Science vs. Religion

[Celebrindal]

Take the quotes from the other thread and post 'em here for your responses. I'm hoping you respect it.

[Celebrindal]

I will start it off then.



What..the..fuck?

[Kolle]

My issues with religion is that millions of people believe and follow a lie. If this stuff was true I would be inclined to go along with it.

And yes, some religious people do hate me. Whenever some religious person tries to convert me and they discover i'm not some ignorant fool so they get pissed and eventually stomp away. Their distaste of me is very clear.

[Tullaeniel]

Black Guy -1
Dumb Broads -0

[dak]

They need to remove CNN and FOX news and replace them with 24 hour math, physics, biology and chemistry lectures, would do this country a world of good.

[Celebrindal]

Just to add. Richard Dawkins will be on CNN today at 8PM EST. This will probably be a shouting match, with 3 vs. 1 I assume. I don't think they're gonna take Dawkins' attitude toward this situation very well. I'm sure it will be amusing though.

[Busan]

Religion causes too many wars, arguments and other shit.

You can't force all the religious followers not to pray, and you can't force all the atheist or normal as I'd refer to them, to pray.

Freedom of choice, sure, but religion just causes too much hassle.

Still religion would be cool, with all the oppression of women and stuff, I mean, I didn't give them one of my ribs for nothing.

Wow should I not press Submit Reply.

[tikkus]

Religion is a good thing. It gives the uneducated and otherwise morally absent masses something to follow and a golden way to live their lives. It gives the educated and morally present hope for the future and the ultimate "carrot on a stick".

Church leaders and those that manipulate religion for their own personal gain are the bane of what religion stands for. They are the reason that wars are fought and prejudice exists.

[Kolle]

But can religion exist without people using it for personal gain and abusing it to hurt others? I don't think it can. Maybe a philosophy of sorts can, but not something like christianity or islam.

[GrobbeeTrull]

Religion doesn't make people go to war, people do. Just like some people can have a fuzzy grip on astrophysics and quantum mechanics, so to can people have a fuzzy grip on religion and theology.

Whenever religion is blamed for the atrocities of the world, you are inherently saying "I'm too angry to look at the real reason why this all happened, and I refuse to accept that a person or group of person made a bad/selfish decision and ignored the teachings of their faith."

If you claim to be so enlightened, how can you accept that if there is a faith people claim to follow, and people are doing something contrary to the tenants of that faith, that the faith is flawed, and not the person thinking and believing contrary to that faith?

Clearly the issue of whether it's true or not won't be solved for quite some time. But regardless of the truth of religion (any of them, not just western ones), the fact that people believe in them, and do good works because of that faith shows that it is doing what it was designed to do.

If religion didn't exist (which won't ever happen), morals still would exist, but unless the level of human understanding and compassion goes up as a whole, the world will be a worse place. We see the barbarism that goes on, day after day, in places that both claim to be religious and are absent of religion. That won't disapper with religion either, it will be strengthened, when people have nothing to fear but whether or not they will get caught or punished for breaking a moral code.

So to answer your question Kolle, it is possible that religion can exist without people manipulating it for their own ends. It is also equally possible that without religion, everyone would be morally centered (because morals are not arbitrary, by their very definition) and act for the greater good (note: being moral implies that you are acting for the greater good. Egoist Ethics are NOT moral, because if in your choice you are hurting others, that makes it not moral!).

[Kolle]

People are definately responsible for their actions, but religion *Does* teach those negative things. There's plenty of violence, hatred, and bigotry taught in the bible and other religious texts. The problem is that most preachers or religious figures ignore these things publicly all the while they are taught to every christian as they grow up. The sad thing is the brainwashing is so hardcore that mos are incapable of seeing how they excuse the religious violence.

[Dumar]

grobbee is right. until the human condition sees a major change, religion will always be with us and serve as an overall positive aspect in the majority of people who choose to partake in it. whether a particular religion is true or not makes no difference whatsoever.

if you look at star trek on a more serious note, you'll see a human condition presented that's almost devoid of any religion, where the masses adhere to scientific principles and logical thinking that many of you seem to adore. in fact, many of the more serious criticisms of the show stem from how they portray the human condition in this fashion.

that human conditon also has no competition for resources and no strive for material wealth though, and thus no money; communism in its most perfect idea. it's in this state where people would do as many of you ask because no one person is greatly empowered more so than another.

many people tell the masses to be more logical in their decision-making; more critical of deep-rooted ideas; more broad in their thinking. people like dawkins. but could you tell people like dawkins to give up their ferraris? to abandon their elegant homes? would dawkins do that? the capitalist answer to this is that they worked hard and deserved it, but that's not the issue here. the issue is that empowerment shouldn't be wanted in the first place.

i'm hardly a closet communist. i'll never have faith in humanity such that i think that scenario would be even a remote possibility, even if the tech provided such.

if you want to absolve the minds of the masses from religion, you must give them incentive to do so. telling them to be more "logical" and what they believe is wrong ala dawkins and co. is not an incentive.

edit: kolle, please don't start that again.. please. violence is part of the human coniditon, and that's why it's in every major religious text.

[Zest]

America is a nation of religious extremists.

Christians being ostricized in a Muslim nation? That's a violation of human rights!
Atheists being ostricized in a Christian nation? A-OK!

[Tuco]

Atheists being ostricized in a Christian nation? A-OK!

As a Christian, that's not A-OK with me.

[Zappo_Crappo]

back in my day, shutting up was not ok. didnt ben franklin say something along the lines of, i dont agree with what you say, but ill fight for your right to say it. that whole 'shutting up' argument is "wack".

i also believe news stations have talks, like this one, where their crowd will strongly disagree. like a trick to capture their interest.