is this debate stupid?

[Riverwolf]

I'm talking about advancements regarding equality, rights, liberty and justice (things that have a history of being scarce in religion's shadow).

Such as when Hindus gave shelter to Jews. Or when Saladin gave food to the losing Richard III. Or when Islam increased the rights of women to then-unheard of heights. Or when King Ashoka declared one of the earliest examples of freedom of religion being a state mandate.

...did I miss something? Or does medieval Europe represent the entire world?

 

[Riverwolf]

No video game pretends to represent or reflect reality, though.

What's that have to do with anything?

 

[Father Heathen]

Such as when Hindus gave shelter to Jews. Or when Saladin gave food to the losing Richard III. Or when Islam increased the rights of women to then-unheard of heights. Or when King Ashoka declared one of the earliest examples of freedom of religion being a state mandate.

...did I miss something? Or does medieval Europe represent the entire world?

Maybe I'm the one who missed something, because I didn't say every religion ever or every religious person ever was oppressive. My point was that whenever there has been opposition toward equality for homosexuals, women or racial minorities, the given justifications were almost always rooted in religion, for example. Openly discussing and debating religious perspectives has helped change attitudes and thus helped pave the way for progress.

 

[Aopllo]

Or, then again, perhaps correlation does not necessarily equal causation.

Sorry, but from what I've seen, saying religious beliefs inherently cause violence is as silly as saying video games cause violence.

Nice strawman.

I didn't say "inherently cause." (But it is easy to pretend that is what I said. Makes your answer SO-O-O much easier.) I merely pointed out examples of coincidence.
.
However you cannot deny this. If you do not believe in a god you will not kill (or give) in its name. Nor can you deny that many violent acts ARE done is "god's" name. We have the preps own word for it.

 

[Riverwolf]

Maybe I'm the one who missed something, because I didn't say every religion ever or every religious person ever was oppressive.

Actually, that is the gist of what you said, even if it's not quite what you meant.

You said: equality, rights, liberty and justice (things that have a history of being scarce in religion's shadow)

This particular wording means that things like equality, rights, liberty, and justice are scarce when there's religion, when history does not actually show that.

My point was that whenever there has been opposition toward equality for homosexuals, women or racial minorities, the given justifications were almost always rooted in religion, for example. Openly discussing and debating religious perspectives has helped change attitudes and thus helped pave the way for progress.

Now THIS I will agree with. :yes:

 

[Riverwolf]

Nice strawman.

Or an example of another, related fallacy.

I first pointed out the fallacy, then gave an analogy to illustrate it.

I didn't say "inherently cause." (But it is easy to pretend that is what I said. Makes your asnwer SO-O-O much easier.) I merely pointed out examples of coincidence.

If they're just coincidences, then pointing them out ultimately contributes nothing.
.

However you cannot deny this. If you do not believe in a god you will not kill (or give) in its name.

Right. And if you do not live in a country, you will not kill (or give) in its name.

What's your point?

 

[Father Heathen]

What's that have to do with anything?

You were comparing religion to video games. It's fair to say that certain religions can be a contributing factor regarding violent actions when when they actually instruct people to do so.

 

[Riverwolf]

You were comparing religion to video games. It's fair to say that certain religions can be a contributing factor regarding violent actions when when they actually instruct people to do so.

I've seen very little evidence that most religions say to be violent; on the contrary, most (certainly not all) surviving religions seem to teach non-violence.

 

[Revoltingest]

really, why do we discuss religion in this day and age?

It's not to learn anything about the supernatural world, which seems either inaccessible, inscrutable,
or non-existent. Rather, I discover much about culture & other people by discussing religion.

 

[Aopllo]

What's that have to do with anything?

Quite a bit actually.

IF you believe that you KNOW how to make a perfect society why not DO IT?

IF you believe that what you know is the final absolute and perfect truth w/o error or possibility of error are you not empowered, nay required, to show your fellows THE WAY? And if they be retrograde in understanding your perfect Truth are you not justified in changing their minds? By whatever methods work.

 

[Father Heathen]

I've seen very little evidence that most religions say to be violent; on the contrary, most (certainly not all) surviving religions seem to teach non-violence.

Admittedly I was thinking in terms of abrahamic faiths, who's roots are drenched in blood. The commandments are there (the laws that required stoning people to death over petty, trival and/or unfair reasons), they're just conveniently ignored due to that social progress mentioned earlier. Sadly in some part of the world they still do this sort of thing (such as burying a 13 year old rape victim up to her neck and then stoning her to death for "committing adultery").

 

[Aopllo]

"Right. And if you do not live in a country, you will not kill (or give) in its name.

What's your point?"

That religious faith can does and has been used to justify all kinds of heinous acts.

 

[Riverwolf]

Quite a bit actually.

IF you believe that you KNOW how to make a perfect society why not DO IT?

IF you believe that what you know is the final absolute and perfect truth w/o error or possibility of error are you not empowered, nay required, to show your fellows THE WAY? And if they be retrograde in understanding your perfect Truth are you not justified in changing their minds? By whatever methods work.

Wasn't that the motivation for both sides during the war between America and communism?

And wouldn't that theoretically (luckily I don't think there are any organized attempts of this, yet) be a great motivation for atheist idealists to commit terrorist acts against religious people simply because they're religious?

I still fail to see what your argument even has to do with this thread.

 

[Riverwolf]

"Right. And if you do not live in a country, you will not kill (or give) in its name.

What's your point?"

That religious faith can does and has been used to justify all kinds of heinous acts.

So has politics. Again, what's your point?

EDIT: Oh, and religious faith has also inspired someone to spend millions of dollars to found free schools, free hospitals, etc, for those who would not otherwise have access to them.

 

[Riverwolf]

Admittedly I was thinking in terms of abrahamic faiths, who's roots are drenched in blood. The commandments are there (the laws that required stoning people to death over petty, trival and/or unfair reasons), they're just conveniently ignored due to that social progress mentioned earlier. Sadly in some part of the world they still do this sort of thing (such as burying a 13 year old rape victim up to her neck and then stoning her to death for "committing adultery").

Sad, yes, but I actually was including Abrahamic religions as teaching non-violence.

Violence committed in Islamic countries by Islamic governments have typically been demonstrated to be cultural things that were there before Islam. When the Roman Catholic Church expanded... well, Rome already had a history of imperialism, so that really wasn't a whole lot different than how things were before.

 

[Father Heathen]

Sad, yes, but I actually was including Abrahamic religions as teaching non-violence.

Are you positive? :sarcastic

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/cruelty/long.html

 

[Aopllo]

Wasn't that the motivation for both sides during the war between America and communism?

And wouldn't that theoretically (luckily I don't think there are any organized attempts of this, yet) be a great motivation for atheist idealists to commit terrorist acts against religious people simply because they're religious?

I still fail to see what your argument even has to do with this thread.

Well OK I will overlook and forgive your failure to grasp the obvious.

The OP was questioning WHY discuss religion. The answer, in part, is that religious faith is a powerful force in the modern world. And many believers have as their cherished goal the spreading of their "faith" by reason where possible and fire and sword where necessary.

For those of us who fail to appreciate the "Infallible and Divine Word of God' that effort on their part can be - troubling.

 

[Aopllo]

"And wouldn't that theoretically (luckily I don't think there are any organized attempts of this, yet) be a great motivation for atheist idealists to commit terrorist acts against religious people simply because they're religious?"

No. Because atheist have no claim to "absolute truth." Many would deny any such thing exists. So unlike believers we have no rationale for compelling our fellows to believe as we. Or NOT believe. WE know all too well that these questions CANNOT be answered with certainly. And we further are quite willing - unlike the true believer in religion - we are quite willing to allow the rest of humanity to hold to and practice the tenets of their myths.

All we ask is that we not be require to either participate in or pay for their doings

 

[David M]

that is a bit paranoid isnt it!

Not so much, its a matter of record that certain subsets of religious people demand that their religion should be the basis for enacting laws in society.

Just look at the interference of religion in politics and education in the US.

 

[Riverwolf]

Are you positive? :sarcastic

Cruelty and Violence
Cruelty in the Quran

Well, we're all still here, are we not? The actual number of violent Muslims are very low, ergo there's something to the religion that's non-violent. Same goes with Christianity and Judaism. Baha'is haven't started any violence in their history, as far as I'm aware.

I tend to base my opinions on other religions on more than just anti-Abrahamic quote-mining.