I dislike anyone who is prepared to believe something irrational just because their book says it's right. I find people who are not prepared to examine their own lives and attitudes reprehensible.
The irony, 'tis delicious.

the reason I'm not religious is the same reason I don't believe in the veracity of astrology, spiritualism or the tooth fairy. No proof, just circular logic and a lot of people getting a free ride by being holy men.
Good on yew. Now, tell me then, what's reality?

The problem with Dawkins, in my opinion, is that he is about as zealous in his atheism as many fundamentalist preachers are in their theism. His personal crusade against religion makes him a poor choice for an unbiased look at the foundations and reasons for religious belief.

It's not zealous when your correct.

I don't hate religion, I merely have not found one to my liking. I beleive that god, if there is one, looks upon religions with disdain.

Because Generalites are somewhat more intelligent than average.

LMAO that's a good one Big Jim

Because religious belief is irrational, and the whole point of boards like this is to hone one's skills in logical reasoning and debate.

So is this, the amount of poor arguments both in structure and fallacies I see from people from all sides of the topic at hand is unbelievable.


In regards to the OP I think some people hate religion because they are influenced by certain sections of the media and people with loud voices. so in response they wishing to sound intelligent repeat these same words without thinking and not go through the facts properly (ie All wars are about religion).

Some others have seen the hypocrisy of some so called religions and this is true in America and there are many of them on these forums, where they have seen such preachers who have accumulated large amounts of money (usually millions of dollars) and use it for their own personal needs while the homeless people outside die. These are evangelicals and there are plenty of them in America.

Second many people hate religious people and consequently religion because other strongly religious people have committed unlawful acts and so assume all religious people are like that, this in itself is a fallacy (Guilt by association).

Other people on these forums also tend to assume that all conservatives are Christian or those that have conservative ideals social or economic or anything else and so obviously all religions are evil and so they wrongly associate these conservatives which they hate and because they maybe a christian which I am sure sometimes has little bearing on the ideals, and I have news for them I know a couple of people who are members of the Liberal Party of Australia (A party consisting of centre-right and right winged people) and they do not believe in God.

I usually see these threads and sometimes I just have to laugh, and while I should correct them many people on NSG are set so much in their beliefs (yes that includes people from all viewpoints) that no matter what you say, even if you shreds the argument to bits and prove that they are wrong 100% you will still not change their minds

why do so many people who are unwilling or unable to think out side the box of whatever dominant belief where they live, assume, that anyone who doesn't subscribe to exactly the same shaired speculations as themselves, somehow "hates" any and every sort of belief?

or that THEIR belief knows everything and is the final, ultimate and only word on it?

wake up and smell the reality. none of us KNOW anything. only that we CAN feel and experience things we don't even have to pretend to know anything about in order to do so. things that may resemble the claims of some belief or beliefs or another, or may not.

words prove nothing. neither is, nor can, nor has to, nor can't.

maybe there's something close enough for government work to being a god. maybe it loves us. but maybe, just maybe, neither it, nor anything else unseen, has diddly to do with anyone pressuring anyone else to make the same speculative assumptions as themselves.

=^^=
.../\...

I hate religion because it's irrational, inflexible, deliberately ignorant and aside from a very few liberal sects, it's intolerant of gays, women and anything that doesn't fit into the frame work called "tradition". It's a cancer that spreads ideas that some hoe if we don't buy into the same load of horse shit these people are that we're hellbound, or that we're misguided because we don't believe in the right god or any god for that matter...

Religion is easy to attack.

Find a contradiction or cruelty in the holy scripture.
Assume all followers of that religion believe the holy scripture is true.
Therefore they believe the contradiction or cruelty.
Therefore the religion and/or the followers are immoral or stupid.

Voila. Instant argument. Just add angst.

True. But are their not also many contradictions in economic systems like communism? So its more of an argument against everything.

why do so many people who are unwilling or unable to think out side the box of whatever dominant belief where they live, assume, that anyone who doesn't subscribe to exactly the same shaired speculations as themselves, somehow "hates" any and every sort of belief?

or that THEIR belief knows everything and is the final, ultimate and only word on it?

wake up and smell the reality. none of us KNOW anything. only that we CAN feel and experience things we don't even have to pretend to know anything about in order to do so. things that may resemble the claims of some belief or beliefs or another, or may not.

words prove nothing. neither is, nor can, nor has to, nor can't.

maybe there's something close enough for government work to being a god. maybe it loves us. but maybe, just maybe, neither it, nor anything else unseen, has diddly to do with anyone pressuring anyone else to make the same speculative assumptions as themselves.

=^^=
.../\...

But is faith through trials and tribulations not the base of religion? And if words do prove nothing, then is this entire thread not null and void, leaving the blank slate we started with?

I am an atheist but I don't hate religion. I dislike anyone who is prepared to believe something irrational just because their book says it's right. I find people who are not prepared to examine their own lives and attitudes reprehensible.

In the bible, it says MULTIPLE times to examine your very lives, charecter, and attitude to find the problem and then seek guidence from anyone to correct it.

True. But are their not also many contradictions in economic systems like communism?
Careful, you'll upset the followers of the Red God and Marx his Prophet, and they'll go all jihadist on your ass.

Careful, you'll upset the followers of the Red God and Marx his Prophet, and they'll go all jihadist on your ass.

Exactly. If the people with "sense" attack religion with the same zealosy that they say religion does, they are the problem, not the solution.

True. But are their not also many contradictions in economic systems like communism? So its more of an argument against everything.

Religions and political idealogies are the same thing. A set of ideals with varying numbers of inconsistancies and contradictions. However believers are willing to accept these, either through denial, elastic thinking or just "meh". There is no difference between being a comitted communist, a committed libertarian, a committed christian, a comited hindu, or a comitted atheist.

Oh, where to begin. Probably because organized religion is the single biggest deterrent to spiritual growth, intellectual growth, emotional growth and progress known to man. Maybe because the current state of affairs in the Middle East is a direct outgrowth of organized religion. Possibly because the practitioners of organized religion worship everything but God. Other than that, I can't really say.

I am relegious. Many sects of EVERY religion go either radical and hate all but themselves, or become corrupt. The church now is much like the church of the middle ages. So, relegion doesn't hate. Religious people don't hate. Radical Zealots who are totally disselusioned hate. They hate all, even religious people.

Religions and political idealogies are the same thing. A set of ideals with varying numbers of inconsistancies and contradictions. However believers are willing to accept these, either through denial, elastic thinking or just "meh". There is no difference between being a comitted communist, a committed libertarian, a committed christian, a comited hindu, or a comitted atheist.

Yeah. Cannot there be a "socalist" (just a fancy word for communist) attack everything and then turn hypocratic and say that capitalism or christianity or even athiesm is unjustly attacking him when he is doing the same to them?

Exactly. If the people with "sense" attack religion with the same zealosy that they say religion does, they are the problem, not the solution.

I propose a new Semi-Religion, the First Church of STFU.

The Sum of our Scripture can be Matthew 6 1-8. Expanded to cover everybody.

I'm having T-shirts made.

Thank you for providing an example of the low quality of debate against religion in these forums.

You're welcome...

He/she said Religions, you automatically went to Christians, I guess we know where your bigotries are.

She said christian because that is the religion she is most familiar with, and because it is perceived attacks on christianity that prompted this thread.

Because the good people of NSG, bless their hearts, are grounded in their ways. Many believe if science doesn't tell them its true, then it can't be true. Many don't understand what "faith" truly means. To know something is true because it fills your heart and body to point where you know it's true and it's good enough for you. And there is no reason to have to defend that belief to anyone, especially to try to do so with science. For the doubter, no amount proof will be enough, for the believer, no amount of proof is necessary. So go, believe in God, pray and don't worry about what people may say, its not worth it.

Very well stated.

Well, there seems to be two answers to the question.

Either:

One, you tend to get a lot more (Militant) atheists on this board due to a wide range of resons, but mostly being the age demographic I'm willing to bet. And after getting pounded on in real life and finding like minds on this board start to figure that this is now their time to pound back about how all Christians or religion-of-the-week (Though it almost always seems to be Christians) are X or do Y or believe Z or are stupid poo poo heads because of X, Y or Z... after stating how pissed off they are that those of a religious bent tend to treat all atheists as if they were one and not individuals with individualtic beliefs and how they would NEVER do that in return.

Or

Two, This is a debate board and most people here will gladly argue over the color of grass at the drop of a hat and religion is probably the biggest spark you can make in a tinder dry forest containing a gunpowder factory.

Whether I go with one or two depends upon the threads currently in general and how annoyed I'm feeling at the moment.

I'd say that is an accurate summation, for me the reason is usually #2, religious debates are always lively.

It's mostly just Christianity and occasionally Judaism, though. NSers love Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.

I have just as many problems with judaism and islam as I do with christianity, as far as the other religions, I do not know enough about them to have a definite opinion of them.

I myself am a hard core atheist. No wavering. I am absolutely certain that nobody on this planet in their holy book, secret tablets, oral history or whatever are correct, but I do not hate religion.

I hate religion when it gets used as a tool of hate. This happens too often. To justify torture (Spanish inquisition). Making battles over land and resources much more personal, and thus more horrific (Ex-Yugoslavia, Palestine, Northern Ireland, Pakistan-India. I've just scratched thesurface, but you get my gist.

Why am I so certain their is no god? I do not discount that a being could exist beyond our power. For example. The ant can only perceive poison from the skys, boiling water coming through their home, food falling from heaven, etc, but all these things are the result of actions by humanity. It would be the height of arrogance to assume something similar could not be the case with us.

But all the prohets contradict so much, that they must all be wrong. "There is but 1 god." O.K. What about the Romans, Greeks, etc. Your religion has much less to do with the truth, than where you were born and who raised you.

God is unnecessary. If we need a creator, then god needed 1. If he can just be, so can us.

As I am so certain, if the topic comes up, I will try the anti-conversion. I will not bring up the topic though.

1 question. Do any of you have ANY idea about what (insert religion here)'s holy texts say and what they mean? Sometimes, people will read the old testament of the bible and attack it when those are the JUDIASTIC beleifs, and the christian beliefs and why they worship jesus is in the NEW TESTAMENT. DON'T ARGUE AGAINST SOMETHING UNLESS YOU UNDERSTAND IT!!!

It's not zealous when your correct.
Then no one is zealous in their own eyes, because they are correct in their own eyes.

Do any of you have ANY idea about what (insert religion here)'s holy texts say and what they mean

Sounds like a good question to ask the people of [insert religion here]

Sounds like a good question to ask the people of [insert religion here]

Take religion and insert it, then ask them.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Maybe it's people using "religion" as a byword for Christianity. :p

Take religion and insert it, then ask them.

Hmmmm i'm not sure if you understood what I was saying. Just to be on the safe side i'll clarify.

In my experience a lot of the people who identify themselves as Christians (for they're the group I talk to most) have never fully read their religious texts. They go to church and all that jazz but they take their information from the minister, priest, etc alone and never read the Bible unless as a part of a religious ceremony, etc.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

I'll tell you why.

It's because Religion is anathema to the 'progressive' mentality. Religion is about self sacrifice, self control, and believing in something greater than you. Modern liberal thought is all about the self, self gratification and holding oneself over all else.

And they hate religion because its a nagging reminder of it. This is why Christianity bears the brunt. Looking over the world there are religions that commit atrocities far and away worse than anything found in Christian culture, yet still it is reviled the most.

You'll notice there are two kinds of religious people on this thread. Devout religious people who typically get lots of vitriol when talking religion, and posers who call themselves religious but really have no conviction. They're generally tolerated much more because they 'know their place.'

Yeah. Cannot there be a "socalist" (just a fancy word for communist) attack everything and then turn hypocratic and say that capitalism or christianity or even athiesm is unjustly attacking him when he is doing the same to them?

I think that's different. That's just hypocracy and a way to try and plead the sympathy vote of others when you get pwned in a debate. It's not a way of protecting your own internal ideals agaisnt contradictions you are (on some level) aware of. Everyone does it, simply because there is no belief or ideal that is completely bulletproof, and everybody (including me) has one belief or ideal, not neccessary religious.

Hmmmm i'm not sure if you understood what I was saying. Just to be on the safe side i'll clarify.

In my experience a lot of the people who identify themselves as Christians (for they're the group I talk to most) have never fully read their religious texts. They go to church and all that jazz but they take their information from the minister, priest, etc alone and never read the Bible unless as a part of a religious ceremony, etc.

Oh. See, the problem lies there withen. They claim to "practice" a religion but only do it for their wive/husband/girlfreind/boyfreind/boss/mom/dad etc etc etc, so only about 40-60 percent are TRUE beleivers. The fakers are who people are attacking, since THEY contradict the holy text of their religion, not the holy text contradicting itself, as some people belive.

I prefer Hitchens to Dawkins.

Hitchens? The ridiculous posturing warmonger? Seriously?

Oh. See, the problem lies there withen. They claim to "practice" a religion but only do it for their wive/husband/girlfreind/boyfreind/boss/mom/dad etc etc etc, so only about 40-60 percent are TRUE beleivers. The fakers are who people are attacking, since THEY contradict the holy text of their religion, not the holy text contradicting itself, as some people belive.

The problem comes along when people try to differentiate between true and fake followers of a religion. I don't think that all people who fit the description I gave are doing it for someone else. I think a lot of them do it just out of laziness. What are the criteria being set to say who is a true follower or not?

Hitchens? The ridiculous posturing warmonger? Seriously?
I can't stand him - or his brother.

I'll tell you why.

It's because Religion is anathema to the 'progressive' mentality. Religion is about self sacrifice, self control, and believing in something greater than you. Modern liberal thought is all about the self, self gratification and holding oneself over all else.

And they hate religion because its a nagging reminder of it. This is why Christianity bears the brunt. Looking over the world there are religions that commit atrocities far and away worse than anything found in Christian culture, yet still it is reviled the most.

You'll notice there are two kinds of religious people on this thread. Devout religious people who typically get lots of vitriol when talking religion, and posers who call themselves religious but really have no conviction. They're generally tolerated much more because they 'know their place.'

One problem with that Summation Neo B is I'd say you are one of the Devout religious people, and at the same time you are one of the ones whose opinions I respect, I may not agree with you but you always state your case intelligently, the same thing applies to Baldy.

The problem comes along when people try to differentiate between true and fake followers of a religion. I don't think that all people who fit the description I gave are doing it for someone else. I think a lot of them do it just out of laziness. What are the criteria being set to say who is a true follower or not?

Intresting. I see your point, and I can also count about 500+ of the 1000 that go to my church that fit that description.

I'll tell you why. It's because Religion is anathema to the 'progressive' mentality. Religion is about self sacrifice, self control, and believing in something greater than you. Modern liberal thought is all about the self, self gratification and holding oneself over all else.

This is an unfair generalisation. I know many people with no religious convictions who believe very much in self sacrifice and control. I also know some selfish religious people (not just Christians, though them too) who are all about self self self. No one group is better than the other, and I say this as a religious person.

And they hate religion because its a nagging reminder of it. This is why Christianity bears the brunt. Looking over the world there are religions that commit atrocities far and away worse than anything found in Christian culture, yet still it is reviled the most.

Christianity is not the most hated religion (in the west, at least). That title belongs fair and square to Islam. Sorry to all my Muslim friends, but you know it's true.


You'll notice there are two kinds of religious people on this thread. Devout religious people who typically get lots of vitriol when talking religion,

I've never been attacked because of religion. There is a difference between devout and aggressive. I think a lot of people who express religious views on here can get defensively aggressive about their beliefs, and that gets them flamed. That's also true of other "religions" on here though (ultra capitalist and ultra leftist) that get treated just the same way.

and posers who call themselves religious but really have no conviction. They're generally tolerated much more because they 'know their place.'


That could mean people who are simply less agressive in their beliefs, that doesn't make them posers

One problem with that Summation Neo B is I'd say you are one of the Devout religious people, and at the same time you are one of the ones whose opinions I respect, I may not agree with you but you always state your case intelligently, the same thing applies to Baldy.

Well TBH Dyakovo, and I should have put a statement like this in my post, you're an exception from what I stated. I actually look forward to seeing posts from you because even when I don't agree I've never seen vitriol or mean spiritedness in them. There are a few atheists on here who are exceptions, whom I respect for not being like the ones I described earlier, and I realize I've done a disservice by not listing them.

Knights of Liberty
Muravyets (I haven't forgotten, and yes I know you're not atheist but I'm still giving you the nod.)
Ifreann

And I know there's more but my Warhammer buddies will be here any minute so we can go Nerdin' so I gotta scoot ;)

Maybe I'll edit later when I think of more.

Religion is about self sacrifice, self control, and believing in something greater than you. Modern liberal thought is all about the self, self gratification and holding oneself over all else.

Religion is all about self-gratification... faith in the deity itself being the most obvious example, as well as all the other incentives to stop thinking and trust your holy book. It's quite convenient for people's selfish needs, especially when they're deluded into thinking that once they memorize the doctrine and never question it, they're guaranteed forgiveness for any misdeeds and an eternity of happiness in Heaven.

The rule of reason, on the other hand--which "modern liberal thought" elevates over all else--demands that we invest the effort in thinking for ourselves, and that we recognize that just because something is convenient for us doesn't mean it's actually true. It demands that we use reason to investigate our moral duty rather than just accept whatever we're told, and thus it insists that we question and reject our prejudices instead of affirming them with passages from some holy scripture.

I believe in self-sacrifice, self-control, and "something greater than myself" in the sense of certain ideals that are worth pursuing even against my inclinations. But I don't believe in them arbitrarily--because someone told me to.

And they hate religion because its a nagging reminder of it. This is why Christianity bears the brunt. Looking over the world there are religions that commit atrocities far and away worse than anything found in Christian culture, yet still it is reviled the most.

Undoubtedly because Christianity is uniquely about self-sacrifice and self-control, right? :rolleyes:

Hmm... maybe our targeting of Christianity has something to do with the fact that most of us live in countries where Christianity is far and away the major religion, the one we're most exposed to and most familiar with, and in which we may ourselves have been brought up.

No. Can't be that. Must be because Christianity is exceptional, being the word of God we unbelievers don't want to hear.

This is an unfair generalisation. I know many people with no religious convictions who believe very much in self sacrifice and control. I also know some selfish religious people (not just Christians, though them too) who are all about self self self. No one group is better than the other, and I say this as a religious person.


I don't mean religious people I mean religion itself as an entity. Generally most people on here won't cross the line into hating individuals because they know they'll be called out as bigoted.


Christianity is not the most hated religion (in the west, at least). That title belongs fair and square to Islam. Sorry to all my Muslim friends, but you know it's true.

That may be true in society in general, but not on this board. People still rail about a poster named Deep Kimchi for developing an anti-Islamic reputation but people are applauded around here for saying far worse about Christianity.


I've never been attacked because of religion. There is a difference between devout and aggressive. I think a lot of people who express religious views on here can get defensively aggressive about their beliefs, and that gets them flamed. That's also true of other "religions" on here though (ultra capitalist and ultra leftist) that get treated just the same way.


I'm very devout, and I don't attack other religions, and I'm not seeking converts, yet some of the posts I've gotten would curl your toenails.


That could mean people who are simply less agressive in their beliefs, that doesn't make them posers

I don't think so. The ones I have in mind are borderline apologetic for their belief.

Generally most people on here won't cross the line into hating individuals because they know they'll be called out as bigoted.

I'm not afraid of being "called out as bigoted." I just generally draw a distinction between religious people and the religions they believe in... religious people can be decent even as their religions decidedly are not.

People still rail about a poster named Deep Kimchi for developing an anti-Islamic reputation but people are applauded around here for saying far worse about Christianity.

Really? Be more specific. What do people say about Christianity that's "far worse"?

That may be true in society in general, but not on this board. People still rail about a poster named Deep Kimchi for developing an anti-Islamic reputation but people are applauded around here for saying far worse about Christianity.






http://intellectualize.org/images/help_oppressed.gif

its opinions you can voice in the anonymity of online forums that you wouldnt feel comfortable saying to people's faces (in the same way)nope

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?
I resent religion because it makes my life worse. It's just that simple.

I don't mean religious people I mean religion itself as an entity. Generally most people on here won't cross the line into hating individuals because they know they'll be called out as bigoted.

Or, you know it could be because they are not bigotted.

That may be true in society in general, but not on this board. People still rail about a poster named Deep Kimchi for developing an anti-Islamic reputation but people are applauded around here for saying far worse about Christianity.

Examples por favor.

I'm very devout, and I don't attack other religions, and I'm not seeking converts, yet some of the posts I've gotten would curl your toenails.

True, there are some posters here who are as bad in their 'atheism' (actually anti-theism) as fundamentalists

I don't think so. The ones I have in mind are borderline apologetic for their belief.

And I have as little respect for anyone who is not willing to defend their religion as I do for those who say that their religion is 'prefect'.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

This response was touched on by another poster, but it's the true one :

Demographics. There are very many liberal, upper-middle class, high-school aged kids on NS that hate anything their parents represent. The main targets are usually Republicanism and Christianity. That doesn't mean that some people don't fit that mold, but when you go to any online gaming forum you're going to find a disproportionate amount of people who do.

Hitchens? The ridiculous posturing warmonger? Seriously?

political reasons, probably. though i would have thought hitchens' status as a trot/former trot would have turned our resident stally off. maybe it's his transition to explicitly being a "single issue voter"?

Religion is a mindset of the past. It is the refusal to live in reality. No modern and (hopefully) enlightened mind will adhere to something so vain, hollow, and fake as religion, especially the abrahamic religions where not only the theology is idiotic but where even the (hi-)story is corrupted.

This response was touched on by another poster, but it's the true one :

Demographics. There are very many liberal, upper-middle class, high-school aged kids on NS that hate anything their parents represent. The main targets are usually Republicanism and Christianity. That doesn't mean that some people don't fit that mold, but when you go to any online gaming forum you're going to find a disproportionate amount of people who do.

Funny how people move toward Republicanism as they start making money. Not all but many do. I started out as a Dem and have got much more conservative as I have made a bunch of money and aged.

As for the religious aspect there is an obvious correlation to ones age and how much they believe. I mean when someone gets near their end life they want to make sure their bases are covered.

Religion is a mindset of the past. It is the refusal to live in reality. No modern and (hopefully) enlightened mind will adhere to something so vain, hollow, and fake as religion, especially the abrahamic religions where not only the theology is idiotic but where even the (hi-)story is corrupted.

Religion will not disappear but evolve. Some have forsaken it all together and just picked up other religious like causes. This is why Scientology has a following. Some of the extreme Environmentalist are the same mindset as the fundies, etc.

The fakers are who people are attacking, since THEY contradict the holy text of their religion, not the holy text contradicting itself, as some people belive.

so on the account of easter, which are the fakers? the author of matthew, the author of mark, the author of luke, or the author of john?

Funny how people move toward Republicanism as they start making money. Not all but many do.

short-sighted self interest explains many things. more important is the leftward drift correlated with education. i mean, you are aware that even economists far and away side with social democratic/progressive/usian democratic politics over anything right-wing, right?

[idiotic and self-serving pacman graph]

Yeah we've never seen that before.

Interestingly, in your zeal to whip out the ol' pacman graph you failed to remember that this discussion is about what goes on in NSG, which I hope you've been around long enough to realize, isn't represented by that graph.


Or, you know it could be because they are not bigotted.

That remains to be seen.



Examples por favor.


Haven't you seen them? If not just do a search for DK or Deep Kimchi.



True, there are some posters here who are as bad in their 'atheism' (actually anti-theism) as fundamentalists


Which is why I sometimes think of Atheism as a religion. (And it really gets under some peoples' skin. ;) )


And I have as little respect for anyone who is not willing to defend their religion as I do for those who say that their religion is 'prefect'.

As do I.

I'm not afraid of being "called out as bigoted." I just generally draw a distinction between religious people and the religions they believe in... religious people can be decent even as their religions decidedly are not.

To me that sounds a little like saying "I don't hate n*****s! I've had at least 6 black people in my home! Some of my best friends are black!"



Really? Be more specific. What do people say about Christianity that's "far worse"?

Please. With a post count as high as yours I know you know better.

Funny how people move toward Republicanism as they start making money. Not all but many do. I started out as a Dem and have got much more conservative as I have made a bunch of money and aged.

So you can be bought for money? When you had no money, you thought the Dems could throw some your way. Now you have money, you think the Republicans will give you tax cuts, and stop those evil Dems forcing you to fund programs. Most people don't like a mirror of that kind being held up to them. That assessment is deliberately harsh, but I would be curious how you can justify that shift, using any logic that isn't about personal selfishness.

That selfishness is the problem with the world today.I am quite financially comfortable, but I still vote for the most rational left wing party I can find.

Please. With a post count as high as yours I know you know better.

let me guess, S also fails to meet your standards for people you are willing to actually give evidence to back up your crazy ideas?

So you can be bought for money? When you had no money, you thought the Dems could throw some your way. Now you have money, you think the Republicans will give you tax cuts, and stop those evil Dems forcing you to fund programs. Most people don't like a mirror of that kind being held up to them. That assessment is deliberately harsh, but I would be curious how you can justify that shift, using any logic that isn't about personal selfishness.

That selfishness is the problem with the world today.I am quite financially comfortable, but I still vote for the most rational left wing party I can find.

I think he meant more that when you live off your parents, you can afford to be as liberal as you want.

I think he meant more that when you live off your parents, you can afford to be as liberal as you want.

no, because then he wouldn't have linked it to making 'a bunch of money', but rather, moving out at all. this, of course, would be even more laughable than his already laughable claim. his republicanism is stupidly shortsighted selfishness (or, more likely, imagined future selfishness).

To me that sounds a little like saying "I don't hate n*****s! I've had at least 6 black people in my home! Some of my best friends are black!"

No. Disagreeing with somebody's beliefs and disagreeing with what someone is are very different things.

If somebody attacked me for my race or my sexual orientation, that person would be acting in an offensive and unacceptable manner, and I would not tolerate it. If somebody attacked my political views, however harshly, in a way that was not founded in bigotry, I would take it as fair game.

Of course, I don't think religious people are going to (or should) suffer agonizing torment in the afterlife... so even ignoring all that I'm already morally superior to a great number of the world's religions. ;)

Please. With a post count as high as yours I know you know better.

Is that really the best you can do?

That remains to be seen.

Some are, some aren't...


Haven't you seen them? If not just do a search for DK or Deep Kimchi.

Not that I remember, and I'm too lazy to go look, which is why I asked you to do it for me. :D


Which is why I sometimes think of Atheism as a religion. (And it really gets under some peoples' skin. ;) )

For some it is, UB comes to mind as a perfect example of atheism as a religion.

Atheism is not a religion, it is a conclusion.

short-sighted self interest explains many things. more important is the leftward drift correlated with education. i mean, you are aware that even economists far and away side with social democratic/progressive/usian democratic politics over anything right-wing, right?

I was speaking of the general public. I am well aware of democratic economists. Especially Greenspan who got us started on this whole clusterf**ck with the mortgage meltdown.

Atheism is not a religion, it is a conclusion.

Atheism has traits associated with religion. Militant Atheists share a lot with religious radicals.

Atheism has traits associated with religion. Militant Atheists share a lot with religious radicals.

And yet it is still not a religion. A religion would require a deity or deities that the group believes in, and atheists believe that the very idea of gods is absurd.

Atheism has traits associated with religion. Militant Atheists share a lot with religious radicals.

how, exactly? what traits are essential (rather than tangential) to religion that 'militant' atheism shares?

and what exactly do you mean by militant atheism, anyway?

So you can be bought for money? When you had no money, you thought the Dems could throw some your way. Now you have money, you think the Republicans will give you tax cuts, and stop those evil Dems forcing you to fund programs. Most people don't like a mirror of that kind being held up to them. That assessment is deliberately harsh, but I would be curious how you can justify that shift, using any logic that isn't about personal selfishness.

That selfishness is the problem with the world today.I am quite financially comfortable, but I still vote for the most rational left wing party I can find.

I am not selfish and have had that vetted fairly well on these forums over the years. I have to try hard to keep the money I have. That is what I am talking about.

Many so called Democrats want to take take take. I want to be the one that decides where I contribute to society. This is public info that can be looked up so here you go. I paid out 75k(approx) in property taxes to the city, county and state I live in last year. As for other taxes I probably came close to another 100k last year. It is difficult to calculate taxes once you get passed the obvious Federal and State taxes. As for my other contributions the business that I own outright or in partnership with employ over 100 employees. The majority of those jobs or careers would be over the state median household income. So I believe my personal contributions outstrip many others. So I feel that I want a say in how much money that I earned I get to keep. The Democrats have a mentality at the moment regarding taxes that I don't like.

Rolling squid;13564318']because if you know anything about it, religion is worthy of hate. The harm done by religion far outweighs any good done, and that's assuming that their is no god. According to the bible, Jehovah stacks up unfavourably to Hitler.

Sorry but religion in and of it self is largely harmless, it what people do using religion as an excuse. And to be fair you can only compare Jehovah to Hitler if you think they are both real otherwise you may as well compare Hitler to Santa.

how, exactly? what traits are essential (rather than tangential) to religion that 'militant' atheism shares?

and what exactly do you mean by militant atheism, anyway?

I am referring to the trait of not having an open mind and aggressively sticking to their way of thinking.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?

Nobody can make you feel stupid without your consent.

Religion is the mob mentality aspect of personal faith. Your personal faith should never make you feel stupid. People in large groups, however, are sometimes the very definition of stupid.

And yet it is still not a religion. A religion would require a deity or deities that the group believes in, and atheists believe that the very idea of gods is absurd.

Did I say it was a religion? I believe I said it had traits of a religion. The extreme environmentalist have traits that would be attributed to religion too.

I am referring to the trait of not having an open mind and aggressively sticking to their way of thinking.

Actually, considering most people are religious, atheists are the ones with an open mind, aren't they? ;)

Nobody can make you feel stupid without your consent.

Religion is the mob mentality aspect of personal faith. Your personal faith should never make you feel stupid. People in large groups, however, are sometimes the very definition of stupid.

A good example would be humanity in general. If someone were looking at us from the outside they would probably come to the conclusion we are stupid.

Your personal faith should never make you feel stupid.

not even if your personal faith is objectively and blindingly stupid?
some beliefs are stupid, and it is right to feel stupid for holding them.

Actually, considering most people are religious, atheists are the ones with an open mind, aren't they? ;)

I was specifically talking militant Atheists. As for the open minded they come in all walks of life. Atheists I don't think have a corner on being open minded. They just have come to the conclusion that there is no god and many stick to that point very vigorously just as many religious people do with the belief in God.


Edit: I think the ones with the open mind are the ones that say believe what you want I won't judge either way. That is how I personally look at people.

not even if your personal faith is objectively and blindingly stupid?
some beliefs are stupid, and it is right to feel stupid for holding them.

Then it is the person who holds them who must come to that conclusion. The only problem I have with someone believing something I think is stupid is when they insist that others believe it, too, and take steps such as trying to get legislation passed or picketing at soldiers' funerals and the like. Until I see proof of that, I am content to let others believe whatever they like.

How is someone believing something stupid and forcing it on others any different from your insistence that if YOU think what someone else believes is stupid that THEY should feel stupid? You both want control, but your version of it seems a bit more mean.

Then it is the person who holds them who must come to that conclusion. The only problem I have with someone believing something I think is stupid is when they insist that others believe it, too, and take steps such as trying to get legislation passed or picketing at soldiers' funerals and the like. Until I see proof of that, I am content to let others believe whatever they like.

How is someone believing something stupid and forcing it on others any different from your insistence that if YOU think what someone else believes is stupid that THEY should feel stupid? You both want control, but your version of it seems a bit more mean.


QFT

not even if your personal faith is objectively and blindingly stupid?
some beliefs are stupid, and it is right to feel stupid for holding them.

Also, you missed the hidden point in my post. "Your religion should never make you feel stupid" means that if it does, something needs to change.

snip....


Must be something in the water around here to allow such tolerance. ;)

Also, you missed the hidden point in my post. "Your religion should never make you feel stupid" means that if it does, something needs to change.

I got that. Seems people don't read between the lines.

Must be something in the water around here to allow such tolerance. ;)

I'm kinda with Bill Maher on the subject. The only thing we shouldn't tolerate is intolerance.

I'm kinda with Bill Maher on the subject. The only thing we shouldn't tolerate is intolerance.

QFT

As I said before, I don´t think it´s a mater of hating religion. Is more a matter of not understanding why, after so much evidence, people still believe blindly in a god or doctrine.

I'm kinda with Bill Maher on the subject. The only thing we shouldn't tolerate is intolerance.

I can't disagree with that.

They just have come to the conclusion that there is no god and many stick to that point very vigorously just as many religious people do with the belief in God.

Open-mindedness doesn't mean that you don't hold to your beliefs vigorously. It means you're willing to abandon them if someone can effectively challenge them rationally. If such challenges fail repeatedly, if your beliefs are firmly founded on rational bases, then there's nothing wrong with holding strongly by them. Indeed, that's exactly what you should do.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?



Because religion, in all it's forms, is probably the most evil system ever invented by man.

Cheers

Bright Capitalism

As I said before, I don´t think it´s a mater of hating religion. Is more a matter of not understanding why, after so much evidence, people still believe blindly in a god or doctrine.

NnT, that is perhaps the thorniest question one can ask about religion. Simple answers like "because it's reassuring" or "it makes them feel good, special, loved, not alone, etc." are exactly that, too simple. I have thought a lot about the answer to the "evidence" question, and I can't think of anything simple, and the convoluted stuff eventually ties itself into so many knots, I can't Gordian my way out of them with a sword.

Then it is the person who holds them who must come to that conclusion.

That's right. We shouldn't hold a gun to their head. But why shouldn't we engage their minds, their reason, and try to convince them? That doesn't show any disrespect for their autonomy.

I extend the same respect to the religious. They are perfectly free to try to convert me, to convince me my beliefs are wrong.

As I said before, I don´t think it´s a mater of hating religion. Is more a matter of not understanding why, after so much evidence, people still believe blindly in a god or doctrine.

The 'hate' thing is because too many people equate questioning their religion with hating it.

Open-mindedness doesn't mean that you don't hold to your beliefs vigorously. It means you're willing to abandon them if someone can effectively challenge them rationally. If such challenges fail repeatedly, if your beliefs are firmly founded on rational bases, then there's nothing wrong with holding strongly by them. Indeed, that's exactly what you should do.

Agreed. Mostly.

If you never get challenged with serious vigor or with sound logic, over time, you might think that your faith is unassailable. That's the kind of faith that off of which even the most rational counters bounce.

The 'hate' thing is because too many people equate questioning their religion with hating it.

True -- however, many people question others' religion with words and tone that read a lot like hate. If you come out of the gate with "why do you believe something so stupid", what opinion BUT hatred is the believer expected to adopt?

NnT, that is perhaps the thorniest question one can ask about religion. Simple answers like "because it's reassuring" or "it makes them feel good, special, loved, not alone, etc." are exactly that, too simple. I have thought a lot about the answer to the "evidence" question, and I can't think of anything simple, and the convoluted stuff eventually ties itself into so many knots, I can't Gordian my way out of them with a sword.

If it came across as thorny, my apologies. But I still don´t understand. Granted, I myself recognize that there exists a Creative Force. What it´s hard to swallow, after years of being a Catholic, is the belief system. How can so many, so many and after the evolution of science and after not concretely finding an answer to the God question, still believe. Faith? Perhaps my problem is that I don´t understand the concept faith anymore.

That's right. We shouldn't hold a gun to their head. But why shouldn't we engage their minds, their reason, and try to convince them? That doesn't show any disrespect for their autonomy.

I extend the same respect to the religious. They are perfectly free to try to convert me, to convince me my beliefs are wrong.

I agree completely. Hence my post just before this one about the words and tone people choose to question with. Being immediately dismissive when trying to convince something that they hold dear is not what they believe it to be isn't going to win you any arguments.

He/she said Religions, you automatically went to Christians, I guess we know where your bigotries are.

Sadly Christian is the religion we got most knowledge of, so you guy often take the blunt of attack against all religions

Because the good people of NSG, bless their hearts, are grounded in their ways. Many believe if science doesn't tell them its true, then it can't be true. Many don't understand what "faith" truly means. To know something is true because it fills your heart and body to point where you know it's true and it's good enough for you. And there is no reason to have to defend that belief to anyone, especially to try to do so with science. For the doubter, no amount proof will be enough, for the believer, no amount of proof is necessary

True, many take the irrational beleave that science provide all the answers but i hope you don't think we all like that, i think religion a load of bull but i got other beleaves

If it came across as thorny, my apologies. But I still don´t understand. Granted, I myself recognize that there exists a Creative Force. What it´s hard to swallow, after years of being a Catholic, is the belief system. How can so many, so many and after the evolution of science and after not concretely finding an answer to the God question, still believe. Faith? Perhaps my problem is that I don´t understand the concept faith anymore.

Relax, "thorny" means that the question itself is a tangled, pointed mess, and says nothing whatsoever about you. You are, in fact, wise in my estimation to have asked the question.

To attempt to answer your question, I'll guess that faith is more reassuring than science. Science offers no afterlife, no comfort in death, no forgiveness. Once you develop morals, it seems that forgiveness for deviation from them requires some form of atonement, restitution or forgiveness for a human being to feel "right". Science offers no such thing, and can't -- science isn't in the redemption business. Religion is. That's why it's so powerful, and perceived as such a need.

And yet it is still not a religion. A religion would require a deity or deities that the group believes in, and atheists believe that the very idea of gods is absurd.

NO Religtion dose not nee a deity it just normally dose

True -- however, many people question others' religion with words and tone that read a lot like hate. If you come out of the gate with "why do you believe something so stupid", what opinion BUT hatred is the believer expected to adopt?

Good point.

Being immediately dismissive when trying to convince something that they hold dear is not what they believe it to be isn't going to win you any arguments.

I agree, in general... I try to have a reasonable tone when arguing with religious people.

At least when they're actually interested in a reasonable discussion. I'm not interested in arguing reasonably with people who bombard me with nonsense and bigotry... but I'm sometimes inclined to mock them.

Relax, "thorny" means that the question itself is a tangled, pointed mess, and says nothing whatsoever about you. You are, in fact, wise in my estimation to have asked the question.

To attempt to answer your question, I'll guess that faith is more reassuring than science. Science offers no afterlife, no comfort in death, no forgiveness. Once you develop morals, it seems that forgiveness for deviation from them requires some form of atonement, restitution or forgiveness for a human being to feel "right". Science offers no such thing, and can't -- science isn't in the redemption business. Religion is. That's why it's so powerful, and perceived as such a need.

Makes sense. And thanks for the clarification. I know sometimes I sound like I´m getting poised to attack. It´s a cultural thing, we Spaniards can come across as mean sometimes.;)

Sadly Christian is the religion we got most knowledge of, so you guy often take the blunt of attack against all religions

Kontor is Prince Blunt. A bulldozer in a china shop, if you will. That's his style -- defensive even without the presence of aggression. But that's just who he is, and I thank him for it, because with Kontor, you know what you're gonna get. Kontor is NOT lawke a bawx o' chawklits. But he is a valuable conversational foil in NSG.

Makes sense. And thanks for the clarification. I know sometimes I sound like I´m getting poised to attack. It´s a cultural thing, we Spaniards can come across as mean sometimes.;)

Esto es sólo porque usted es...
;)

Makes sense. And thanks for the clarification. I know sometimes I sound like I´m getting poised to attack. It´s a cultural thing, we Spaniards can come across as mean sometimes.;)

Far from it, NnT. I suspect my jumping at your throat for an innocent question last week had something to do with your perceiving anything I have to say to you as an attack. That.......was a bad week, and I apologize again.

I agree, in general... I try to have a reasonable tone when arguing with religious people.

At least when they're actually interested in a reasonable discussion. I'm not interested in arguing reasonably with people who bombard me with nonsense and bigotry... but I'm sometimes inclined to mock them.

this is more or less my strategy. though i go for the mockery quicker, but that's because i'm more jaded than S, i think.

though i also think people underestimate the power of a good mocking. it's more of a long term process, but if we make certain things into a joke, then we marginalize the believers of those things. maybe the individuals involved will get bitter and hardened, but their power in society will be diminished. and that matters more to me.

Far from it, NnT. I suspect my jumping at your throat for an innocent question last week had something to do with your perceiving anything I have to say to you as an attack. That.......was a bad week, and I apologize again.

It´s fine. That week has passed.

As for you, Dy, get thee back into the pokéball!!

I agree, in general... I try to have a reasonable tone when arguing with religious people.

At least when they're actually interested in a reasonable discussion. I'm not interested in arguing reasonably with people who bombard me with nonsense and bigotry... but I'm sometimes inclined to mock them.

Which is, in itself, a perfectly reasonable response to such a bombardment, and I'm often forced to defend my views in that way. It is fun, too, I admit. The harder thing to do, and I've not managed it myself very often, is to maintain an even tone in the face of pious acrimony. It is the harder path, but when you can stay calm while they fly off the handle into rage, guess who looks more foolish? Again, I wish I could do it more often, but I have a strong defensive reaction lobe in my brain. I'm working on it....

It´s fine. That week has passed.

As for you, Dy, get thee back into the pokéball!!

:(
'k
http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff315/Sarothai/Dyakovochu.jpg

The harder thing to do, and I've not managed it myself very often, is to maintain an even tone in the face of pious acrimony.

NSG's rules against flaming help. :)

NSG's rules against flaming help. :)

As does the ability to remain reasonable...
of course take that with a grain of salt since I have been smacked for flaming, albeit only once.

NSG's rules against flaming help. :)

I was referring more to such arguments with actual people in actual life, but yes, the no-flame rules around here do help.

Personally I don't care if a person agrees with me or not when it comes to whether there is a God or not. My faith is my faith, so I'll keep it that way. If anyone believes what I believe, well good for them, but honestly I don't care.

I don't mind a person asking me a genuine question about my faith, but 90% of the time (roughly speaking) it will be designed to cause an argument or to try and make me look like some kind of cult-zombie.

I have a cool mix of friends from Catholic, Evangelical, Pagan, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and athiest...and when we do discuss the concept of faith and belief as well as the possible existence or non-existence of God or a God or Gods it never leads to an argument because we know how to respect another person's opinion and we don't judge them for thinking different to us.

Bottom line, as I tell anyone who wants to argue with me because I believe in God - "Well if I don't see Heaven or Hell after I die, I'll assume you were right."

Just because you have a bad experience of faith doesnt mean you have to give up on it altogether. Religion is not based completely on lies and bad teaching as you(most of you) all seem to think. Myself, i was born a catholic, however i questioned my faith and the blind belief, but this didnt mean i had to give up on religion altogether, rather i just looked for a belief that better suited me and i found fulfilling.

so why do you all give up on faith completely? you can have balance

Well, if the bad experience with faith is discovering that a) you don't need it, and b) there's no evidence to suggest it's more than a bunch of stories, why would you go on trying to believe? Just for the sake of it?

Personally I don't care if a person agrees with me or not when it comes to whether there is a God or not. My faith is my faith, so I'll keep it that way. If anyone believes what I believe, well good for them, but honestly I don't care.

I don't mind a person asking me a genuine question about my faith, but 90% of the time (roughly speaking) it will be designed to cause an argument or to try and make me look like some kind of cult-zombie.

I have a cool mix of friends from Catholic, Evangelical, Pagan, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and athiest...and when we do discuss the concept of faith and belief as well as the possible existence or non-existence of God or a God or Gods it never leads to an argument because we know how to respect another person's opinion and we don't judge them for thinking different to us.

Bottom line, as I tell anyone who wants to argue with me because I believe in God - "Well if I don't see Heaven or Hell after I die, I'll assume you were right."

http://russellsteapot.com/images/comics/2007/Image036.jpg

Well, if the bad experience with faith is discovering that a) you don't need it, and b) there's no evidence to suggest it's more than a bunch of stories, why would you go on trying to believe? Just for the sake of it?

Actually that would be a good experience :D

NO Religtion dose not nee a deity it just normally dose

Indeed. Buddhism is a religion, but doesn't have a god. But none the less, atheism isn't a religion any more than theism is.

Indeed. Buddhism is a religion, but doesn't have a god. But none the less, atheism isn't a religion any more than theism is.

Damn, just read where you quoted me , and that was badly written, even for me, and i agree atheism is not a religion, but it's many followers :p often act like
it is. Look at some of there statements and often with almost no change they could be said by the Christean (or religion of your choice)

People mistake God for religion. Don't get me wrong, I'm an agnostic and I think that, rationally, the God question doesn't have an answer, but I do know that God(s) and religion are not the same thing. Any religion is a social/political club for like-minded individuals - they get together and socialize, congratulate each other on being right while everyone else is wrong, decry the problems created by the fact that people are free not to be like them, and, (if stupid, extreme and wealthy enough), harm non-believers. Of course I hate religion.

I wonder how many times bourgeois has been said on these forums.

Irrespective of the answer, I'd place a fair bet AP has used it the most.


In the past week bourgeois has been said 22 times of those 9 are Andaras.

100 times since the 16th of March.

If it came across as thorny, my apologies. But I still don´t understand. Granted, I myself recognize that there exists a Creative Force. What it´s hard to swallow, after years of being a Catholic, is the belief system. How can so many, so many and after the evolution of science and after not concretely finding an answer to the God question, still believe. Faith? Perhaps my problem is that I don´t understand the concept faith anymore.
Because science never can and never will answer the God question? I believe because, well, I have any number of reasons, many of which are personal. I also acknowledge that my faith is just that, faith. Yes, there will always be an element of irationality in it, I accept that and move on. I also accept that science itself also has to take a leap of faith as it were (Though I find it very funny that the last time I pointed it out, some of the atheiests went Librarian poo) about some fundamental points, namely being that reality actually exists, but I accept that and move on as well.

If you don't understand faith, I would challenge you to look at your life closer, not as a you'll-then-discover-reglion, but noting that humans take a great many things on faith every single day. I think it was TheNazz who used to wander arround with a sig that stated, in effect, that the reason he was an atheist was the same reason why you (Hypothetical you BTW) believed in just one god and just remove that one. Faith for me works backwards, ask yourself why you take anything on faith from the sun coming up tomorrow to reality and go from there.

this is more or less my strategy. though i go for the mockery quicker, but that's because i'm more jaded than S, i think.

though i also think people underestimate the power of a good mocking. it's more of a long term process, but if we make certain things into a joke, then we marginalize the believers of those things. maybe the individuals involved will get bitter and hardened, but their power in society will be diminished. and that matters more to me.
See, there's a small problem with that idea. You don't bother going after biogtry, hatred, or things like that, but the religion of those people. Now, granted, some people have used their religion for great evil, but many have used it for great good as well. Futhermore, given that some 90+% of the world's population are SOME kind of theist, I can safely say that many folks who would normally be more than happy to join you in condeming bigotry, hatred, etc. instead find themselves wondering why they should bother helping you when you mock them as well.

People mistake God for religion. Don't get me wrong, I'm an agnostic and I think that, rationally, the God question doesn't have an answer, but I do know that God(s) and religion are not the same thing. Any religion is a social/political club for like-minded individuals - they get together and socialize, congratulate each other on being right while everyone else is wrong, decry the problems created by the fact that people are free not to be like them, and, (if stupid, extreme and wealthy enough), harm non-believers. Of course I hate religion.
Ya I guess
believe in God=whatever
but don't let your belief in God affect your beliefs on other issues (Gay, women's rights, other Gods/religions...)

The 'hate' thing is because too many people equate questioning their religion with hating it.

QFT.

It's depressing, actually. Someone can tell you you're going to 'burn in Hell' (or whatever) because you don't accept the same set of unprovable principles that they accept... but if you dare to question it, they ask you why you gotta be hatin'...

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?
Because it's a stupid thing to believe.

QFT.

It's depressing, actually. Someone can tell you you're going to 'burn in Hell' (or whatever) because you don't accept the same set of unprovable principles that they accept... but if you dare to question it, they ask you why you gotta be hatin'...

that's because they are warning you of the dangers of hell, they are actually trying to keep you from eternal damnation. when you question religion however, you are running the risk of causing christians to question their beliefs, thus exposing them to an increased risk of damnation. what could be more hateful than increasing people chances of eternal torment in the lake of fire. when you question religion you are doing the devil's work. better than you should smoke meth with a christian then sodomize them than cause them to question their faith. sins of the flesh are easy to repent, but sins of the mind are much harder to cleanse.

QFT.

It's depressing, actually. Someone can tell you you're going to 'burn in Hell' (or whatever) because you don't accept the same set of unprovable principles that they accept... but if you dare to question it, they ask you why you gotta be hatin'...
Welp, I would point out two things:

A. It is very, VERY rare for the Christians on this board to say to anyone that they are going to Hell (Hell, we don't even say 'Go to Hell' because that would be flaming). Now, Kat might wave the Mod Hammer in your direction if you do flame, and LG might threaten you with mud and/or pies just because, I can get started on long and boring rants that might SEEM like hell, but oddly enough I don't see many 'Dude, you're goin' to Hell!' posts around here.

B. It is also very, VERY rare to actually get questions regarding our faith. I have rarely seen someone say, 'Why do you believe X? Haven't you ever considered Y?' instead it's very much, 'You don't know what you're talking about and your ignorant, so why do you believe X?'

If I asked you over and over again if you've stopped beating your wife yet and ignored any protestings that you make to the contrary, I think you'd agree that my assumption of innocence (I don't HATE him! All I was doing was asking a question! What's wrong with that?) is false in the extreme.

seeing as so many of you use science as your reason to abandon religion entirely, what do you think of this?

"scientist has calculated that there is a 67% chance that God exists. "

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/sciences/story/0,12243,1164894,00.html

how dya like dem apples

that's because they are warning you of the dangers of hell, they are actually trying to keep you from eternal damnation. when you question religion however, you are running the risk of causing christians to question their beliefs, thus exposing them to an increased risk of damnation. what could be more hateful than increasing people chances of eternal torment in the lake of fire. when you question religion you are doing the devil's work. better than you should smoke meth with a christian then sodomize them than cause them to question their faith. sins of the flesh are easy to repent, but sins of the mind are much harder to cleanse.

It is only "exposing them to an increased risk of damnation" if what they believe is the only possible correct answer. If there's a possibility they were wrong, I'd actually be reducing the risk of them getting it wrong, overall... no?

Welp, I would point out two things:

A. It is very, VERY rare for the Christians on this board to say to anyone that they are going to Hell (Hell, we don't even say 'Go to Hell' because that would be flaming). Now, Kat might wave the Mod Hammer in your direction if you do flame, and LG might threaten you with mud and/or pies just because, I can get started on long and boring rants that might SEEM like hell, but oddly enough I don't see many 'Dude, you're goin' to Hell!' posts around here.

B. It is also very, VERY rare to actually get questions regarding our faith. I have rarely seen someone say, 'Why do you believe X? Haven't you ever considered Y?' instead it's very much, 'You don't know what you're talking about and your ignorant, so why do you believe X?'

If I asked you over and over again if you've stopped beating your wife yet and ignored any protestings that you make to the contrary, I think you'd agree that my assumption of innocence (I don't HATE him! All I was doing was asking a question! What's wrong with that?) is false in the extreme.

Well, I'd have to say that NS isn't the only place that I encounter christians, so the NS rules and traditions for what christians might do aren't the be all and end all (heresy, I know).

I often question things here. It can't be that rare.

Well, I'd have to say that NS isn't the only place that I encounter christians, so the NS rules and traditions for what christians might do aren't the be all and end all (heresy, I know).
Psst... don't look now... but when you start a thread on NSG, only the Christians on NSG will respond to it. So stating in threads that folks here get upset after condeming you to hell... well...

I often question things here. It can't be that rare.
So have you stopped beating your wife then?

that's because they are warning you of the dangers of hell, they are actually trying to keep you from eternal damnation. when you question religion however, you are running the risk of causing christians to question their beliefs, thus exposing them to an increased risk of damnation. what could be more hateful than increasing people chances of eternal torment in the lake of fire. when you question religion you are doing the devil's work. better than you should smoke meth with a christian then sodomize them than cause them to question their faith. sins of the flesh are easy to repent, but sins of the mind are much harder to cleanse.

Anyone questioning where the hate comes from, reread the quote a few times. I personally do not hate the above poster, I just think he is incredibly blinkered. But such naive comments as "saying you'll burn in hell isn't hate, it's just trying to help you." gets a very poor response from non christians. :headbang:
Did you know that one of the justifications for the Spanish Inquisition using torture, was that no mortal pain is worse than eternal torment, so if your torture makes them become christian, the torture is doing god's work. So by your logic, their was no hate in the torture. I'm sure the tortured people took great comfort in that.

Well, I'd have to say that NS isn't the only place that I encounter christians, so the NS rules and traditions for what christians might do aren't the be all and end all (heresy, I know).

*Checks heresy handbook.* Um, actually, it is. Sorry, we'll have to torture you now.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

so good people of NS, why?
Religious people have tried to kill me. Twice.

It is only "exposing them to an increased risk of damnation" if what they believe is the only possible correct answer. If there's a possibility they were wrong, I'd actually be reducing the risk of them getting it wrong, overall... no? but there is no possibility that they are wrong, that is the nature of faith.

Anyone questioning where the hate comes from, reread the quote a few times. I personally do not hate the above poster, I just think he is incredibly blinkered. But such naive comments as "saying you'll burn in hell isn't hate, it's just trying to help you." gets a very poor response from non christians. :headbang: well certainly those to persist in sin are less that trilled to having their lives called into question by the saved. the devil closes their ears to the truth, but the christian is still required to try and through the power of the holy spirit hardened hearts can still be opened.
Did you know that one of the justifications for the Spanish Inquisition using torture, was that no mortal pain is worse than eternal torment, so if your torture makes them become christian, the torture is doing god's work. So by your logic, their was no hate in the torture. I'm sure the tortured people took great comfort in that. well i'm sure after they confessed and were mercifully executed before they could lapse again into error and thus were allowed to enter the kingdom of heaven, the compassion of those who lead they back into righteousness was greatly appreciated.

See, there's a small problem with that idea. You don't bother going after biogtry, hatred, or things like that, but the religion of those people. Now, granted, some people have used their religion for great evil, but many have used it for great good as well. Futhermore, given that some 90+% of the world's population are SOME kind of theist, I can safely say that many folks who would normally be more than happy to join you in condeming bigotry, hatred, etc. instead find themselves wondering why they should bother helping you when you mock them as well.

firstly, at one point nearly everybody believed that there were witches that could turn us into newts. we used a dual strategy of education and mockery to marginalize those beliefs, to good effect. even now, where the education doesn't take hold, the mockery is still effective.

second, when things are deserving of mockery, it is right and good to mock them. mormonism, for example. it's a fucking joke, and we should never let that fact be forgotten.

seeing as so many of you use science as your reason to abandon religion entirely, what do you think of this?

"scientist has calculated that there is a 67% chance that God exists. "

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/sciences/story/0,12243,1164894,00.html

how dya like dem apples

of course, it's a bogus article. try looking up the word "falsifiability" in association with science and you'll see why calculating any probability of a god is nonsensical

seeing as so many of you use science as your reason to abandon religion entirely, what do you think of this?

"scientist has calculated that there is a 67% chance that God exists. "

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/sciences/story/0,12243,1164894,00.html

how dya like dem apples

unwin fails

no, seriously, his 'bayesian' approach is a bunch of nonsense. it randomly assigns probabilities to various things that he pulls directly from his ass.

unwin fails

no, seriously, his 'bayesian' approach is a bunch of nonsense. it randomly assigns probabilities to various things that he pulls directly from his ass.
well lets be fair, its hard to assign truly accurate values to stuff you've just pulled directly out of you butt.

There seems to be a complete hatred and intolerance of religion here on the forums, i was just wondering why that is exactly?

Not complete. Just visual and loud.

Personally i'm not very religious, but i do believe in God, i have no problems if you don't, but it seems almost as if i should be made feel stupid just for this belief?

People tend to be big and tough on the internet. Chances are high that most of them wouldn't think to be belittling in real life, for at least two reasons. One is that they simply wouldn't act like that in real life. But there's also the fact that they aren't arguing with you (or any given individual) here. They are arguing with whatever construct they have created of what a theist is.


Is not intolerance for religion. It´s more or less a hunger for trying to understand why Christians believe so blindly. That´s all.

If you a priori decide that Christians "believe so blindly", what understanding can you possibly be seeking?

Religion is easy to attack.

Find a contradiction or cruelty in the holy scripture.
Assume all followers of that religion believe the holy scripture is true.
Therefore they believe the contradiction or cruelty.
Therefore the religion and/or the followers are immoral or stupid.

Voila. Instant argument. Just add angst.

Nice strawman. How about:

Find an example of brutality/misogyny/intolerance/homophobia in a 'Holy Text'
Wonder why religionists would dignify such a nasty book by calling it 'Holy', even if they say they don't take that part literallly.
Conclude that religion leads otherwise decent people to do silly things.

EDIT: with respect to my third point, there was an interesting study in Israeli schools not long ago which found that children would defend atrocities which they'd otherwise condemn if they were told that they were carried out by Joshua during the conquest of Canaan.

The problem with Dawkins, in my opinion, is that he is about as zealous in his atheism as many fundamentalist preachers are in their theism. His personal crusade against religion makes him a poor choice for an unbiased look at the foundations and reasons for religious belief.

So being passionate about something is a problem? I've got a book of famous speeches in front of me, and the section on 'Liberty' includes speeches from people like Martin Luther King, Susan Anthony, Patrick Henry, Bob Geldof, Emmeline Pankhurst and Nelson Mandela. Every one of those speeches, whether several pages long or just a few sentences (Geldof...) exudes a palpable passion: none of those people would have achieved what they did if they hadn't been so zealous and ardent in pursuit of their goals.

1 question. Do any of you have ANY idea about what (insert religion here)'s holy texts say and what they mean?

For Christianity and Judaism, yes. For Islam, yes to a lesser extent.

Sometimes, people will read the old testament of the bible and attack it when those are the JUDIASTIC beleifs, and the christian beliefs and why they worship jesus is in the NEW TESTAMENT. DON'T ARGUE AGAINST SOMETHING UNLESS YOU UNDERSTAND IT!!!

I'm often amazed by the number of people who are willing to proclaim that the Bible is divinely inspired or that the Tanach prophecies the coming of Jesus when they've read neither...

Atheism has traits associated with religion. Militant Atheists share a lot with religious radicals.

Don't you feel rather silly using the phrase 'millitant' atheism?

To be a Millitant Muslim you have to cut someone's head off on video or blow yourself up in a public place.
To be a Millitant Christian you have to make bomb-threats to Abortion Clinics or murder homosexuals.
To be a Millitant Hindu you have to form a mob and go out killing Muslims.

To be a Millitant Atheist it seems you just have to say "religion is daft and lacks evidence". It's an absurd double standard.

I am referring to the trait of not having an open mind and aggressively sticking to their way of thinking.

Most Atheists do have open minds: I for one have stated on numerous occaisons that I'd change my beliefs if new evidence comes to light (as I've done several times in the past). The problem comes when the religious fail to present any decent evidence for their claims and then accuse Atheists of being close-minded for not being convinced...

Because religion, in all it's forms, is probably the most evil system ever invented by man.

Cheers

Bright Capitalism

That's silly: Nazism is unquestionably worse that the Society of Friends (Quakers).

seeing as so many of you use science as your reason to abandon religion entirely, what do you think of this?

"scientist has calculated that there is a 67% chance that God exists. "

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/sciences/story/0,12243,1164894,00.html

how dya like dem apples

LMAO!!! :p

This has to be the stupidest abuse of Bayes Theorem since Richard Swinburne. Even ignoring all the arbitrary figures he shoved in to make it work, look at the starting assumption:

The Manchester University graduate, who now works as a risk assessor in Ohio, said the theory starts from the assumption that God has a 50/50 chance of existing, and then factors in the evidence both for and against the notion of a higher being.

That is an unsupportable assumption to base a calculation on. The man's a quack.

About Unwin's article.

Just go read the God Delusion or if you can't be bothered look up the GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out).

He may have used a scientific formula but he just put in numbers plucked from the sky. So that's all that 67% is, a number from the sky.

As for the broader question, I don't hate religion, my problem is with supernaturalism. Religion is a form of supernaturalism (though by no means the only one) so I have a problem with it too.

The reason I despise supernaturalism is that it is false and any falsehood creates danger if believed

Psst... don't look now... but when you start a thread on NSG, only the Christians on NSG will respond to it. So stating in threads that folks here get upset after condeming you to hell... well...


Errr... the point was that the response is the same in and out of NS (yes, I know I invoked the mythical concept of 'outside of NS', but this IS a debate about the metaphysical, and I believe there could be life outside of General), to whit - even in 'real life' (where NSG pleasantries mightn't hold sway), the 'you hate christianity' response is not uncommon to questions about New Testament style faith.


So have you stopped beating your wife then?

I'm not actually seeing the connection.

*Checks heresy handbook.* Um, actually, it is. Sorry, we'll have to torture you now.

Yay! Errr. I mean, oh noes?

but there is no possibility that they are wrong, that is the nature of faith.

Which is all fluffy bunnies if subjectivity turns out to be empirically relevent.

Which is all fluffy bunnies if subjectivity turns out to be empirically relevent.of course subjectivity is empirically relevent, because god is in our hearts and the devil rules the world... if you reply on only your senses you are already a slave of the devil

of course subjectivity is empirically relevent, because god is in our hearts and the devil rules the world... if you reply on only your senses you are already a slave of the devil

Or, alternatively. Not.

That's the beauty of 'faith' as a fact in debate. You can't prove anything, and I can't disprove it - because it's all subjective. And that means, there's no empirical way to ever even agree what is 'real'.

Hence - questioning faith is good - because you MIGHT be convinced it's right, but that don't mean it is :)

Incidentally, everybody needs to watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw&eurl=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/) video. It should be required watching before a poster's allowed to contribute to a religion topic. :p

Or, alternatively. Not.

That's the beauty of 'faith' as a fact in debate. You can't prove anything, and I can't disprove it - because it's all subjective. And that means, there's no empirical way to ever even agree what is 'real'.

Hence - questioning faith is good - because you MIGHT be convinced it's right, but that don't mean it is :)
but if you are open to faith the truth will be revealed. your eyes will be opened and you will see beyond this veil of tears to the glorious reality that is god. that is the true empirical reality, what you see now are the deceptions of the devil. but until you accept jesus christ(me) into your heart you can not see the what is real. secular science is like basing all your views about how the world work by watching tv, the images bare some relationship to the truth but they are filtered and editted and corrupted by powerful forces to create a falsified impression of what really is.

but if you are open to faith the truth will be revealed. your eyes will be opened and you will see beyond this veil of tears to the glorious reality that is god. that is the true empirical reality, what you see now are the deceptions of the devil. but until you accept jesus christ(me) into your heart you can not see the what is real. secular science is like basing all your views about how the world work by watching tv, the images bare some relationship to the truth but they are filtered and editted and corrupted by powerful forces to create a falsified impression of what really is.

Do you have anything to add other than meaningless unfalsifiable rhetoric colored in red?

Religious people have tried to kill me. Twice.

Thats a terrible thing to hear, what happened? and why?

this is a case of a bad brush with religion to the extreme, but not all religion is as intolerant as whatever intolerant extremists sought to end your life

but if you are open to faith the truth will be revealed. your eyes will be opened and you will see beyond this veil of tears to the glorious reality that is god. that is the true empirical reality, what you see now are the deceptions of the devil. but until you accept jesus christ(me) into your heart you can not see the what is real. secular science is like basing all your views about how the world work by watching tv, the images bare some relationship to the truth but they are filtered and editted and corrupted by powerful forces to create a falsified impression of what really is.

I'm open to faith.

No truths to save, or condemn me.

Your experiment fails, your evidence is debunked.

but if you are open to faith the truth will be revealed. your eyes will be opened and you will see beyond this veil of tears to the glorious reality that is god. that is the true empirical reality, what you see now are the deceptions of the devil. but until you accept jesus christ(me) into your heart you can not see the what is real. secular science is like basing all your views about how the world work by watching tv, the images bare some relationship to the truth but they are filtered and editted and corrupted by powerful forces to create a falsified impression of what really is.
More seasoned NSG posters, does this guy have a history of trolling?
Just so I've got this right. I must believe in an invisible all powerful loving being. The reason I can't perceive his love and goodness is because a different invisible all hating being is ruling the world.

Wait. How do I know you aren't a deception! I think you are. I have a theory.

God deliberately doesn't show his existence. He has decided the entry to heaven should only be given to people who critically examine the world. The bible, old and new testament, and the Koran were tools to screen out those who choose to be led, instead of investigate their world to see the truth.

You have no logic. If deception is all around you, how do I know you aren't deceived?