Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   
Where is god?

Home // Atheism Versus Religion



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
emceeMC wrote:

However, religion has helped literally billions of people put meaning and purpose to their lives, and as much as it physically hurt people, it has done much good as well.

Free speech is responsible for things like the KKK and other hate speech organizations that hurt thee world. Is free speech bad? No, the people using it are..


Oh no, i totally agree.

I don't think that religion is bad because religious nuts kill people. Nuts kill people in general, with or without god telling them to do it.

I think religion is bad because it promotes irrational thought, which makes for bad decision-making.

Quote:

Quote:
How exactly? I couldn't tell you. It's a matter of quantum mechanics, which, as of yet, i don't entirely understand.

I can assure you that it happens, though. It's been observed experimentally.


Lol, "I cant tell you how or why, but I believe in it!" Thats about as logical as humans and dinosaurs in the same time period.


No, it's more like acknowledging that the sky is blue, without knowing why.

Quote:

What experiment has proved this theory you have no understanding of?


Description of observations of it:

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/g.....ction.html

Description of the theory (you may see why i'm not up to snuff on it):
http://www.modspil.dk/agger/speciale.pdf

Quote:

Quote:
Well, that's kind of the point: it originates from nowhere. It just happens.


Oh, thats veerrrryyyyy scientific. "It just happens." Was that Stephen Hawking who said that? Thats some deep stuff. Am I wrong, or is a fundamental tenet of science is that nothing "just happens?"


I used the word "happens" as opposed to "created" because, as i've said (i think), it doesn't seem to originate from anywhere. No one makes it.
There's undoubtedly a reason for it, but there's no action of the sort that you have in mind - it doesn't "come from" anywhere. It happens into existence.

Which is why i've said before that energy conservation is iffy - it doesn't happen on very tiny scales.

Quote:

You can engage in hedonistic practices like the author of this thread would have us do, be happy, and not suffer. Your life, however, won't be very interesting.


Hedonism is just about being happy. It has little to do with the precise method of achieving happiness.

Quote:

Quote:
I'd be interested to see your evidence for making such a claim.


Neanderthal humans buried their dead, most historians agree that that indicates a belief in the afterlife. They buried their dead with things they thought they might need in the afterlife. This code of morality of respect for the dead set the stage for the more complex religions that would develop over time.


Your factual statements are true, but they don't unequivically imply what you think they do. The fact that neanderthals believed in the supernatural, and that they had what we would consider to be moral practices, does not at all mean that religion and morality have always existed together.

And do you believe that morality and religion are codependent? Because i don't think that's true, personally.

Quote:

Quote:

And except for language. And cooperation. And hunting tactics. Etc.


Hunting and cooperation being used for...survival. But you've got me, language is up there is age too.


Hehe...and why do you think we developed language? It has survival advantages.

And, much like language, you'll note that we now use hunting and cooperating for non-survival-related things too.
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
I think religion is bad because it promotes irrational thought, which makes for bad decision-making.


Generally speaking, religious people try to base their decisions off of what they consider to be good and moral, how is that bad?

Quote:
There's undoubtedly a reason for it, but there's no action of the sort that you have in mind - it doesn't "come from" anywhere. It happens into existence.


In science, there is a reason behind properties. Electrolytes conduct electricity because their solutions are ionic, Noble gases aren't very reactive because they have 8 valence electrons. Background energy is a "property" of the universe, meaning either it has a discernible root as to why (which would lead to the question where did that root come from) or we have already reached the end of the line.

Quote:
Hedonism is just about being happy. It has little to do with the precise method of achieving happiness.


Hedonism has to do with increasing pleasure, in other words maximizing your exposure to pleasurable stimulii (food, drink, sex, or "eat, drink and be merry", as the author of this thread so insightfully articulated.) Mother Theresa was happy, was she a hedonist? Hardly. Engaging in hedonism may increase pleasure, and create some empty happiness, however true happiness can only come from having lived a full life, e.g. experiencing helping others, engaging in practices other than wine-filled orgies.

Quote:
Your factual statements are true, but they don't unequivically imply what you think they do. The fact that neanderthals believed in the supernatural, and that they had what we would consider to be moral practices, does not at all mean that religion and morality have always existed together.


There is no evidence to support, however, that religion or morality ever existed independently in the dawn of man. Our evidence of the first belief in the supernatural (burial) is compounded by the fact that the burial itself should be considered a moral act- since it bore no survival advantage. Therefore, I can say that "The first evidence of morality and the first evidence of religion are one in the same," and point to evidence. Unless you can point out some evidence that suggests one predated the other?

Quote:
And do you believe that morality and religion are codependent? Because i don't think that's true, personally.


No, I believe you can be moral without being religious. However, as I pointed out above, our only evidence of the origins of morality are compounded with a belief in the supernatural. Which leads me to conclude that belief in the supernatural gave birth to morality, so I do believe that if religion had never entered to world, we would have highly different values on what constitutes morality nowadays.

Quote:
And, much like language, you'll note that we now use hunting and cooperating for non-survival-related things too.


As I said before, outside of anything used to increase survival, religion is the oldest component of the human psyche, the first philosophy. There is something within people that draws us to a God. We can disagree on what that is, but undoubtedly, it exists.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's an interesting article on christian recruitment:
http://www.truthdig.com/report.....bombs_you/
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh my! I believe that brings the questionable Christian organization that you've cited count up to...3! Is there no limit to the number of these crooked Christians?
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
emceeMC wrote:
Oh my! I believe that brings the questionable Christian organization that you've cited count up to...3! Is there no limit to the number of these crooked Christians?


Look, I will give it to you that there are some goodhearted people still in the world. Just not Christian charities. I would also like to point out that I do not hold Christianity in question alone. It applies to Judaism and the Muslim faith, as well.
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Look, I will give it to you that there are some goodhearted people still in the world. Just not Christian charities.


You have cited a total of three Christian organizations that are questionable. How can you make a statement about a group of things based on the actions of a few?

If 1000 black people commit a crime, are all black people criminals? No, it is a stereotype based on the actions of a few. How is what you think about Christian charities different from racial stereotypes?
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
emceeMC wrote:
Quote:
Look, I will give it to you that there are some goodhearted people still in the world. Just not Christian charities.


You have cited a total of three Christian organizations that are questionable. How can you make a statement about a group of things based on the actions of a few?

If 1000 black people commit a crime, are all black people criminals? No, it is a stereotype based on the actions of a few. How is what you think about Christian charities different from racial stereotypes?


Just Google any one of the televangelists and you will find a crooked charity. I will not go through the whole list of christian charities, I already have my perception. Throughout my history, so far, I have found that the more holy a person claims to be, the more dirty the shit is that they do. The more charitable they claim to be is usually a relection of just how charitable they are not. That is just my perception of it.
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Just Google any one of the televangelists and you will find a crooked charity. I will not go through the whole list of christian charities, I already have my perception. Throughout my history, so far, I have found that the more holy a person claims to be, the more dirty the shit is that they do. The more charitable they claim to be is usually a relection of just how charitable they are not. That is just my perception of it.


What televangelists, and how do you know their charity is crooked?

Your perception is shaped by a handful, literally, of Christian charities, when there are thousands of religious charities in the world.

Furthermore, if your perception is not supported by evidence, how can it be considered valid or plausible?
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Corrupt charities:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/manion/manion58.html

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/.....03028.html

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=513478

http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/c.....php?id=306

http://www.informationclearing.....e13004.htm

Here is a pdf also, if you are interested:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t.....Gxgy4V3c4w

http://findarticles.com/p/arti....._n15779339
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/manion/manion58.html


What religious charity is being discussed here? None.

Quote:
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=513478


All of the charities here are secular, not religious. How are the relevant to a discussion of religious charities?

And take a look at the correction at them bottom of the article...

The May 15, 2006 op-ed, “Corrupt Charities,” incorrectly stated the percentage of donations to several charities that goes towards the people and programs that the charities exist to serve. According to Charity Navigator, a non-profit organization that reviews charitable groups, the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation spends 76.2 percent of money on its causes, not 13 percent. The Greenpeace Fund spends 78.8 percent on its causes, not 18 percent. The March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation spends
75.1 percent, not 18 percent. Charity Navigator does, however, rate the efficiency of Greenpeace and March of Dimes as deserving only two stars, which signifies that it “needs improvement.” The Komen Foundation received a three-star “good” rating.


Glad to see Jayson Blair's fact-checker is still finding employment.

Quote:
http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/comment/article.php?id=306


What religious charity is being discussed here? None.

Quote:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13004.htm


What religious charity is being discussed here? None.

Quote:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t.....Gxgy4V3c4w


This article discusses whether or not the government should fund charities, what corrupt religious charity is being discussed here?

Quote:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0MKY/is_16_29/ai_n15779339/pg_2


What religious charity is being discussed here? None.

My question to you is this: Why, in a discussion of religious charities, would you post 6 links that are in no way connected to corrupt religious charities?

Although you did manage to wrangle one more bad charity, Abramoff's. That brings the count up to 4.
Back to top
Refused
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 247

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Listen, I will admit when I do something stupid and I am all for the truth and everything. I am not a really a person to criticize one particular person but damn, some of the stuff in the first post was dumbbbbbbbb.


Really dumb.



You know what, just because creationist are the only ones that make the websites to support creationism and not the TRUTH, atheist are the only ones that create websites that will tell you that evolution is rampant!

The whole thing was a decent post but damn that was so stupid to say.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
emceeMC wrote:
My question to you is this: Why, in a discussion of religious charities, would you post 6 links that are in no way connected to corrupt religious charities?


I was referring to the premise of "Giving" as a whole and not just limiting it to religious charities alone.
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
I was referring to the premise of "Giving" as a whole and not just limiting it to religious charities alone.


Rofl, yes, giving to others, what a ridiculous cause. Thanks for pointing that out.

You never answered my question, I'll repost it.

Your perception is shaped by a handful, literally, of Christian charities, when there are thousands of religious charities in the world.

Furthermore, if your perception is not supported by evidence, how can it be considered valid or plausible?
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bushes faith based initiatives:
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1465.cfm

Salvation Army:
http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/faith26.htm

Ever tried Googling "corrupt christian charities" or something similar? Not to many hits from our mainstream media. There were a lot of hits from arab sources, though. I chose not to post them. Then, I could be labeled as a sympathizer. Mother Theresa was a good person, that's where I draw the line, though. Isn't pride a sin anyway, to tout how much we give in charity.

"Pride" is also used to mean hubris, or excessive pride, which was usually the defining trait that leads to the tragic hero's tragic downfall according to Aristotle. This negative connotation of pride often appears in a religious context. Excessive pride also manifests itself as arrogance, the act of obtaining rights or advantages, including vainglorious or rhetorical advantages, sometimes through violence or threat of violence, or through verbal violence.

Pride is found in someone who won’t give up and someone who refuses to settle for anything less than respect.
Back to top
emceeMC
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rofl Laughing Your only source of evidence that religious charities are bad: Bigoted Muslim News Sources. Yea, thats bulletproof.

Can even these sources prove their claims are true? And do they prove a majority of religious charities are corrupt?

I will not engage in debate with someone who can offer no evidence of their claims.
Back to top


Post new topic   Reply to topic   Quick Reply    LVC Home // Atheism Versus Religion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics
Politics blogs Politics blogs Article Directory Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Top Blog Sites