In light of the killing in Paris over a fucking cartoon of Muhammad (NSFW)

[Airbongo (OP)]

[Akomine]

Just watched the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) covering this story, said that several news outlets are running the cartoon in solidarity, but that the CBC has determined it will offend muslims and will not be running it.

What a disgrace. For shame, CBC. So early into 2015 and already a disgrace.


Religion is poison, and today's events are proof. This is a specifically religiously-influenced massacre. Killing people over an unsavory depiction of your "prophet"? Please. And stop calling a weird pedophile your prophet already?

Oh, and fuck religion, fuck Muhammad, fuck the Quran, fuck Islam, fuck letting your religion determine your views and actions in the world. Whether it's killing a cartoonist, fucking a little kid, shunning a gay person, disowning a non-believer, or looking at someone who doesn't believe in your particular version of your particular ancient book as inferior... religion is not a worthwhile moral guide. It isn't a moral guide at all. Think freely. Just try it.

/rant

[Lividup64]

I get that you disagree with religion, but there's no need to be disrespectful. Slamming someone's beliefs which they've held dear is just being a dick. In some cases religion helps people through their lives, it provides a moral compass and it takes the stress off of people's heads. Religion helps people cope with the world. I'm not saying that you can't say whatever you want, but what you are saying is extremely one sided.

[Airbongo (OP)]

I get that you disagree with religion, but there's no need to be disrespectful. Slamming someone's beliefs which they've held dear is just being a dick. In some cases religion helps people through their lives, it provides a moral compass and it takes the stress off of people's heads. Religion helps people cope with the world. I'm not saying that you can't say whatever you want, but what you are saying is extremely one sided.

How am I slamming anyone's beliefs? All I did was post a disrespectful picture of Mohammad "in light of the killings in Paris".

[Lividup64]

Not you.

[Akomine]

This is coming from someone who thinks religion is far more dangerous than helpful so I understand why people would post this, people were murdered over a satirical newspaper goddamnit, and everybody is freaking pissed. I also understand why Akomine has such strong feelings about this topic because like the rest of us, we're going to live our entire lives seeing tragedy after tragedy, people having their lives taken from them all because of religion. It's disturbing.

This is not the first tragedy religion has caused, and far from the last. Islam, specifically, is going to cause many many many more in the years to come. Just watch.

I don't think they want us to hate muslims, I think they are just strong adherents to their book and did as it commanded. We shouldn't hate all muslims just for being muslim, of course.

And you're right and I'm glad you understand.

I get that you disagree with religion, but there's no need to be disrespectful. Slamming someone's beliefs which they've held dear is just being a dick. In some cases religion helps people through their lives, it provides a moral compass and it takes the stress off of people's heads. Religion helps people cope with the world. I'm not saying that you can't say whatever you want, but what you are saying is extremely one sided.

Yes, there is a need to be disrespectful of religion. It is able to get people to fucking slaughter writers - I don't just disrespect that, I have complete contempt. If your religious beliefs tell you to do horrid crimes, overlook horrid crimes, or otherwise defend a belief system that causes horrid crimes, I don't care how "dear" they are to you, I am going to slam those beliefs for being asinine and dangerous.

Remember, I hate religion, not the person who holds that religion. Yes I know it can help people in their lives, help relieve stress. However, no, it does not provide a moral compass. Killing innocent people as a martyr is not a MORAL action. Slavery is not a moral thing. The hatred of homosexuals is not moral. The oppression of women is not moral. Punishing atheists with death is not moral. Religious books are not moral, and it bothers me that people try to say they are.

Do you really think religion is a moral guide?

[Lividup64]

I agree that religion that religion has caused violence over the years, but you must not forget the billions of people who do good. Of course, no religion is perfect and every religion has it's extremists and terrorists. I do believe that religion could provide a moral compass, so I respectfully disagree with you on that.

My point is that religion might not be perfect but it does help people with their lives.

[Akomine]

I agree that religion that religion has caused violence over the years, but you must not forget the billions of people who do good.

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

It isn't hard to name bad things a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

Of course, no religion is perfect and every religion has it's extremists and terrorists.

For whatever it's worth, statistics show that the vast majority of muslims are extremists.

I do believe that religion could provide a moral compass, so I respectfully disagree with you on that.

Though I've already listed several morally bankrupt things religious books command, let's just talk about one on-topic thing the bible and the quran advocate: killing innocent people as a martyr to get the approval of your deity to gain access to a better afterlife.

Do you find this to be moral?

[ChaosMushrooms]

I told my dad about these shootings and how 'they were pissed because somebody dissed mohammed' and all he said was 'which one, there's bloody millions of them'

[Airbongo (OP)]

I told my dad about these shootings and how 'they were pissed because somebody dissed mohammed' and all he said was 'which one, there's bloody millions of them'

LEL

[SirLogiC]

I agree that religion that religion has caused violence over the years, but you must not forget the billions of people who do good.

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

It isn't hard to name bad things a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

Of course, no religion is perfect and every religion has it's extremists and terrorists.

For whatever it's worth, statistics show that the vast majority of muslims are extremists.

I do believe that religion could provide a moral compass, so I respectfully disagree with you on that.

Though I've already listed several morally bankrupt things religious books command, let's just talk about one on-topic thing the bible and the quran advocate: killing innocent people as a martyr to get the approval of your deity to gain access to a better afterlife.

Do you find this to be moral?

There is no bad religions, only bad people (scientology isn't a religion). I've come to believe the biggest harm to the world isn't from religion, it's from people believing things are meant to be a certain way.

People hate gays because it's "wrong", it's not what people are "supposed" to do.
Israelis hate Palestinians because they have land that is "supposed" to be theirs.
South Korea and North Korea are still technically at war and hate each other because isn't ruling their people how they are supposed to be ruled.

Really a lot of the intolerance in the world is because some people are just inflexible and cannot get over that someone else is doing things differently to them. Religion does cause a lot of it, true. Of course removing religion from the world won't help. We would still have the same stupid people starting fights over slightly different reasons.

"If you want the world to be a better place, be a better person."- me

[Akomine]

There is no bad religions, only bad people (scientology isn't a religion). I've come to believe the biggest harm to the world isn't from religion, it's from people believing things are meant to be a certain way.

People hate gays because it's "wrong", it's not what people are "supposed" to do.
Israelis hate Palestinians because they have land that is "supposed" to be theirs.
South Korea and North Korea are still technically at war and hate each other because isn't ruling their people how they are supposed to be ruled.

Really a lot of the intolerance in the world is because some people are just inflexible and cannot get over that someone else is doing things differently to them. Religion does cause a lot of it, true. Of course removing religion from the world won't help. We would still have the same stupid people starting fights over slightly different reasons.

"If you want the world to be a better place, be a better person."- me

1. There are bad religions. This is evidenced by things like... otherwise normal people being tainted by them to do horrid things. See: Paris massacre.
Religions indoctrinate people into thinking things that simply are not true. This is bad. All religions have this in common. All religions are bad in this sense.

2. There are also bad people. A considerable number of them are bad because they do religiously-inspired/taught bad things. Some are bad for other reasons.

3. Scientology is a religion. I don't know why you'd claim otherwise.

4. The Israeli and Palestinian conflict is based off of religion, which is actually a good example of how bad religion is. Look at what it makes people do.

5. North Korea is a state theocracy. Kim is their god. They even have religious dogma along with this. Many South Koreans obviously realize this and don't necessarily hate the northerners with this in mind.
Uniquely, unlike many religions, death is actually an escape from their god, as they have no dogma that extends into the afterlife.

6. Regarding intolerance:

Religion does cause a lot of it, true. Of course removing religion from the world won't help.

This makes no sense. You say religion causes a lot of it, yet somehow also say removing religion won't help.
Why exactly would removing religion, which is quite possibly the single largest source of intolerance in the world, fail to help in reducing intolerance in the world?
Yeah, there would still be fights over things. But holy shit, think of all the RELIGIOUS things humans would no longer fight about.


Thanks for the reply man, feel free to respond to any of my points.
And I realize I wasn't asking you originally, Sirlogic, but I open these questions up to anyone:

Is it moral to kill innocent people to get into heaven?

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

[SirLogiC]

6. Regarding intolerance:

Religion does cause a lot of it, true. Of course removing religion from the world won't help.

This makes no sense. You say religion causes a lot of it, yet somehow also say removing religion won't help.
Why exactly would removing religion, which is quite possibly the single largest source of intolerance in the world, fail to help in reducing intolerance in the world?
Yeah, there would still be fights over things. But holy shit, think of all the RELIGIOUS things humans would no longer fight about.


Thanks for the reply man, feel free to respond to any of my points.
And I realize I wasn't asking you originally, Sirlogic, but I open these questions up to anyone:

Is it moral to kill innocent people to get into heaven?

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

Maybe choice of words is wrong. I guess it's like this. For Jews eating pork is wrong, they are not allowed to because of their religious dogma. This isn't a good or evil thing though, it's just a weird religious custom. It could become a problem if a Jewish person sees another person eating pork and decides to hate him, because he is doing something that is "wrong". If this view becomes systemic then there is a serious issue. It's not the religion that is causing the hate though, it's intolerance of difference.

The Shiite and Sunni hate each other, kill each other even even though they are both Muslim. It's not because the religion says to kill each other but because each sees the other as practising Islam "wrong". It's not the religion, it's the people and their intolerance.

If we removed religion though, people are still stupid. Excellent case in point- they are communist and we are democratic, so they are obviously wrong and should be punished. The problem isn't that either government style is inherently bad (though I agree communism is more inherently open to corruption), but intolerance.

Name one single bad thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

[Akomine]

Maybe choice of words is wrong. I guess it's like this. For Jews eating pork is wrong, they are not allowed to because of their religious dogma. This isn't a good or evil thing though, it's just a weird religious custom. It could become a problem if a Jewish person sees another person eating pork and decides to hate him, because he is doing something that is "wrong". If this view becomes systemic then there is a serious issue. It's not the religion that is causing the hate though, it's intolerance of difference.

Religion tells people how to think, how to act, and what the supposed truth is. If your religion says it is wrong to eat pork, you're naturally going to be intolerant of pork eating. It isn't a good-or-evil thing to force people to think, eat, believe certain things without good reason? To tell them not to question it? I say it is wrong. I say it is evil.

"It's not the religion that is causing the hate though, it's intolerance of difference."
It's intolerance of difference that DIRECTLY stems from the teachings of a religion. It is the religion causing the intolerance. It is the religion that teaches people to be intolerant. People aren't magically intolerant of pork eaters, they learned it from a religion.

The Shiite and Sunni hate each other, kill each other even even though they are both Muslim. It's not because the religion says to kill each other but because each sees the other as practising Islam "wrong". It's not the religion, it's the people and their intolerance.

This is a dubious claim. To say that the shit going on in the Middle East isn't because of religion is really just... silly.

This is called sectarian violence, which is by definition religious in nature, as it is caused by ideological divides between religious sects. The religion, again, directly causes the intolerance.

If we removed religion though, people are still stupid. Excellent case in point- they are communist and we are democratic, so they are obviously wrong and should be punished. The problem isn't that either government style is inherently bad (though I agree communism is more inherently open to corruption), but intolerance.

Yes, some people are still stupid, so let's stop these systems of brainwashing gullible people into thinking things that aren't true. Let's stop holding them back from thinking freely. Let's stop making them stupid. It causes hate, intolerance, and a seriously poisoned mindset when it comes to scientific knowledge and general knowledge about reality. Let's encourage question-asking, critical thought, free speech, freedom of thought, and science.

That is the biggest problem with religion; it requires faith. Faith is the lack of critical thinking, believing in something without evidence. Critical thinking is important. Evidence is necessary for understanding reality. Religion, in this sense, is poison.

Name one single bad thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

Mass-slaughter innocent people to get into heaven.

[SirLogiC]

Name one single bad thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

Mass-slaughter innocent people to get into heaven.

The reason is irrelevant Wasn't one of the mass shootings in the US because the young guy couldn't get pussy?

Again I just don't think it's the religion. You can be religious and good, use critical thinking. You can respect the tenets of your faith but also respect others. When you get attached to the ideology that is when problems start. So I guess "belief" is the right word. Faith is not. If the Muslims had faith in Allah then they shouldn't feel the need to make sure other people fear him by beheading Christians. They believe they need to show the power of their god, they believe they need to show the dominance of Islam by starting a new caliphate, they believe other religions are wrong and want to eliminate them. They show their faith by praying to the sun 3/5? times a day. See the difference.

Or a Christian example would be the hate on abortion. It has nothing to do with faith. Faith is believing in God, you show that faith by going to church. The nuts believe abortion is wrong and bomb abortion clinics. If they had faith they would know God would punish those that do abortion and there is no need for their violence. Really I think lots of religious violence is often caused by insecurity of one's faith, so they start believing and doing extreme things in the hope of sparking faith.

I think banning religion would fix nothing. Would be like banning alcohol or drugs. Some people need a drink, some need a high, some just need something to believe in, no matter how stupid. But like how alcohol or drugs should be taken in moderation, faith should be taught with an open mind and tolerance of others.

[Airbongo (OP)]

Name one single bad thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

Mass-slaughter innocent people to get into heaven.

The reason is irrelevant Wasn't one of the mass shootings in the US because the young guy couldn't get pussy?

Again I just don't think it's the religion. You can be religious and good, use critical thinking. You can respect the tenets of your faith but also respect others. When you get attached to the ideology that is when problems start. So I guess "belief" is the right word. Faith is not. If the Muslims had faith in Allah then they shouldn't feel the need to make sure other people fear him by beheading Christians. They believe they need to show the power of their god, they believe they need to show the dominance of Islam by starting a new caliphate, they believe other religions are wrong and want to eliminate them. They show their faith by praying to the sun 3/5? times a day. See the difference.

Or a Christian example would be the hate on abortion. It has nothing to do with faith. Faith is believing in God, you show that faith by going to church. The nuts believe abortion is wrong and bomb abortion clinics. If they had faith they would know God would punish those that do abortion and there is no need for their violence. Really I think lots of religious violence is often caused by insecurity of one's faith, so they start believing and doing extreme things in the hope of sparking faith.

I think banning religion would fix nothing. Would be like banning alcohol or drugs. Some people need a drink, some need a high, some just need something to believe in, no matter how stupid. But like how alcohol or drugs should be taken in moderation, faith should be taught with an open mind and tolerance of others.

The reason is irrelevant Wasn't one of the mass shootings in the US because the young guy couldn't get pussy?

I wouldn't compare genocides perpetrated by religious fundamentalists, poisoned by religious ideas and brain washed since birth (by other religious people), to the psychopathic actions of an obvious fucking sociopath. The reason is NOT irrelevant wtf?

Again I just don't think it's the religion. You can be religious and good, use critical thinking. You can respect the tenets of your faith but also respect others. When you get attached to the ideology that is when problems start. So I guess "belief" is the right word. Faith is not. If the Muslims had faith in Allah then they shouldn't feel the need to make sure other people fear him by beheading Christians. They believe they need to show the power of their god, they believe they need to show the dominance of Islam by starting a new caliphate, they believe other religions are wrong and want to eliminate them. They show their faith by praying to the sun 3/5? times a day. See the difference.

That's because it is in the Quran, they don't pull these insane ideas out of their asses, the Quran instructs them to kill non believers. If anything, fundamentalist Muslims are way better Muslims than your average "moderate" Muslim (I quoted moderate because polls show most of them hold some extreme ideals.) because they don't nitpick the Quran and follow most of it, including the hateful disgusting shit. At least Christians have the New Testament, which is an excuse to ignore the Old Testament, which has the same kind of hateful shit as the Quran. How can you say religion is not the problem when the main religious books tell you homosexuality is an abomination and that you should slaughter non believers.

Or a Christian example would be the hate on abortion. It has nothing to do with faith. Faith is believing in God, you show that faith by going to church. The nuts believe abortion is wrong and bomb abortion clinics. If they had faith they would know God would punish those that do abortion and there is no need for their violence. Really I think lots of religious violence is often caused b y insecurity of one's faith, so they start believing and doing extreme things in the hope of sparking faith.

No it isn't, you don't kill because you feel insecure about your religion, you kill when you've been brainwashed and indoctrinated since birth by fellow brainwashed believers. They kill because they are completely sure they are doing the right thing, their critical thinking regarding religion has been taken away by indoctrination.

This isn't just a fundamentalist thing, most parents will raise their kids with their own religion, most people don't get the chance to make up their own mind about what they believe, they are taught to believe and not to question. Of course you can be religious, a good person and use critical thinking, most people do, just not when it comes to their beliefs, because believing in something with no evidence, just faith, is not critical or rational thinking, no.

I think banning religion would fix nothing. Would be like banning alcohol or drugs. Some people need a drink, some need a high, some just need something to believe in, no matter how stupid. But like how alcohol or drugs should be taken in moderation, faith should be taught with an open mind and tolerance of others.

Ako never mentioned banning religion though.

[Akomine]

How the fuck is the reason not relevant? Why does religion get this undeserved pardon from any responsibility it has over people's minds and actions?

The Quran says to kill non-believers. The Quran says dying a martyr is a legitimate way to get into the afterlife (the bible says that too actually). People are taught these horrid things by their religions and act upon their faith in these teachings with bloody consequences. You can't just say the reason behind a mass murder is irrelevant. What the fuck. Are you playing devil's advocate?


Mass-slaughtering innocent people to get into heaven is something only a religious person could do. It is a uniquely religious evil, and without religion in the world nobody would be mass slaughtering people to try to get into heaven, because nobody would believe in this nonsensical, immoral, evidence-devoid, dangerous shit.

I think banning religion would fix nothing. Would be like banning alcohol or drugs.

What does this have to do with anything? Who ever said we should ban religion? Is this an intentional straw man argument?
I not only agree that banning religion would fix nothing, but I am very, very, very strongly against doing something as insane as that.

Some people need a drink, some need a high, some just need something to believe in, no matter how stupid.

I think this is a very demeaning way to look at the human mind. I think we should give everyone the opportunity and encouragement to think freely, and rationally demand evidence. I disagree that some people simply need to believe in stupid fairy tales. I see no reason why supressing critical thinking is needed by some people.

But like how alcohol or drugs should be taken in moderation, faith should be taught with an open mind and tolerance of others.

This seems again sortof off topic, but I guess I agree. It should be taught about with openness (though not as if it is factual), however there is no requirement to tolerate any particular faith. I'll tolerate whatever I choose to, and no religious man or woman can tell me that religion gets a free pass, as they often do. As you seem to be doing in this thread.

[Die_Endermen]

Actually, today in this world religion is why many people die. Not all the people, but just people die, because there are other causes for death. There are bad and good people wherever you go, belonging to all faiths of the world. I know many Muslims who don't feel represented by 9/11 and the Charlie Hebdo shootings, since in a poll I read, about 80-85% of Muslims oppose any act of violence carried out in the name of Islam. There are also many Christians who say that marriage is for everyone and that some silly Vatican rules shouldn't control peoples lives. Just a general word to remember that violence carried out in a name of a God does not represent the majority of that faith, since there are good and bad people all over in this world, apart from religion such as gangs and other groups.

[SirLogiC]

Wilful murdering for any cause is wrong, so the reason isn't so important. I guess it has equal weight as any other reason, so singling out the religion reason as more wrong doesn't make sense.

It is significant if there is a mental issue involved, but that isn't what we are talking about.

Mass slaughter has reasons beyond religion. Genghis Khan, when building an army/empire slaughtered. I've read he massacred entire towns, men, women, children, horses even, piled their skulls up in town. Poured molten silver into the eyes and ears of a city ruler that opposed him. This wasn't a religious conquest.

The Spanish massacred the Aztecs for the sake of stealing their gold. The US colonists and native Indians massacred each other, as the colonists intended to just steal their land for themselves. US veterans were fired on for public demonstrations to get their due benefits for fighting for their country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

Just reading through this, a lot of them mention religoin, but not many actually say religion was the cause. Often it's more a culture of hate as an excuse. A lot are about greed, or just massacring to get their own way.


Really though what I see is this. You hate on religion, post stuff guaranteed to offend someone. It is hate though. You worship Atheism as a religion. Violence is wrong. Don't say that the religion is wrong because some of the followers are violent. Some drunks are violent. Some people are just mean. Some people are racist. The reason doesn't matter, the violence and hate matters. If you don't want hate in the world, stop hating. You may not discriminate but someone growing up now will think it ok to discriminate against religious people because you now say religion is wrong. If you want the world to be a better place, be a better person.

I really dislike that you post shit like in the OP. Like you have freedom of speech, but does that include freedom to be an ass? You also seem to believe that critical thinking and faith are completely incompatible. A lot of conservative religious people are also scientists. They have faith their god(s) are real, but believe in the science they are doing too. I agree with critical thinking being important. It should be the #1 thing taught in schools. However it is human nature to follow the crowd, critical thinking is sometimes hard. The list of cognitive biases is large. So to get around this there is this thing we call "common sense". Common sense is in some part defined or encoded in religion. So when this gets twisted you get extremism. This is when those with critical thinking need to step up and lead. If you don't have the personal clout to be a great leader, just lead by example.

Right now you are saying religion is bad, using confirmation bias to support your belief, listening to like-minded people say religion is bad. It's as bad as the Christians in the US that think atheists are amoral people (google that figure for sadness). Yes I know religion causes evil, it's why I don't like religion. I don't hate it though, I am neutral to it. I accept some people are religious and expect them to accept me for not being religious. I also think there is a difference between ideology and religion, most religious wars are about ideology (who is right and wrong). The ideology needs to be shifted to fix the war, changing the religion won't fix it because the ideology will persist.

All that said, this is a fun debate and I hope their is no rustled jimmies. A good debate every now and then is engaging, gets you thinking and looking stuff up to learn more.

[Airbongo (OP)]

Wilful murdering for any cause is wrong, so the reason isn't so important. I guess it has equal weight as any other reason, so singling out the religion reason as more wrong doesn't make sense.

It is significant if there is a mental issue involved, but that isn't what we are talking about.

Mass slaughter has reasons beyond religion. Genghis Khan, when building an army/empire slaughtered. I've read he massacred entire towns, men, women, children, horses even, piled their skulls up in town. Poured molten silver into the eyes and ears of a city ruler that opposed him. This wasn't a religious conquest.

The Spanish massacred the Aztecs for the sake of stealing their gold. The US colonists and native Indians massacred each other, as the colonists intended to just steal their land for themselves. US veterans were fired on for public demonstrations to get their due benefits for fighting for their country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

Just reading through this, a lot of them mention religoin, but not many actually say religion was the cause. Often it's more a culture of hate as an excuse. A lot are about greed, or just massacring to get their own way.


Really though what I see is this. You hate on religion, post stuff guaranteed to offend someone. It is hate though. You worship Atheism as a religion. Violence is wrong. Don't say that the religion is wrong because some of the followers are violent. Some drunks are violent. Some people are just mean. Some people are racist. The reason doesn't matter, the violence and hate matters. If you don't want hate in the world, stop hating. You may not discriminate but someone growing up now will think it ok to discriminate against religious people because you now say religion is wrong. If you want the world to be a better place, be a better person.

I really dislike that you post shit like in the OP. Like you have freedom of speech, but does that include freedom to be an ass? You also seem to believe that critical thinking and faith are completely incompatible. A lot of conservative religious people are also scientists. They have faith their god(s) are real, but believe in the science they are doing too. I agree with critical thinking being important. It should be the #1 thing taught in schools. However it is human nature to follow the crowd, critical thinking is sometimes hard. The list of cognitive biases is large. So to get around this there is this thing we call "common sense". Common sense is in some part defined or encoded in religion. So when this gets twisted you get extremism. This is when those with critical thinking need to step up and lead. If you don't have the personal clout to be a great leader, just lead by example.

Right now you are saying religion is bad, using confirmation bias to support your belief, listening to like-minded people say religion is bad. It's as bad as the Christians in the US that think atheists are amoral people (google that figure for sadness). Yes I know religion causes evil, it's why I don't like religion. I don't hate it though, I am neutral to it. I accept some people are religious and expect them to accept me for not being religious. I also think there is a difference between ideology and religion, most religious wars are about ideology (who is right and wrong). The ideology needs to be shifted to fix the war, changing the religion won't fix it because the ideology will persist.

All that said, this is a fun debate and I hope their is no rustled jimmies. A good debate every now and then is engaging, gets you thinking and looking stuff up to learn more.

Wilful murdering for any cause is wrong, so the reason isn't so important. I guess it has equal weight as any other reason, so singling out the religion reason as more wrong doesn't make sense.

It is significant if there is a mental issue involved, but that isn't what we are talking about.

Mass slaughter has reasons beyond religion. Genghis Khan, when building an army/empire slaughtered. I've read he massacred entire towns, men, women, children, horses even, piled their skulls up in town. Poured molten silver into the eyes and ears of a city ruler that opposed him. This wasn't a religious conquest.

The Spanish massacred the Aztecs for the sake of stealing their gold. The US colonists and native Indians massacred each other, as the colonists intended to just steal their land for themselves. US veterans were fired on for public demonstrations to get their due benefits for fighting for their country.

Well that's just a huge strawman, just like the "banning religion" thing you came up with. No one is saying religion is the only cause of massacres, it's just one of the biggest ones (probably the biggest), yet people try to argue religion isn't bad. It's easy to be "neutral about religion" if you completely ignore facts, there is overwhelming proof of the tragedies religion can cause, how can you look at it and still be neutral about religion? I'm not saying the religions are wrong because "some of their followers are violent", I say they are wrong because I am aware of what the "holy" books say, I have bothered reading them before picking a position. You keep claiming the religions are good, but violent followers make it look bad, if you bothered reading a bible or a Quran, you'd realize that's total bullshit. Their message isn't a peaceful message, they promote murder, discrimination and violence, yet have beautiful verses proclaiming peace, the hypocrisy is obvious. 

How can I worship atheism as a religion? All it is is the lack of belief in a deity, that makes no sense. And how am I hating? Stop giving religion a pass, it isn't above criticism and it isn't on a pedestal, if we were discussing literally any other subject, you wouldn't say I'm "hating".

I really dislike that you post shit like in the OP. Like you have freedom of speech, but does that include freedom to be an ass? You also seem to believe that critical thinking and faith are completely incompatible. A lot of conservative religious people are also scientists. They have faith their god(s) are real, but believe in the science they are doing too. I agree with critical thinking being important. It should be the #1 thing taught in schools. However it is human nature to follow the crowd, critical thinking is sometimes hard. The list of cognitive biases is large. So to get around this there is this thing we call "common sense". Common sense is in some part defined or encoded in religion. So when this gets twisted you get extremism. This is when those with critical thinking need to step up and lead. If you don't have the personal clout to be a great leader, just lead by example.

This is what I mean with the whole religion gets a pass thing. Why is it so offensive for me to post a cartoon mocking Mohammad? Do you realize he was a pretty shitty person? He was a thief and a murderer, pillaged and murdered his way to the top, all in the name of Allah. His army raided towns, murdered most of the men, raped women and sold them as slaves. Do I even have to mention he was a pedophile and married a 6 year old? You gotta give credit where credit is due though, he waited until she was 9 to have sex with her, which is pretty cool I guess.

Of course religion and critical thinking aren't mutually exclusive and religious people can be scientists, but, believing something with no evidence and just believing in it it because you were raised to, is the exact opposite of critical thinking.

Right now you are saying religion is bad, using confirmation bias to support your belief, listening to like-minded people say religion is bad. It's as bad as the Christians in the US that think atheists are amoral people (google that figure for sadness). Yes I know religion causes evil, it's why I don't like religion. I don't hate it though, I am neutral to it. I accept some people are religious and expect them to accept me for not being religious. I also think there is a difference between ideology and religion, most religious wars are about ideology (who is right and wrong). The ideology needs to be shifted to fix the war, changing the religion won't fix it because the ideology will persist.

No, what a moot point, I say religion is bad because of all the reasons I already gave, actual facts, I'm not using "confirmation bias" what in the fuck? Can you disprove ANYTHING of what we said? Because we can provide evidence for it, that's not confirmation bias, that's a decision made after looking at the facts.  If you want me to compile a list of reasons and sources, then by all means, please ask.

Religion and atheism aren't comparable, religion is a collection of beliefs, atheism is the exact opposite, a lack of beliefs. Unlike the Christians you are talking about, I don't discriminate people, all I do is ridicule their beliefs, not the person. You are implying I don't accept religious people and that's a shitty thing to imply when all of my family is Catholic and I get along great with everyone. I accept everyone as long as they're a good person, I don't give two shits about their religious beliefs.

I also think there is a difference between ideology and religion, most religious wars are about ideology (who is right and wrong). The ideology needs to be shifted to fix the war, changing the religion won't fix it because the ideology will persist.

If the original ideology of the religion is filled with hate, I don't see how changing the ideology would help at all, it would just be hypocrisy.

All that said, this is a fun debate and I hope their is no rustled jimmies. A good debate every now and then is engaging, gets you thinking and looking stuff up to learn more.

<3 <3 <3

[SirLogiC]

I don't give religion a pass, I give faith a pass. OK ideally everyone should be given a solid education, particularly critical thinking. However part of education is also social values, like respect for others, working hard, helping people in need (without putting yourself into a bad spot). Religion can give people something to believe in, it's a way to meet others and have a community that can support each other. It doesn't need to be religion, sports groups or like any club fill a similar niche. Just having someone to talk to is good. Now if someone gets a solid education and also chooses to believe in God, Allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the idea of nothing after death, that is their choice.

What I hate is when people make blanket statements about a group. A lot of the crazy nutjobs in the US hate Islam and Muslims because of 9/11. 9/11 was done by terrorists though. Also hating Islam means you'd have to hate Indonesia, largest Islamic population for any country. Of course that never enters their dumb heads. Racism, intolerance, etc all stem from A) growing up around openly hateful people B) ignorance. Also politics but that's another debate.

I think people get too hung up on the reason for things. Or they get an idea that things must be a certain way. So yeah looking at things, people are about half good, half bad. Sometimes more bad, sometimes more good but it averages out. Ideally we'd be more good, but selfishness is a survival trait just live altruism and sometimes it's needed to help you survive.

If you say religion does more harm than good I have to disagree. It might but that is because of the interpretation of the religion. But not only is it people that interpret it, but people that invented it. You can't hold it above people or above other reasons to justify bad behaviour. All bad behaviour stems from human nature. People have justified bad behaviour towards others for all kinds of dumb reasons. Religion is just one of them.

Some people get offended by mum jokes. Like they see it as really disrespectful and get angry to the point of violence. I think that sort of person needs to calm down a tad about it, at the same time I'm not going to keep saying mum jokes to them if it's going to piss them off. Pic in OP is worse, it only exists to offend Muslims. It's like saying a mum joke only because you know it will piss someone off, not because it's funny.

I think this post is probably the best I can describe what I'm getting at
Oh also:


This is so retarded, on multiple levels. Buddhism is an atheist religion for one...

[Akomine]

I find your post really disconnected and hard to follow, so I'll just hit a few of the random points.

Why does faith get a pass? What good does suspending critical thinking do? This illogical process of non-thinking should have no place in a solid education.
Religion can give people something to believe in -  so what? It can give people a way to meet others and a support community, yes. However, these benefits are not unique to religions, and can be achieved elsewhere, so why not cut out the whole believing in things without evidence part? People need support, but they don't need to be immersed in a random belief system that tells them lies about the real world. It isn't helpful.

I hate when people make blanket statements about a group too. It's a good thing me and airbo have not done so, so I don't understand why you're mentioning it rather than responding to one of our questions. Oh and, 9/11 was done by RELIGIOUSLY-INSPIRED terrorists. The reason behind something is important, I can't imagine why you think otherwise. Why does the reason not matter? How else do we solve a problem or gain an understanding without looking at the motives?

The interpretation of religion is all religion is. Religion corrupts the mind. It often systematically teaches people not to critically think. Religion does do more bad than good, because the good it does can be and is done irreligiously, but much of the bad it does is unique to religion. Cutting out religion means removing at least some of the bad from happening, yet the good things will still continue to happen because they never required religion. If it's all just human nature, then remember than humans are corruptible, so why not remove the silly ancient immoral books so people stop following their immoral teachings?

About the picture of the pedophile false prophet shitting into his own mouth: just because it offends muslims means nothing.
Oh you're offended? So fucking what!? You gonna kill me? Worthless brainwashed bullies get absolutely no leniency from me. Not a single millimeter. You have every right to be offended, but it ends there. You do not get to kill people, or even suggest they censor themselves just because you don't like what they said.


Could you please respond to some of the questions in these posts? I'd like a bit more discussion rather than just random disjointed tangents. Up to you, but you seem to have ideas you want to get out, so please respond. It's not much of a discussion or debate otherwise. I try to directly respond to what is typed here, but you seem to ignore most of what we say and just move on. It's frustrating. <3

[SirLogiC]

I find your post really disconnected and hard to follow, so I'll just hit a few of the random points.

Why does faith get a pass? What good does suspending critical thinking do? This illogical process of non-thinking should have no place in a solid education.
Religion can give people something to believe in -  so what? It can give people a way to meet others and a support community, yes. However, these benefits are not unique to religions, and can be achieved elsewhere, so why not cut out the whole believing in things without evidence part? People need support, but they don't need to be immersed in a random belief system that tells them lies about the real world. It isn't helpful.

I hate when people make blanket statements about a group too. It's a good thing me and airbo have not done so, so I don't understand why you're mentioning it rather than responding to one of our questions. Oh and, 9/11 was done by RELIGIOUSLY-INSPIRED terrorists. The reason behind something is important, I can't imagine why you think otherwise. Why does the reason not matter? How else do we solve a problem or gain an understanding without looking at the motives?

The interpretation of religion is all religion is. Religion corrupts the mind. It often systematically teaches people not to critically think. Religion does do more bad than good, because the good it does can be and is done irreligiously, but much of the bad it does is unique to religion. Cutting out religion means removing at least some of the bad from happening, yet the good things will still continue to happen because they never required religion. If it's all just human nature, then remember than humans are corruptible, so why not remove the silly ancient immoral books so people stop following their immoral teachings?

About the picture of the pedophile false prophet shitting into his own mouth: just because it offends muslims means nothing.
Oh you're offended? So fucking what!? You gonna kill me? Worthless brainwashed bullies get absolutely no leniency from me. Not a single millimeter. You have every right to be offended, but it ends there. You do not get to kill people, or even suggest they censor themselves just because you don't like what they said.


Could you please respond to some of the questions in these posts? I'd like a bit more discussion rather than just random disjointed tangents. Up to you, but you seem to have ideas you want to get out, so please respond. It's not much of a discussion or debate otherwise. I try to directly respond to what is typed here, but you seem to ignore most of what we say and just move on. It's frustrating. <3

I'm sorry, I am bad at writing eh... succinctly. I tend to waffle on and find it hard to stay on point. I numbered the above as follows. After much editing I ended with this.
1) why faith gets a pass
2) you say why religion corrupts the mind, this is my counter
3) countering point that religion allows more bad to happen
4) blanket statements I saw
5) on offensive pic

1)I guess religion is part faith, part dogma, part ideology. Faith I have no problem with. Faith is what the religion asks you to believe. I give faith a pass because it is harmless. Many people don't understand physics, so it is partly faith to believe in what the scientists say. The difference is scientists can explain the big bang theory or global warming or evolution, where belief in religion is purely faith.

1)Dogma I don't like. Dogma is what a religion says you are meant to do. Not eating pork, going to church on Sundays, women required to be covered in public, are all dogma. Dogma is itself neutral. If you want to not eat porn for your religion, so be it. When you judge others for it, then that is wrong. Dogma comes about from culture. People worship a certain way, certain animals are needed so can't be killed, many different things. over time they get baked into the religion. Then people take them too seriously and it causes trouble. I'd be happy if dogma was removed from religion. If you look at Tibetan Buddhism, you are supposed to be vegetarian. However they don't judge you if you eat meat. Part of Buddhism is giving up desire, so you can eat meat but it makes it harder to achieve Nirvana. Some Christians hate gays to the point of violence. It is true the bible says it is wrong, but the bible also says that only God can judge people. So Christians that hate on gays are following Dogma blindly, and not respecting their faith.

1)Ideology I hate. This is basically politics, and I hate politics. Ideology I see is like "how things are meant to be" or "the proper way of things". Sunni correctly interpret the Quran and other Muslims are wrong, Gaza strip is Jewish land and Palestinians there are invaders, Democracy is right and Communism is evil, Drugs are bad and drug users should be punished. All dogma that causes hate and division in the world. It isn't unique to religion, politics and social custom can also be a cause.

1)Faith is harmless so it gets a pass, dogma is mostly unneeded but as long as you don't judge others for it I don't mind, dogma does not get a pass.

2)Political ideology corrupts the mind, not religion. Ideology demands the suspension of critical thinking or seeing reality. Often perpetrated by greedy and selfish people that do know how things are, so brainwash everyone they can into an ideology so they can profit from it. ISIS is doomed to failure because it is run by ideology. If at some point they succeed in making a caliphate, there will be so many people so involved in how it is, finding someone to lead it would be impossible. The backstabbing and conniving by everyone who thinks they have more right to lead because they know how it's meant to be "more" correctly. Until then the many leaders live like kings and send fools in to die, driving them crazy with blind faith in the ideology.

3)Cutting out religion won't stop any bad things from happening. You know why the US initially made Marijuana illegal? Racism. Mexicans smoked it and kept bringing it with them from Mexico. They made up that reefer madness crap and used so much propaganda on the drugs are bad bullshit just to justify being racist to Mexicans. No religion needed. Crack cocaine convictions in the US receive harsher penalties by federal law, due to it being a more dangerous drug. Heard of a study that says it isn't any different to normal cocaine besides how it's used. Real reason for this is racism. More blacks use crack cocaine than normal cocaine. No religion needed. Soviets and US almost started nuclear armageddon in the cold war, because of political ideology, not religion. I mean maybe religion is used as an excuse more, but only because it is so pervasive, not because it leads to badness itself.

4)

"Religion does do more bad than good..."

Blanket statement. Do you mean all religions all do more bad than good? Are Buddhists more bad than good?

4)

so people stop following their immoral teachings?

Blanket statement.

The 10 Commandments List, Short Form
You shall have no other gods before Me.
You shall not make idols.
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Honor your father and your mother.
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet.

4)Some are dogma true, but please enlighten me as to it's immorality.

5)As for that picture- why do you feel the need to be offensive? (Not targeted at anyone)
If you want to be more good, then surely just respecting others is a great way to do that. You know it will offend, so why? I don't mean censoring, I don't mean it WILL lead to violence. I mean that someone that truly wants to be good will see no merit in creating or posting or w/e someone that's only purpose is to offend.

[Akomine]

I'm sorry, I am bad at writing eh... succinctly. I tend to waffle on and find it hard to stay on point. I numbered the above as follows. After much editing I ended with this.
1) why faith gets a pass
2) you say why religion corrupts the mind, this is my counter
3) countering point that religion allows more bad to happen
4) blanket statements I saw
5) on offensive pic

1)I guess religion is part faith, part dogma, part ideology. Faith I have no problem with. Faith is what the religion asks you to believe. I give faith a pass because it is harmless. Many people don't understand physics, so it is partly faith to believe in what the scientists say. The difference is scientists can explain the big bang theory or global warming or evolution, where belief in religion is purely faith.

Why do you claim faith is harmless? Don't you think that suspension of critical thinking is bad? Don't you think teaching people how to think and question is good? Don't you think an informed population is better than an uninformed one? Believing things that are false is dangerous. To give faith a pass is random, considering your dislike of ideology and dogma. Faith holds back truth. Faith is baseless. Faith is potentially dangerous when people start making poorly-informed decisions based on lies. Faith should not get a pass.

You also refute your own point here. At first you say it takes faith to believe in what scientists say. Then you describe the difference in how science has proof and thus is NOT based on faith. Again, science does not involve faith. None. Any science that does is shoddy science and should be corrected by scientists (peer review). There is a difference between faith... and trust in a system that works, that you can review, that is proven. I've never seen a science paper that demands you believe it is true just because.

The Bible is true!
Sources: The Bible.

versus:

Evolution by natural selection is true!
Sources:
Abel, O. (1908) "Die Morphologie der Huftbeinrudimente der Cetaceen." Denkschr. Math. Naturw. Klasse Kaiserl. Aka. Wiss. Vol. 81.

Acharya, K. R., D. I. Stuart, et al. (1989) "Refined structure of baboon alpha-lactalbumin at 1.7 Å resolution - comparison with c-type lysozyme." Journal of Molecular Biology 208: 99-127.

Adami, C., C. Ofria, et al. (2000) "Evolution of biological complexity." PNAS 97: 4463-4468.

Albert, J., Wahlberg, J., Leitner, T., Escanilla, D. and Uhlen, M. (1994) "Analysis of a rape case by direct sequencing of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 pol and gag genes." J Virol 68: 5918-24.

Amasaki, H., Ishikawa, H., and Daigo, M. (1989) "Developmental changes of the fore- and hind-limbs in the fetuses of the southern minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata." Anat Anz 169: 145-148. [PubMed]

Andren, C., M. Marden, et al. (1989) "Tolerance to low pH in a population of moor frogs, Rana arvalis from an acid and a neutral environment : a possible test case of rapid evolutionary response to acidification." Oikos 56: 215-223.

Andrews, R. C. (1921) "A remarkable case of external hind limbs in a humpback whale." Amer. Mus. Novitates. No. 9.

Aravind, L. and Koonin, E. V. (1999) "DNA polymerase beta-like nucleotidyl transferase superfamily: identification of three new families, classification, and evolutionary history." Nucleic Acids Research 27: 1609.

Archie, J. W. (1989) "A randomization test for phylogenetic information in systematic data." Systematic Zoology 38: 219-252.

Arnold, C., Balfe, P. and Clewley, J. P. (1995) "Sequence distances between env genes of HIV-1 from individuals infected from the same source: implications for the investigation of possible transmission events." Virology 211: 198-203.

Atchely, W. R. and Fitch, W. M. (1991) "Gene trees and the origins of inbred strains of mice." Science 254: 554-558.

Avery, O. T., MacLeod, C. M. and McCarty, M. (1944) "Studies on the chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of pneumococcal types." J. Exp. Med. 79:137-158.

Avise, J. C. and Wollenberg, K. (1997) "Phylogenetics and the origin of species." PNAS 94: 7748Ð7755.

Bajpai, S. and Gingerich, P. D. (1998) "A new Eocene archaeocete (Mammalia, Cetacea) from India and the time of origin of whales." Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 95: 15464-15468. [PubMed]

Baldauf, S. L., Roger, A. J., Wenk-Siefert, I., and Doolittle, W. F. (2000) "A kingdom-level phylogeny of eukaryotes based on combined protein data." Science 290: 972-7.

Ban, N., P. Nissen, et al. (1999) "Placement of protien and RNA structures in a 5 Å resolution map of the 50S ribosomal subunit." Nature 400: 841-847.

Bar-Maor, J. A., Kesner, K. M., and Kaftori, J. K. (1980) "Human tails." J Bone Joint Surg Br. 62-B: 508-510. [PubMed]

Barrell, B. G., et al. (1996) "Life with 6000 genes." Science 274: 546-567.

Barsh, G. S. (1996) "The genetics of pigmentation: from fancy genes to complex traits." Trends in Genetics 12: 299-305.

Barton, N. H. and Gale, R. S. (1993) "Genetic analysis of hybrid zones." Hybrid Zones and the Evolutionary Process. New York, Oxford University Press: 12-45.

Baruchin, A. M., Mahler, D., Hauben, D. J., and Rosenberg, L. (1983) "The human caudal appendage (human tail)." Br J Plast Surg. 36: 120-123. [PubMed]

Behe, M.J. (1994) "Experimental support for regarding functional classes of proteins to be highly isolated from each other." In Darwinism, Science or Philisophy? Eds. Jon Buell and Virginia Hearn, Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Houston, Texas. [ARN Michael Behe Files]

Behe, M. J. (1996) Darwin's Black Box. New York, Touchstone.

Bejder, L. and Hall, B.K. (2002) "Limbs in whales and limblessness in other vertebrates: mechanisms of evolutionary and developmental transformation and loss." Evol Dev 4: 445-458. [PubMed]

Belzberg, A. J., Myles, S. T., and Trevenen, C. L. (1991) "The human tail and spinal dysraphism." J Pediatr Surg 26: 1243-1245.

...

Woodburne, M. O. and Case, J. A. (1996) "Dispersal, vicariance, and the Late Cretaceous to Early Tertiary land mammal biogeography from South America to Australia." Journal of Mammalian Evolution 3: 121-161.

Wright, L. (1973) "Functions." Philosophical Review 82: 139- 168.

Wu, C. I. (1991) "Inferences of species phylogeny in relation to segregation of ancient polymorphisms." Genetics 127: 429-435. [PubMed]

Xu, X., Tang, Z-T., Wang, X-l. (1999) "A therizinosauroid dinosaur with integumentary structures from China." Nature 399: 350-354.

Xu, X., Zhou, Z., and Wang ,X. (2002) "The smallest known non-avian theropod dinosaur." Nature 408: 705-708.

Xu, X., Norell, M. A., Wang, X-l., Makovicky, P. J., and Wu, X.C. (2002) "A basal troodontid from the Early Cretaceous of China." Nature 415: 780-784.

Yirrell, D. L., Robertson, P., Goldberg, D. J., McMenamin, J., Cameron, S. and Leigh Brown, A. J. (1997) "Molecular investigation into outbreak of HIV in a Scottish prison." Bmj 314: 1446-50.

Yockey, H. P. (1992) Information Theory and Molecular Biology. New York, Cambridge University Press.

Yoder, A. D., Rasoloarison, R. M., Goodman, S. M., Irwin, J. A., Atsalis, S., Ravosa, M. J., and Ganzhorn, J. U. (2000) "Remarkable species diversity in Malagasy mouse lemurs (primates, Microcebus)" Proc Natl Acad Sci 97(21): 11325-30.

Zembskii, V. A. and Berzin, A. A. (1961) "On the rare phenomenon of atavism in the sperm whale." Nauchnye Doklady Vysshei Shkoly. Series "Biologicheskie Nauki."

Zhu, T., B. Korber, et al. (1998) "An African HIV-1 sequence from 1959 and implications for the origin of the epidemic." Nature 391: 594- 597.

etc...

Point proven?

1)Dogma I don't like. Dogma is what a religion says you are meant to do. Not eating pork, going to church on Sundays, women required to be covered in public, are all dogma. Dogma is itself neutral. If you want to not eat porn for your religion, so be it. When you judge others for it, then that is wrong. Dogma comes about from culture. People worship a certain way, certain animals are needed so can't be killed, many different things. over time they get baked into the religion. Then people take them too seriously and it causes trouble. I'd be happy if dogma was removed from religion. If you look at Tibetan Buddhism, you are supposed to be vegetarian. However they don't judge you if you eat meat. Part of Buddhism is giving up desire, so you can eat meat but it makes it harder to achieve Nirvana. Some Christians hate gays to the point of violence. It is true the bible says it is wrong, but the bible also says that only God can judge people. So Christians that hate on gays are following Dogma blindly, and not respecting their faith.

I agree dogma is bad. Religions are based upon their dogma. Blindly believing in and following religious dogma involves faith.

1)Ideology I hate. This is basically politics, and I hate politics. Ideology I see is like "how things are meant to be" or "the proper way of things". Sunni correctly interpret the Quran and other Muslims are wrong, Gaza strip is Jewish land and Palestinians there are invaders, Democracy is right and Communism is evil, Drugs are bad and drug users should be punished. All dogma that causes hate and division in the world. It isn't unique to religion, politics and social custom can also be a cause.

I'll add to this by saying ideology usually involves being fixed on that position, unwilling to think another way or change an idea. This is bad.

1)Faith is harmless so it gets a pass, dogma is mostly unneeded but as long as you don't judge others for it I don't mind, dogma does not get a pass.

Maybe you can explain why faith is harmless since you keep repeating it. Both dogma and faith are entirely unneeded and corrupt human thought.

2)Political ideology corrupts the mind, not religion. Ideology demands the suspension of critical thinking or seeing reality. Often perpetrated by greedy and selfish people that do know how things are, so brainwash everyone they can into an ideology so they can profit from it. ISIS is doomed to failure because it is run by ideology. If at some point they succeed in making a caliphate, there will be so many people so involved in how it is, finding someone to lead it would be impossible. The backstabbing and conniving by everyone who thinks they have more right to lead because they know how it's meant to be "more" correctly. Until then the many leaders live like kings and send fools in to die, driving them crazy with blind faith in the ideology.

I don't know why you give religion a pass here, as if religion doesn't include ideology and dogma.

3)Cutting out religion won't stop any bad things from happening. You know why the US initially made Marijuana illegal? Racism. Mexicans smoked it and kept bringing it with them from Mexico. They made up that reefer madness crap and used so much propaganda on the drugs are bad bullshit just to justify being racist to Mexicans. No religion needed. Crack cocaine convictions in the US receive harsher penalties by federal law, due to it being a more dangerous drug. Heard of a study that says it isn't any different to normal cocaine besides how it's used. Real reason for this is racism. More blacks use crack cocaine than normal cocaine. No religion needed. Soviets and US almost started nuclear armageddon in the cold war, because of political ideology, not religion. I mean maybe religion is used as an excuse more, but only because it is so pervasive, not because it leads to badness itself.

Cutting out religion WILL stop bad things from happening. Like the fucking Paris attack.

Your points about cannabis, cocaine, and the Cold War are random, off-topic, and moot. You can't just describe a few issues that aren't religious in nature and try to pass it off as a point in favour of your argument.

4)

"Religion does do more bad than good..."

Blanket statement. Do you mean all religions all do more bad than good? Are Buddhists more bad than good?

Not a blanket statement, I explained myself, you just cut off the quote. That's not cool.
Yes all religions do more bad than good.
Yes that includes Buddhism.

Why do Buddhists always get to be passed off as such peace-loving do-gooders in these sorts of conversations? Do you know how many fucking cases there are of Buddhists burning Hindu temples and killing Hindus, and overall Buddhist violence in the Southeast Asian region? GO GOOGLE IT.

4)

so people stop following their immoral teachings?

Blanket statement.

Not a blanket statement. Earlier in this thread I have given information as to why religious teachings are immoral.
Allow me to type it in all caps to hope it sticks this time:

KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE AS A MARTYR TO GET INTO HEAVEN IS IMMORAL.
KILLING NON-BELIEVERS IS IMMORAL.
SYSTEMATICALLY INDUCING HATRED, BULLYING, AND KILLING OF GAY PEOPLE IS IMMORAL.
Do I honestly need to keep saying this shit? Don't say my statement was a blanket statement. My position is clear and I will gladly offer more examples and evidence. I'll even get fucking specific. Like, I'll find news stories and shit. It'll be great. Want me to?

The 10 Commandments List, Short Form
1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall not make idols.
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet.

4)Some are dogma true, but please enlighten me as to it's immorality.

Who here mentioned the 10 commandments?
Who here claimed they were immoral?
What the fuck?

Regardless, I will gladly enlighten you.

The first 4 have little to do with morality. The first 3 just depict a jealous "god" commanding people how to think. I could argue it is immoral to command people to worship you, to not speak badly about you, etc. I won't really argue that cause those are the most boring of the 10.

5 is obviously immoral if you have abusive parents. Say a little girl is raped and beaten by her father... must she honour him? The commandment says so. Howabout an orphan? Oops, guess god forgot about them. What are they supposed to do? What if a parent abandoned a child to die in a dumpster? Should probably honour them, right?

6 Funny how this one is in here isn't it? The bible is full of god murdering, commanding people to murder, genocide, rape, slavery, etc.
Sidenote: the commandments seem to forget about rape and slavery. Guess god fucked up on those ones eh?

7 This doesn't really have to do with morality either, does it? This actually seems to ignore the consenting adults who may want to consensual engage in "adultery", such as swingers. I could argue it's immoral to command people on how to live their lives in this respect.

8 Not bad I guess. It's vague though. Is taxation theft? Or the classic: Is stealing a loaf of bread for a starving child so bad?

9 Mhmm, next

10 Impossible. I argue it is immoral to command people to not do something that is impossible to not do.

The 10 commandments are a weird American phenomenon. They aren't really listed as 10 commandments as such in the bible. I don't quite understand why they are so popular. Some of them suck, some of them are just the human emotion of jealousy, they are missing obvious crimes, and they contradict other commands that god gives in the bible. Lastly, why would an all-powerful deity relay information in such a poor manner? A 2000 year old book written by a nomadic iron-age desert tribe who were mostly illiterate, that has, by sheer fucking chance, happened to survived into 2015... THIS IS WHERE PEOPLE GET THEIR MORALITY? It isn't moral. This isn't where people get their morality. I shouldn't have to say this.

5)As for that picture- why do you feel the need to be offensive? (Not targeted at anyone)
If you want to be more good, then surely just respecting others is a great way to do that. You know it will offend, so why? I don't mean censoring, I don't mean it WILL lead to violence. I mean that someone that truly wants to be good will see no merit in creating or posting or w/e someone that's only purpose is to offend.

I do not respect those who murder innocent people over their religion. I refuse to fucking respect that. I have no problem offending them. The free speech of everyone is more important. I, in fact, think good people should oppose evil bullshit. I think good people should speak out against this crime and this way of thinking, the more the better.




Thank you for responding to things a little more specifically
I have some questions from earlier:

Why do you claim Scientology isn't a religion?

How can you possibly claim that the reason behind a mass murder is irrelevant?

Is it moral to kill innocent people to get into heaven?

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

[SirLogiC]

I do not respect those who murder innocent people over their religion. I refuse to fucking respect that. I have no problem offending them. The free speech of everyone is more important. I, in fact, think good people should oppose evil bullshit. I think good people should speak out against this crime and this way of thinking, the more the better.



Thank you for responding to things a little more specifically
I have some questions from earlier:

Why do you claim Scientology isn't a religion?

How can you possibly claim that the reason behind a mass murder is irrelevant?

Is it moral to kill innocent people to get into heaven?

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

I agree speaking out is a good thing. But you can't just speak out or you end up like Fox "News": war war war, they are evil, bomb them all. If you want peace you have to accept differences. Love them, doesn't mean you have to like them. Show them you are not evil, that you accept their views, even if you can't believe in them. That picture promotes hate, it doesn't help. It makes you hate them, makes them hate you. It makes things worse. You could go to a Mosque and show that picture and be hated there for life. Or you could go to a Mosque and say you don't believe in religion, but want to understand why they believe in Allah and learn about their religion (doesn't mean believe) and you will become a wiser person and they will see that at least some people in society are good, regardless of their beliefs. I mean the rest of the post is debate, but that pic is just pure spite and hatefulness, that's why I take offence to it. You can justify it any way you like but there is no rational way you can say making a picture like that and using it will make the world a better place.

Scientology uses a few tricks. Firstly they use celebrities to market themselves (but it seems to kill the careers of those celebrities). Usually seems those celebrities are getting lots of money or other favours out of the deal too.
They require you to pay lots of money for the magic ghost scanning crap. This uses sunk cost fallacy. I mean you paid so much already you can't really quit right?
They use their IQ/personality tests to figure out the best way to brainwash you into feeling like you belong. They are extremely mentally abusing, far more than real religion.
No matter how big they get, I will only see them as a dangerous cult. I mean some religious communities may shun non-believers, but it's no where near what scientology forces. Plus they don't use faith. They present their story as pure fact.

The reason for mass murder is irrelevant in that there is only two reasons and both are really bad. First is mental illness, you go off the deep end and see killing a lot of people as the only solution. Mind needs to be really sick to get that far. The other is you don't see those you are killing as human (or force yourself not to). If you kill 20 NAZI dogs or 20 Filthy Jews or 20 homeless bums, you can only do it when you see them as not human. That religion or politics or self-righteousness were the labels used it irrelevant. If you teach people to be critical thinkers, accept others as human and respect them, the views that lead to someone killing 20 people can't really arise, regardless of religious belief.

No current major religion says to kill people to get into it's utopian afterlife. I mean you can find quotes that seem to say that but I bet any you find are taken out of context. A lot of war involving religion is politically motivated (misrepresenting religion to justify wars) or taking parts out of context and using those to motivate wars for "holy reasons". I mean the basic tenets of faith of nigh any religion say killing is wrong. Find some passage that explicitly says doing violence against or killing others will lead the perpetrators to utopian afterlife, then read the context of the passage.

Name a single bad thing only a religious person can do that an irreligious one can't?

I really think you are getting religion confused with religious fundamentalism. Is your (straw-man) neighbour a bad person because he is religious? Should you hate him because he is religious? Is it hypocritical to dislike religion but not dislike a person who follows that religion? Is it normal followers who are bad or just the leaders? Are all the leaders bad? Is it just the terrorists who say they did something for religion that are bad? If they follow the same religion as your neighbour are they both equally bad? Is your neighbour likely to do the same act because of the religion? Is someone that stops doing crime because they "found" religion now bad for a different reason? Are the reasons he stopped doing crime relevant, as long as he stops doing crime?

You see where I am getting at with these questions? Where do you draw the line that religion is bad? I mean if someone follows a religion and religion is bad, then that person must be bad. You can't just say religion is bad and not the people that follow it though, since there is no religion without people. So there must be some line that some religious people cross and become bad. Define that line for me.



EDIT: also bored with this, my last post. New topic thread after reply plox

[Akomine]

I agree speaking out is a good thing. But you can't just speak out or you end up like Fox "News": war war war, they are evil, bomb them all. If you want peace you have to accept differences. Love them, doesn't mean you have to like them. Show them you are not evil, that you accept their views, even if you can't believe in them. That picture promotes hate, it doesn't help. It makes you hate them, makes them hate you. It makes things worse. You could go to a Mosque and show that picture and be hated there for life. Or you could go to a Mosque and say you don't believe in religion, but want to understand why they believe in Allah and learn about their religion (doesn't mean believe) and you will become a wiser person and they will see that at least some people in society are good, regardless of their beliefs. I mean the rest of the post is debate, but that pic is just pure spite and hatefulness, that's why I take offence to it. You can justify it any way you like but there is no rational way you can say making a picture like that and using it will make the world a better place.

"You can't just speak out or you end up like Fox News". Huh? Fox News isn't "speaking out". Fox is a money-making organization plain and simple. Do not compare me to Fox News.

"Show them you are not evil, that you accept their views, even if you can't believe in them." I'm happy to show them I'm not evil, to learn about their views... but in no way do I accept their views. No. Way. Their views say I should be put to death. Fuck their views.

The picture is satire. Calm down.

Scientology uses a few tricks. Firstly they use celebrities to market themselves (but it seems to kill the careers of those celebrities). Usually seems those celebrities are getting lots of money or other favours out of the deal too.
They require you to pay lots of money for the magic ghost scanning crap. This uses sunk cost fallacy. I mean you paid so much already you can't really quit right?
They use their IQ/personality tests to figure out the best way to brainwash you into feeling like you belong. They are extremely mentally abusing, far more than real religion.
No matter how big they get, I will only see them as a dangerous cult. I mean some religious communities may shun non-believers, but it's no where near what scientology forces. Plus they don't use faith. They present their story as pure fact.

I asked you to tell me why you think Scientology is not a religion, and what you've done is explain exactly how it is a religion.

"They are extremely mentally abusing, far more than real religion." What is a real religion? All of the mainstream religions are capable of being extremely mentally abusing to the point of suicide. Google: pray the gay away.

"I mean some religious communities may shun non-believers, but it's no where near what scientology forces." There are plenty of religious communities that completely disown non-believers. There are also some who kill non-believers, which is more extreme than Scientology and yet still gets to be called "real religion" in your books.

The reason for mass murder is irrelevant in that there is only two reasons and both are really bad. First is mental illness, you go off the deep end and see killing a lot of people as the only solution. Mind needs to be really sick to get that far. The other is you don't see those you are killing as human (or force yourself not to). If you kill 20 NAZI dogs or 20 Filthy Jews or 20 homeless bums, you can only do it when you see them as not human. That religion or politics or self-righteousness were the labels used it irrelevant. If you teach people to be critical thinkers, accept others as human and respect them, the views that lead to someone killing 20 people can't really arise, regardless of religious belief.

You're speaking out of your ass here, sorry. I think any criminologist would disagree with you. Anybody trying to solve a pattern of problems would want to understand the reason behind an act.

"If you teach people to be critical thinkers, accept others as human and respect them, the views that lead to someone killing 20 people can't really arise, regardless of religious belief." Air and I have been trying to say that religion destroys/degrades the process of critical thinking, and that faith is the exact opposite of critical thinking. If anything, you've helped illustrate why our point is so important.

No current major religion says to kill people to get into it's utopian afterlife. I mean you can find quotes that seem to say that but I bet any you find are taken out of context. A lot of war involving religion is politically motivated (misrepresenting religion to justify wars) or taking parts out of context and using those to motivate wars for "holy reasons". I mean the basic tenets of faith of nigh any religion say killing is wrong. Find some passage that explicitly says doing violence against or killing others will lead the perpetrators to utopian afterlife, then read the context of the passage.

"No current major religion says to kill people to get into it's utopian afterlife." Yeah, except for the major ones.
The bible and the quran both have many, many verses about martyrdom, and several times show it to be a viable way to get into heaven. The books are ripe with endless contradictions of themselves, "thou shalt not kill" being one of them.

You can claim misunderstanding context or misrepresenting the book all you like, but the fact is is that believers draw their own conclusions from these books and may act upon them. The books have incredibly vicious gods and are filled to the brim with frightening immorality. You can't just ignore this stuff. In the bible, god commands martyrdom in multiple instances. I could cite verses, but I guess you aren't going to reply any more.

Name a single bad thing only a religious person can do that an irreligious one can't?

Honestly?
This is the SECOND time you've deflected my question with this dodgy non-answer, and I have already answered it. If there is one more reply you give to this thread, I'd really like to see a thoughtful answer to this. I recognize it's a bit of a trump card, but I try to use it to get people to think deeply about religion and morality.

It's really easy to think of bad things specifically motivated by religion, but I can't seem to think of any motivated by irreligion. Can you? Can anyone? I've never heard one single example.

I really think you are getting religion confused with religious fundamentalism. Is your (straw-man) neighbour a bad person because he is religious? Should you hate him because he is religious? Is it hypocritical to dislike religion but not dislike a person who follows that religion? Is it normal followers who are bad or just the leaders? Are all the leaders bad? Is it just the terrorists who say they did something for religion that are bad? If they follow the same religion as your neighbour are they both equally bad? Is your neighbour likely to do the same act because of the religion? Is someone that stops doing crime because they "found" religion now bad for a different reason? Are the reasons he stopped doing crime relevant, as long as he stops doing crime?

You see where I am getting at with these questions? Where do you draw the line that religion is bad? I mean if someone follows a religion and religion is bad, then that person must be bad. You can't just say religion is bad and not the people that follow it though, since there is no religion without people. So there must be some line that some religious people cross and become bad. Define that line for me.

EDIT: also bored with this, my last post. New topic thread after reply plox

No I'm not confusing religion with fundamentalism. No my neighbour is not necessarily a bad person because he's religious (wtf?). No I shouldn't and don't hate him just because he's religious (wtf?). No it is not hypocritical to dislike religion yet like a religious person (wtf?). Some followers are bad, some leaders are bad. No, not all the leaders are bad. No, religious terrorists aren't the only bad religious people. Again, the religion is not what defines someone as bad or good, I don't know how many times you are going to use this rude fucking strawman argument as if it's something Air or I think. We never said all religious people are bad. We never even fucking came close to saying that, man.

Stop putting words in our mouths. Stop saying things about us that we have clearly said we don't think. STOP. IT. It's rude. It's illogical. It's a shitty way to have a discussion. It feels slanderous. Fucking stop it. It's not acceptable. Don't make me draw a satirical cartoon about you!

"Are the reasons he stopped doing crime relevant, as long as he stops doing crime?" Yes, of course. It is REALLY bizarre to me that you think reasons behind things don't matter. Like, that's some weird shit right there. Whether a mass murder in Paris inspired by religion, or a thief who is inspired by religion to stop stealing, the reason is relevant. The difference here is; irreligious resources can equally or better help someone stop committing crimes (secular help group backed with science instead of bible study) while also not commanding faith or dogma or any of the other false bullshit that warps minds into doing illogical and immoral things that are connected with religion. So let's use good secular means to help people, rather than religion.

[Airbongo (OP)]

SirStrawman

[SirLogiC]

Religion isn't real. it is a thing made up by humans. I just can't see why you place it above other things created by humans. Bad people use religion (and politics, and ethics, and economics...) as a tool for selfish reasons.

Here I will answer your question.

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

There isn't any thing. Just like there isn't any bad thing an irreligious person would do that a religion one wouldn't. There are many bad and good things people do, for many reasons. Religion is just one reason, it just happens to be a common one.

Religion is a tool. Some people use that tool for a purpose in life. Some people use that tool for meaning in life. Some people use that tool for a sense of community. Some people use that tool as an excuse to kill. Don't hate the tool, the tool itself isn't good or bad. Love the people that use it in a bad way, that they might see there is no need to hate. Sometimes to do this you need to accept their religion, because you can't love someone without accepting who they are. Of course you don't need to like them, love here just means to treat with dignity and respect. If you hate, that only leads to more hate. It's the reason the Middle East is bad, so many generations of hate.

There are flaws with religion. Those don't rise from religion itself, but rise because humans created religion. We are flawed and everything we create gets flawed. To be a better person is to try and rise above those flaws. It is my view you don't see this, that you hate religion when the true evil is the people that corrupt it.

God doesn't tell terrorists to kill, bad or misguided people say God does.


Oh one bad thing motivated by atheism- creating a picture designed to offend a specific religious group in the name of free speech.

I agree with free speech, I just don't believe it gives the right to be an ass. Others can, but that is their belief.A belief can be used to justify good or bad things no?

[SirLogiC]

SirStrawman

[Airbongo (OP)]

SirStrawman

[Akomine]

Apologies for another semi-long reply:

Religion isn't real. it is a thing made up by humans. I just can't see why you place it above other things created by humans. Bad people use religion (and politics, and ethics, and economics...) as a tool for selfish reasons.

Another strawman argument. Neither I nor Airbo ever placed it above anything. You are making up that standpoint, pretending I/we said it, and arguing against it.
This is why it's important to respond to what we say, rather than random notions that you randomly decide we are arguing. No more arguing against strawmen, please.

Here I will answer your question.

Name one single good thing a religious person would do that an irreligious person wouldn't.

There isn't any thing. Just like there isn't any bad thing an irreligious person would do that a religion one wouldn't.

I simply can't see an irreligious person killing cartoonists for offending his prophet... as a martyr to get into heaven.

There are many bad and good things people do, for many reasons. Religion is just one reason, it just happens to be a common one.

Religion is uniquely the cause of several bad things that a lack of religion would avoid.

Religion is a tool. Some people use that tool for a purpose in life. Some people use that tool for meaning in life. Some people use that tool for a sense of community. Some people use that tool as an excuse to kill. Don't hate the tool, the tool itself isn't good or bad. Love the people that use it in a bad way, that they might see there is no need to hate. Sometimes to do this you need to accept their religion, because you can't love someone without accepting who they are. Of course you don't need to like them, love here just means to treat with dignity and respect. If you hate, that only leads to more hate. It's the reason the Middle East is bad, so many generations of hate.

Religion has more to it than just being a tool, but as a tool it is overwhelmingly used to control people. Often from a young age. It is used to control thoughts. It is presented as the truth to unsuspecting people. It tells things to people that are simply not true. It tells them completely false accounts of history. It considers itself absolute fact, and that disbelief is dangerous, and disbelievers to be distrusted and punished.

And like you said... it isn't real. It's false.

It's not necessary. The good aspects you see in religion? They're all available through secular means. All of that good stuff. The community, the support, the events, charity, outreach. They're all things that don't require religion. So what's the reason for religion nowadays? Why bundle these good things with lies, brainwashing, false history, hatred towards certain people or things based on an ancient book? I don't get it. I just don't.

There are flaws with religion. Those don't rise from religion itself, but rise because humans created religion. We are flawed and everything we create gets flawed. To be a better person is to try and rise above those flaws. It is my view you don't see this, that you hate religion when the true evil is the people that corrupt it.

Some things we create are objectively more flawed than others, obviously, yes?

Religion is a severely flawed construct. Designed to corrupt people. Preaching horrible crimes, like genocide and rape. And for some reason it gets a pass on criticism.

I say it is evil, and I have been fortunate enough to "rise above those flaws".  I don't think people need this shit in their lives, and I like discussing it to help people think about it more clearly (since religion rarely encourages criticism of itself - and in fact often actively suppresses it).

God doesn't tell terrorists to kill, bad or misguided people say God does.

Religion misguides them to kill. Bad religious people misguide them to kill. Religion supresses self-criticism, faith is the suspension of critical thinking. People are duped into this stuff all their lives. Religion can't just escape blame. I mean, it DOES teach these things. You can pick and choose the better parts all you want, but people will always use those bad parts to do bad things. Some of those bad things are unique to religion and just wouldn't take place without it (like mass-murdering cartoonists who depicted your religious figure in a negative light!). Tell me why it's necessary for some people to have faith/religion, again?

Oh one bad thing motivated by atheism- creating a picture designed to offend a specific religious group in the name of free speech.

Absolutely not. Atheism is the lack of belief in deities and it ends there. It does not command anything. Atheism never got anyone to draw those pictures.

Those pictures are products of skepticism, secularism, free speech, and satire. Furthermore, if you're not allowed to offend, then free speech is dead. It's one or the other. Anybody can claim to be offended, but it doesn't give them the right to censor.

I agree with free speech, I just don't believe it gives the right to be an ass. Others can, but that is their belief.A belief can be used to justify good or bad things no?

Are you sure you agree with free speech, saying something like that?

Well, it does give the right to be an ass. It has to. "An ass" is subjective to every single person. I could say you've repeatedly been an ass by putting words in our mouths when using strawman arguments. Did you breach free speech because I have declared you an ass? Should you be censored?

Absolutely not.

Everyone gets to speak freely, and nobody arbitrarily gets the authority to tell them they can't. That's free speech. I think we're fortunate to have it and should defend it. So I will.