• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What do non-religious people contribute to the world that religious people can't?

Vinayaka

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
This isn't about everyone, just certain segments within the 2 general types. Firstly, the non-religious, if they don't think about, or take their non-religion seriously, are open to anything. They can give freely, without boundaries of what to give to. Secondly, some, if not many, religious people have a boundary, and that boundary is their own tribe. So if there are two charities, each run by different religions, the non religious person can give to either, but the religious folks feel bound, or are bound to give to their tribe only.

If we use countries as a hypothetical analogy, a person not bound to a country could designate his taxes to an impoverished country.

In the other similar thread, the idea that the non-religious could be more helpful wasn't given as a possibility. So I changed my vote to 'this poll doesn't reflect my thinking'.
 
SalixIncendium

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I think the answer would be dependent on if the beliefs of the religious person cause dismissal or denial of secular means of change.

For example, I know of religious people that rest on their laurels waiting for their God to change things that they can put effort into changing themselves.
 
DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan

DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan

DVMAZ
Vinayaka said:
This isn't about everyone, just certain segments within the 2 general types. Firstly, the non-religious, if they don't think about, or take their non-religion seriously, are open to anything. They can give freely, without boundaries of what to give to. Secondly, some, if not many, religious people have a boundary, and that boundary is their own tribe. So if there are two charities, each run by different religions, the non religious person can give to either, but the religious folks feel bound, or are bound to give to their tribe only.

If we use countries as a hypothetical analogy, a person not bound to a country could designate his taxes to an impoverished country.

In the other similar thread, the idea that the non-religious could be more helpful wasn't given as a possibility. So I changed my vote to 'this poll doesn't reflect my thinking'.
Click to expand...

What if a non-religious person doesn't feel any reason to give their hard earned money to some "needy" people, since they have no God to answer to who cares if they waste their money on the poor or not?
 
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
Vinayaka said:
This isn't about everyone, just certain segments within the 2 general types. Firstly, the non-religious, if they don't think about, or take their non-religion seriously, are open to anything. They can give freely, without boundaries of what to give to. Secondly, some, if not many, religious people have a boundary, and that boundary is their own tribe. So if there are two charities, each run by different religions, the non religious person can give to either, but the religious folks feel bound, or are bound to give to their tribe only.

If we use countries as a hypothetical analogy, a person not bound to a country could designate his taxes to an impoverished country.

In the other similar thread, the idea that the non-religious could be more helpful wasn't given as a possibility. So I changed my vote to 'this poll doesn't reflect my thinking'.
Click to expand...
In theory, nothing.

There is nothing a non-religious person could do that couldn't be done by a religious person.

If you turn the question round, ie What could a religious person do that a non-religious couldn't?

A couple come to mind ...
  • Fly a plane into a building on purpose
  • Attach abortion clinics
 
SalixIncendium

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
The Artis Magistra said:
What if a non-religious person doesn't feel any reason to give their hard earned money to some "needy" people, since they have no God to answer to who cares if they waste their money on the poor or not?
Click to expand...

So you're saying that religious people are morally and/or ethically driven by fear of retribution by God?
 
SalixIncendium

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Altfish said:
In theory, nothing.

There is nothing a non-religious person could do that couldn't be done by a religious person.

If you turn the question round, ie What could a religious person do that a non-religious couldn't?

A couple come to mind ...
  • Fly a plane into a building on purpose
  • Attach abortion clinics
Click to expand...

Yeah, we get it. Atrocities are only performed by religious people. Thanks for your contribution.
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Altfish said:
In theory, nothing.

There is nothing a non-religious person could do that couldn't be done by a religious person.

If you turn the question round, ie What could a religious person do that a non-religious couldn't?

A couple come to mind ...
  • Fly a plane into a building on purpose
  • Attach abortion clinics
Click to expand...

No, terrorists can be non-religious.
 
Vinayaka

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Altfish said:
In theory, nothing.

There is nothing a non-religious person could do that couldn't be done by a religious person.

If you turn the question round, ie What could a religious person do that a non-religious couldn't?

A couple come to mind ...
  • Fly a plane into a building on purpose
  • Attach abortion clinics
Click to expand...

I'm just thinking of a subset ... those that have attachment to a tribe.
 
DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan

DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan

DVMAZ
SalixIncendium said:
So you're saying that religious people are morally and/or ethically driven by fear of retribution by God?
Click to expand...

A bunch of them probably are, though the one's not prone to giving charity anyway out of empathy/sympathy probably wouldn't even under their religions, but some religions (like Islam for example) make charity of some sort mandatory and pressure people to do it and make a big fuss about it, and this might increase the amount of charity given out overall in comparison to something which might not make mention of it or no priority or consequences.

In my case, I doubt I'd give to charity or in charity almost ever, I have a poor opinion of the poor and in need around the world mainly, and so if I ever give, its not because I believe in charity or that it will help any or improve the state of the world at all, but for magical merit and rewards from a God and gifts for myself. I think the "needy" and destitute are mainly a nuisance and that charity to them achieves very little to nothing, and that their survival in a dependent state is helpful to no one either, it just gives them a little longer to leech off of other people, and this applies even if they are disabled (and in the world of brute nature, would've rightfully died off on their own). So an Evil being like myself, as you can see, is contained and controlled by a religion, which tricks me into thinking I might receive some benefit for myself in this life and the next, Magical Luck in my life here, and rewards later potentially, for giving help and charity to people I think are worthless. So charity for me is a kind of ritual. I also give it freely, if I ever feel I can or do, to anyone at all regardless of their religion or whatever (so long as they appear in need), and asking nothing in return, and what they do with it is on their own head, and I get my magic from the act and big rewards and gifts (as I perceive them) from my little magic trick. If they end up overdosing on drugs or getting hit by a car, I could care less probably, or I might even be pleased.

Now imagine how many malicious souls like my own may exist in this world, who would never give charity to other human beings, if it were not for being fooled by a religion which makes them think they might be rewarded for such here and later?
 
U

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Vinayaka said:
This isn't about everyone, just certain segments within the 2 general types. Firstly, the non-religious, if they don't think about, or take their non-religion seriously, are open to anything. They can give freely, without boundaries of what to give to. Secondly, some, if not many, religious people have a boundary, and that boundary is their own tribe. So if there are two charities, each run by different religions, the non religious person can give to either, but the religious folks feel bound, or are bound to give to their tribe only.

If we use countries as a hypothetical analogy, a person not bound to a country could designate his taxes to an impoverished country.

In the other similar thread, the idea that the non-religious could be more helpful wasn't given as a possibility. So I changed my vote to 'this poll doesn't reflect my thinking'.
Click to expand...

It does depend on the religion. When I was in catholicism, they taught that through god you give to others. So, the Legion of Mary, for example, would help people with their rent, bedding, clothes, and so forth because that's what they feel god and the church told them to do. So, it's a boundary, yes, but in some cases it's inside out rather than doing something for the tribe as opposed to doing something with the tribe for a given source of purpose.

Non-religious (I don't agree one can take their "non-religion" seriously. Religion/traditions/rules of boundaries/etc just doesn't exist for us. Indifference) can give to the same people the religious give and even receive the same feeling of merit or the fulfilment to help others in need. They can even keep in mind people who they wish good health to. Even make a routine to help others in a soup kitchen or meditate with others who need solace to help with mental anguish. So, I agree, it's freer in a sense there's no rules or edicts that say who to give to and who to thank for the merit of giving.

I think non-religious and religious can contribute to the same thing. Their source and rules that guide their ethics et cetera are different not the contribution itself.
 
Viraja

Viraja

Jaya Jagannatha!
Excellent question, Vinayaka ji. I am not replying with an answer or even as much of a thought on the OP, but I want to tell that it is that kind of question you go out looking for an answer for long and suddenly after real search, one day the answer dawns on you.
 
Brickjectivity

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Vinayaka said:
This isn't about everyone, just certain segments within the 2 general types. Firstly, the non-religious, if they don't think about, or take their non-religion seriously, are open to anything. They can give freely, without boundaries of what to give to. Secondly, some, if not many, religious people have a boundary, and that boundary is their own tribe. So if there are two charities, each run by different religions, the non religious person can give to either, but the religious folks feel bound, or are bound to give to their tribe only.

If we use countries as a hypothetical analogy, a person not bound to a country could designate his taxes to an impoverished country.

In the other similar thread, the idea that the non-religious could be more helpful wasn't given as a possibility. So I changed my vote to 'this poll doesn't reflect my thinking'.
Click to expand...
Vinayaka said:
I'm just thinking of a subset ... those that have attachment to a tribe.
Click to expand...
The secular person, like many religious people, has the opportunity to think "I am not certain about some things." They overlap that group of religious people who have this thought, and that is something many can share in common. It is a kind of super-tribe that permeates the other tribes. The secular person is the martyr to this. They stand in the position of neither this nor that.
 
DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan

DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan

DVMAZ
Viraja said:
Excellent question, Vinayaka ji. I am not replying with an answer or even as much of a thought on the OP, but I want to tell that it is that kind of question you go out looking for an answer for long and suddenly after real search, one day the answer dawns on you.
Click to expand...

Woah! It says it is your Birthday! You're born on a Date very close to my own Birthday on the 27th of October! Happy Birthday! Notice the Post Time as well! I'm posting from here at 10:31 AM!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top