Do you have parents against religion?

[funkyducky]

If religion is such a corrupting, harmful thing, then what say you about religious charities and the commonly held view amongst various religious groups that all humans were created equal and do unto others as you would have them do unto you etc. ? Religion may have caused a lot of serious problems, but it was also the precursor to the human rights movement and plays a large part in society's moral progress throughout history.

[enwiabe]

If religion is such a corrupting, harmful thing, then what say you about religious charities and the commonly held view amongst various religious groups that all humans were created equal and do unto others as you would have them do unto you etc. ? Religion may have caused a lot of serious problems, but it was also the precursor to the human rights movement and plays a large part in society's moral progress throughout history.

Excuse me? How dare you tell me that religion has been a moral beacon for society?

Religion has ensured that AIDS was spread far and wide to the people of Africa. While the Catholic church was greedily sending their missionaries to a vulnerable, desolate place in order to convert as many people as possible on the broken promise of a better life and eternal salvation, they also took with them abstinence only education at a time when they needed condoms. For shame, the catholic church is almost entirely responsible for the fear campaign it waged against condoms in Africa. This lead to an unabated spread of AIDS. Their blood is on their disgusting hands.

The church has killed, tortured and maimed all dissenters for 2000 years and it's only now, only now after we're finally getting our enlightenment period that they've stopped doing that. But Islam hasn't yet had its enlightenment period. They're still killing and torturing apostates. You have only to look at the bloody, disgusting conditions of the Islamic dictatorships to see what life is like in a country adhering strictly to religion.

NO thank you.

You actually have the conclusion in your post. You actually write, "Religion may have caused a lot of serious problems, but it was also the precursor to the human rights movement and plays a large part in society's moral progress throughout history."

"Religion may have caused a lot of serious problems, but it also did good stuff!!!"

I don't care how much you give to charity, if you beat your wife, you're still a gigantic prick. It's the same analogy for religion. It's also laughable that you say that religon was the cause of the human rights movement. Though I guess you're right for a different reason. They did help cause the human rights problem in the first place... People kept slaves in America according to the rules laid down IN THE BIBLE for keeping slaves. The slave trade is what created second class citizens in the first place. It's like my breaking your arm, because my god told me to do so, and then my turning around and saying "PLEASE DON'T GET ME IN TROUBLE OR GO TO THE POLICE! HERE, I'LL PAY YOUR MEDICAL BILL, I'LL HAVE IT FIXED!"

And then 40 years later, I come to you with a shit-eating grin saying "remember how I paid for your medical bills when you broke your arm 40 years ago? Man I'm so awesome "

Religion hasn't been guiding our moral changes. If it had, we'd still be beating homosexuals (see Islamic world where secularism is yet to take root), we'd still stone women for adultery (see Islamic world), etc. No, it's been secularism. It's been the outcry of anguished people, maddened at what the world has come to when religion takes hold and rules with its iron fist of drunk power that has brought RELIGION (not the other way around) kicking and screaming into the 21st century. That is why it is no longer acceptable in society to do many of the things in the bible. Not because the church admitted that they were wrong, because why would someone who thinks they have god on their side willingly admit that? No, because they were forced to change their ways by more reasonable, humane people who banded together and revolutionised our morals through secularism.

It's fucking sick. Religion is NOT a force for good. It is an evil corruption of the mind.

[ninwa]

If religion is such a corrupting, harmful thing, then what say you about religious charities and the commonly held view amongst various religious groups that all humans were created equal and do unto others as you would have them do unto you etc. ? Religion may have caused a lot of serious problems, but it was also the precursor to the human rights movement and plays a large part in society's moral progress throughout history.

If Hitler is such a terrible person, then what say you about his excellent economic policies, which ensured a high employment rate, the creation of the cheap Volkswagen brand and allowing normal citizens to be able to afford a car, the construction of the Autobahnen, which still today rank among the world's best transport infrastructure, and was generally a popular and well-loved leader who managed to unite so many children and encourage them to participate in physical and creative endeavours? Hitler may have done terrible things, but was also a precursor to many of the things that make Germany a leader today in so many areas.

Hmm.

[funkyducky]

I didn't say that religion has been a moral beacon for society, don't put words in my mouth.
I'll try to be more articulate and straightforward, let me put it this way:
If a man or woman were found guilty of terrible crimes, and they defended their actions through religion, then they would lose any respect I had for them.
Similarly, if a man or woman were found guilty of equally terrible crimes, and they acted for political or personal, non-religious reasons, then they would deserve the same judgement as the person in the first scenario.
Conversely, if someone was motivated by their faith to live a life of benevolence and philanthropy, they would earn my utmost respect, as would someone who led a similar life, but whose moral convictions were not the product of religious beliefs.

If you were to ridicule the religious person for his beliefs, despite the fact that only good had arisen from their faith, would that not be completely hypocritical? It's exactly the kind of  persecution which you have been rather vocally and bluntly condemning, enwiabe and ninwa.

As I said before, it's myopic and unfair to judge someone purely based on their personal beliefs, whatever they may be; to do so would be to embrace the kind of backwards intolerance we want to eradicate. People should be judged on their actions; regardless of the reasons, someone who commits a generous act of goodwill deserves respect for it, and someone who commits rape, torture, assault, murder, etc. deserves retribution. It's not about sweeping generalisations and the corruption of major religious organisations such as the Catholic Church, it's about personal choices and one's moral code of conduct.

[enwiabe]

I didn't say that religion has been a moral beacon for society, don't put words in my mouth.

No. You wrote specifically, "[religion] plays a large part in society's moral progress throughout history." - that is the DEFINITION of a moral beacon.

You realise a person's set of beliefs is what guides their actions, yeah? Why is it okay to chastise a homophobe, but not to chastise his religious beliefs which tell him to do so? The belief itself is so obviously flawed, yet we can't criticise it? Buggar off, that's bullshit and you know it. And I won't stand for it.

As for persecution, I'm not persecuting anybody. I'm telling them their belief is wilfully ignorant. I'm not saying I hate them because of it, or that they shouldn't have the same rights as anybody else (provided they're not infringing on anyone else), all I'm doing is saying that they are wilfully ignorant and that they were more than likely brainwashed from a young age to believe what they believe. That's -not- persecution.

There is nothing wrong with being intolerant of ignorance. No society ever came to grief by being more reasonable. -Many- societies have crumbled due to wilful ignorance.

[ninwa]

It's exactly the kind of  persecution which you have been rather vocally and bluntly condemning, enwiabe and ninwa.

Well who's putting words into whose mouth now? All I did was show you how your "religion has done good things" argument is logically fallacious.

[Eriny]

I don't think it is helpful, nor correct, to respect people's wilful ignorance. We can have this namby pamby "well it's not hurting anyone!!!11" but it IS. Because it's so acceptable in society to be wilfully ignorant that this is taught to children and it corrupts and poisons their minds. Wilful ignorance is how problems get started in society, and no, I will not tolerate, and I WILL ridicule the wilfully ignorant, as should be done until it is societally unacceptable.

I've already said that it is unfair to discount everyone who is religious as being wilfully ignorant. I agree that religion should stay out of schools and the state and I think that it is scary when children are taught of hell as though it were a fact and when important policies do not come to fruition because of logic-less arguments based on God's will. That does not mean that every religious person was brainwashed or is so because of stupidity. Given that nobody knows really anything about the meaning of life or what we are doing here, God may be a valid answer for some. People have the right to their private beliefs.

There are heaps of people who believe in God (i.e. most of them) who do not take the religious documents literally. Personally, I don't believe that the bible was written to be taken literally (I mean, there are two creation stories which kind of contradict each other in there), but rather is a book of parables, stories, etc. I don't think that taking these documents literally is logically tenable for the most part.

So what you're saying is that it's a book of fairytales (and yet it's the religious people who get all uppity when atheists say that. Tomahto tomayto.)

If someone is picking and choosing your morals, then they are not basing it on religion. They are basing it on their own (rather arrogant) judgement (who are they to say what god intended to be binding and non-binding rules?).

Sure, but I don't see how picking your morals on the basis of what one thinks God wants is any more or less arrogant that picking your morals based on what one perceives to be 'universally' right or wrong. Ultimately though, I don't think moral reasoning is necessarily about arrogance as it is about trying to make the best decision possible in the face of uncertainty. I would also say that when horrible actions or the ownership of gratuitous power is justified by God, it actually has little to do with belief or morality and is instead an appropriation of religion in order to fulfil personal desire (or just plain insanity).

EDIT: I also wouldn't necessarily call the bible a bunch of fairytales because that denotes that they aren't important, but essentially I suppose you could say that. I'm an atheist so I can't say what religious people think of that assessment.

[mikee65]

mm

[mikee65]

Religion may be a vehement and corruptive force, but imagine if It didnt exist, if all societies were completely rational, were there no longer existed a virtue of contentment and everyone though critically, would we really want this? The same way we would want every student of VCE to excel? Lets think of religion as a filter, an antiquated notion (better Russ?) theres a reason its negatively correlated with intelligence, thus it is contingent with demise, perhaps this is just a transitory phase, this may seem crass, but lets enjoy the opportunity it provides

[funkyducky]

My point is basically eriny's point, and she's put it forward very eloquently.

[enwiabe]

I don't think it is helpful, nor correct, to respect people's wilful ignorance. We can have this namby pamby "well it's not hurting anyone!!!11" but it IS. Because it's so acceptable in society to be wilfully ignorant that this is taught to children and it corrupts and poisons their minds. Wilful ignorance is how problems get started in society, and no, I will not tolerate, and I WILL ridicule the wilfully ignorant, as should be done until it is societally unacceptable.

I've already said that it is unfair to discount everyone who is religious as being wilfully ignorant. I agree that religion should stay out of schools and the state and I think that it is scary when children are taught of hell as though it were a fact and when important policies do not come to fruition because of logic-less arguments based on God's will. That does not mean that every religious person was brainwashed or is so because of stupidity. Given that nobody knows really anything about the meaning of life or what we are doing here, God may be a valid answer for some. People have the right to their private beliefs.

No. Enough of this relativist bullshit. You can't, in one fell swoop say "OH BUT MAYBE SOME OF THEM ARE NOT BEING WILFULLY IGNORANT" and then say "GOD MAY BE A VALID ANSWER FOR SOME."

That is the definition of wilful ignorance. Your entire argument is utter crap. In the absence of not knowing the meaning of life, a valid answer or a valid approach is NOT to guess, as religious people do. It is extremely dumb and very weak. And it becomes dangerous when people think they know what they're here for. Once you can convince somebody that they're doing god's work, you can convince a good person to do evil things.

Tell me, without religion, who would look at a baby and say "jee, that's a beautiful baby. now give me a sharp object so i can hack off part of its penis?" only religion has us to do such despicable things when we're otherwise good people.

[Eriny]

I'm not saying that maybe some of them aren't being wilfully ignorant, I'm saying that most definitely aren't.

[enwiabe]

I'm not saying that maybe some of them aren't being wilfully ignorant, I'm saying that most definitely aren't.

You are being a fool. And you're being wilfully ignorant yourself. Religion is the definition of wilful ignorance. It is accepting something without evidence or facts. That is the definition of wilful ignorance. All religious people are wilfully ignorant.

[Eriny]

Well, not exactly. Wilful ignorance is the blatant disregard of empirical evidence (climate change denial could be considered wilful ignorance since that most climate scientists would say that there is overwhelming empirical evidence that climate change exists). Believing in God doesn't necessarily entail a denial of empirical evidence. Granted, some of the things fundamentalists believe in would count as wilful ignorance (such as teaching creationism in the stead of evolution).

[enwiabe]

Well, not exactly. Wilful ignorance is the blatant disregard of empirical evidence (climate change denial could be considered wilful ignorance since that most climate scientists would say that there is overwhelming empirical evidence that climate change exists). Believing in God doesn't necessarily entail a denial of empirical evidence. Granted, some of the things fundamentalists believe in would count as wilful ignorance (such as teaching creationism in the stead of evolution).

You're almost there! And now you have to realise that it is the same wilful ignorance that religion uses to makes up its own stories and teaches them as facts to children as to how we got here and why we're here when we don't yet have an answer.

See, it's become an ugly process for religion as the ever-shrinking knowledge gaps of the world they call God are being explained robustly by Science. Go back 1000 years and lightning was god's anger. Go back 2000 years and it was Ra who brought up the sun.

As time progresses, we find the proper answers to these questions, and god shifts from those things to new things that weak people who are uncomfortable with uncertainty dream up to explain god. Yes, god is just the ever-shrinking knowledge gap humans have in explaining the natural world.

So yes, it is the same wilful ignorance when they shift their "god" to the creation of the universe. Sure, scientists have very tenuous theories at best about the origins of the universe, but in the place of that, it is NOT okay to teach "god did it" as if it were something that should be believed and devote your entire life to. That IS wilful ignorance because you have no possible way of knowing that.

So we come back to your point about evolution vs. creation. It's painfully obvious the wilful ignorance of religion teaching creation instead of evolution. Why is it not so painfully obvious when they teach their crap about where the universe came from? Because science doesn't yet have an answer for it, so it's all of a sudden considered "okay" because nobody has an answer for it so they might as well guess. Well I say fuck that, it's still wilful ignorance and it's just as ugly as teaching creation over evolution.