Is Religion doing more harm than good?

[blackout]

Don't worry UV, I'm still here


Oh, and I forgot to Multi-Quote, but the second half is towards HumanistHeart.

Sorry I had to drop to elementary school level, but I menshuned Pure-Truth in my post. Ottomatickly hampres smartness. Bussare isnt it?

Hey, look at this Morse.

Morse x.

I have uncovered the meaning to life
by decoding your name.

x truly does mark the spot.

Am I terribly off topic?

 

[Riverwolf]

http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/Ath-Chap-under-7000.pdf

There is one thing: I took a quick glance at the list (and it WAS a glance, so I could be way off), and there did seem to be a correlation to the size of the country to its atheistic population.

Does size matter?

Of course, one has to consider the fact that Israel had virtually no atheistic percentage (though that's understandable), and Russia had a relatively large one (though, again, that's understandable.)

I think there's more going on than simply being "religious" when it comes to the quality of life. Culture plays a large part in it, which is influenced by history. I don't blame religion AT ALL for the state of the masses here in America. I certainly don't call a simple belief in God or compulsively (key word) going to Church every Sunday "religious."

Of course, like last time, I don't have facts, so feel free to go all Foamy on my arguments. ^_^

 

[Riverwolf]

Hey, look at this Morse.

Morse x.

I have uncovered the meaning to life
by decoding your name.

x truly does mark the spot.

Am I terribly off topic?

There's not much of a topic to be off of.

I'd say Humanist has provided the most interesting thing so far in this thread. Seriously, Humanist should have been the OP; at least he had some real data.

 

[blackout]

Does size matter?

^_^

Of course it does!


:flirt:

My religion seems to be thwarting my ability to post on topic.
*spanx herSelf*

 

[Morse]

Hey, look at this Morse.

Morse x.

I have uncovered the meaning to life
by decoding your name.

x truly does mark the spot.

Am I terribly off topic?

Nope, you're spot on.

There's not much of a topic to be off of.

I'd say Humanist has provided the most interesting thing so far in this thread. Seriously, Humanist should have been the OP; at least he had some real data.

Agreed.

 

[blackout]

Could you imagine if Mr.truth found himself
out to dinner with a pagan of Xtreme sexual allure and erotic beauty.
(yes... I know that's hard to imagine... but let me continue...)

Would he spend the whole dinner
criticizing her Pagan stupidity and go home alone?
Or would he compromize his commitment to... the truth
for the sake of... the opportunity to take her ...home...

And what if she wanted him to join her in an Erosian sex ritual?

Would he do it?
If he did... would he go to "compromized truth" hell?
Forever condemned for joining the ranks of the pure truth world wreckers?

Would he actually at some point in time have to tell this beautiful woman,
she is not Divine? Would he call her gOddess... if she wanted him to?

And would he MEAN IT.... in spite of himself.....

 

[phokist33]

Religion exists because there is no proof. If there were proof, religion would be unnecessary.

so because there is no proof, people decide to believe for what reason? To make them sleep better at night? either way it seems to be a cop out for people who can't handle the big question of "where do i go when i die?" without there being some cause behind it. Point is that we can't possibly know what happens, so because something like that is too big for someone to handle, they make up a story and believe in it.

 

[Riverwolf]

so because there is no proof, people decide to believe for what reason? To make them sleep better at night? either way it seems to be a cop out for people who can't handle the big question of "where do i go when i die?" without there being some cause behind it. Point is that we can't possibly know what happens, so because something like that is too big for someone to handle, they make up a story and believe in it.

Except that's not necessarily true.

I'm a theist, and semi-religious. I don't know what happens when we die, and while I do have an opinion of which explanation I like, I do not believe that it is the way it works without question, nor do I make any claim as to how it works if it's true.

 

[phokist33]

Not a very good argument. That's like saying stories shouldn't exist because they're not real.

stories are stories though, I am not gonna read a fictional book and run my life off of it. Star wars is a story yes, ad at the same time the happenings that take place in that book aren't real, so I don't think your counter argument against mine is very good either. I'm talking about religion in genereal, it becomes a bigger deal than just a fictional tale when people run thier lives based on it.

 

[blackout]

so because there is no proof, people decide to believe for what reason? To make them sleep better at night? either way it seems to be a cop out for people who can't handle the big question of "where do i go when i die?" without there being some cause behind it. Point is that we can't possibly know what happens, so because something like that is too big for someone to handle, they make up a story and believe in it.

But stories can be so much fun!
(especially mine)

Lucky for you,
Only I can handle my stories anyway.

And yes.... sometimes my stories make me sleep MUCH better... :flirt:


PS... I'm a theist... and I believe almost nothing in a hardwired way.
Which I'm sure is at least 98% less than you. :cover:

(my religion is about the suspension of disbelief for a purpose.
and my religion/purpose/life... are pretty much all the same thing.)

 

[phokist33]

Except that's not necessarily true.

I'm a theist, and semi-religious. I don't know what happens when we die, and while I do have an opinion of which explanation I like, I do not believe that it is the way it works without question, nor do I make any claim as to how it works if it's true.

what's not necessarily true?

 

[Riverwolf]

what's not necessarily true?

That people become religious from fear of death.

 

[blackout]

so because there is no proof, people decide to believe for what reason? To make them sleep better at night? either way it seems to be a cop out for people who can't handle the big question of "where do i go when i die?" without there being some cause behind it. Point is that we can't possibly know what happens, so because something like that is too big for someone to handle, they make up a story and believe in it.

Except that's not necessarily true.

I'm a theist, and semi-religious. I don't know what happens when we die, and while I do have an opinion of which explanation I like, I do not believe that it is the way it works without question, nor do I make any claim as to how it works if it's true.

Thank you Riverwolf. Frubals.

 

[phokist33]

PS... I'm a theist... and I believe almost nothing in a hardwired way.
Which I'm sure is at least 98% less than you.

no. i don't believe things are hardwired, I just take it like I see it. I used to be catholic, but things that are taught in religion don't hold up in the real world, so I stopped going to church.

p.s. in case you thought i was athiest, I'm not. Agnostic

 

[Riverwolf]

no. i don't believe things are hardwired, I just take it like I see it. I used to be catholic, but things that are taught in religion don't hold up in the real world, so I stopped going to church.

p.s. in case you thought i was athiest, I'm not. Agnostic

Catholicism is but ONE religion, and hardly represents all of them.

 

[phokist33]

That people become religious from fear of death.

Well then what's the leading cause?

 

[phokist33]

Catholicism is but ONE religion, and hardly represents all of them.

I never said catholicism represents all of them, what tangent are you going on? It was a mere statement to show i used to believe in god

 

[Riverwolf]

Well then what's the leading cause?

How should I know, and why should I care?

And why must there be a "leading" cause?

 

[Riverwolf]

I never said catholicism represents all of them, what tangent are you going on? It was a mere statement to show i used to believe in god

Then maybe I got confused because of the way you worded your sentence; you said you used to be a Catholic, but then said that "things taught in religion don't hold up in the real world". This implies, at least to me, that you felt that Catholicism represents all religion.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[blackout]

no. i don't believe things are hardwired, I just take it like I see it. I used to be catholic, but things that are taught in religion don't hold up in the real world, so I stopped going to church.

p.s. in case you thought i was athiest, I'm not. Agnostic

I wasn't speaking strictly of religion.
I was speaking of life in general.

You might say I'm a Societal Agnostic.
I don't suspect that the "real world" is anything very "real" at all.

I REALLY don't believe/believe in much of anything at all.

There's really no way of knowing anything for sure.

I'm also a big time "leadership" skeptic.
I don't believe what reaches me via the media "telephone game",
starting from the (governing) sources,
who "make the calls" in the first place. *un'im'pressed*
Though the spindoctors can certainly be amusing.

Eye witness accounts are of more interest to me,
but only because I find people and their perceptions interesting.
Not necessarily because I think there is anything to "believe" there.
Most people "believe" what they "believe" they've percieved.

I find life, from a stance of general non-belief.... much more interesting.