Thread: I love Satan

Originally Posted by Jeff777

It's Jeff. Not Jefferey.

And to answer your question, no, it wouldn't be childish for me to help you save face by alerting you to the wedged spinach. I understand what point you're trying to make but even contextually, the spinach analogy is almost entirely irrelevant.

How is it irrelevant? I think it pretty much hits the nail on the head. I've used it myself a few times ...

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

How is it irrelevant? I think it pretty much hits the nail on the head. I've used it myself a few times ...

The analogy assumes a persons faith is "idiotic" and "embarrassing", and that people around them will think so as well. Spinach on someones teeth serves no person. Faith however, does. Faith in a god would not have made it this far into the lives of modern humans if it didn't serve some purpose. I'm not talking about the existence of the God. I'm merely talking about faith.

Originally Posted by Jeff777

The analogy assumes a persons faith is "idiotic" and "embarrassing", and that people around them will think so as well. Spinach on someones teeth serves no person. Faith however, does. Faith in a god would not have made it this far into the lives of modern humans if it didn't serve some purpose. I'm not talking about the existence of the God. I'm merely talking about faith.

Vestigial traits have also made their way into present day. Things such as wisdom teeth, for example. Simply because something exists, doesn't mean it is useful or serves any special purpose. Faith, essentially, gives people hope. It gives them a means to cope with reality. It's comforting in times of despair and suffering. It does not, however, fill any exclusive role. That same comfort can be provided without religion. It can arise from wherever a person wants it to. It can stem from friends, family, self, meditation, deep thought, reflection, daydreaming, and so on. It is no longer required that people believe in an all-powerful being they cannot perceive. More importantly, it is no longer necessary for religion to organize. It is no longer necessary or beneficial to preach against other religions, non-believers, gays, or women, as so often comes bundled with organized religions. What once was blasphemy is now colloquial and common.

There is, of course, nothing harmful about simply believing in something that isn't there. A lapse of judgment and poor display of logic, no doubt, but nothing directly harmful. If you believe there's this thing out there that loves and cares for you and all of mankind, well, that's not a problem. If you believe this thing has a strict moral code and will throw you into hell if you don't live by it, well, that limits your growth. It's not a problem if you keep such beliefs to yourself and treat people with different beliefs with the same respect you reserve for anyone else. The moment you start trying to recruit people, however, things change. If you indoctrinate your children, you're imposing your beliefs, fears, and limits on growth upon the next generation. You're now imposing those limits upon society itself. This is much of what we're seeing now; religion slowing progress, getting in the way and delaying it. Gay people condemned because of one arbitrary line in a 2000 year old book. Women continually abused and treated unequally. Abortion clinics protested, shut down, and fire bombed because some people think it is their duty to save the souls they think exist inside embryos, fetuses, and the mothers themselves, contributing further to inequality. Even the morning after pill, a ground-shattering breakthrough in birth control, continues to remain a sizable controversy, with some pharmacies refusing to even carry the drug. Rationality and logic are sacrificed for faith, not just in regards to faith, but on a person's entire outlook on life. On this level and this scale, it is simply unacceptable that this much strife be wrought for the sake of fleeting comfort. People have a right to believe whatever the hell they want to, but I have a right to question. I have a right to poke them in the gray matter and offer an opposing view, and I will not feel regret or remorse for exercising this right. Humanity has fought long and hard for it. Religion is not sacred; it is just another silly set of beliefs.

^ That post gave me a hard-on.



dat logic

Originally Posted by Mario92

People have a right to believe whatever the hell they want to, but I have a right to question. I have a right to poke them in the gray matter and offer an opposing view, and I will not feel regret or remorse for exercising this right. Humanity has fought long and hard for it. Religion is not sacred; it is just another silly set of beliefs.

Agree up until these few lines. When you say that religious people should keep their religious beliefs to themselves, how is your questioning and atheistic viewpoints any different from their questioning and religious viewpoints you're wanting them to "keep to themselves"? What you are essentially wanting them to stop doing is what you are saying you have a right to do. You can't have your cake and eat it too, my friend.

I live in Mississippi. I come from a super religious family. I myself was raised Baptist, converted to the Apostolic faith when I was 13.. was fire baptized with the evidence of speaking in tongues and then converted to non-denominational. Now, I consider myself merely a seeker of knowledge and understanding. I don't believe in the Christian God the way things were put but hey, that's just me. My hats off to the next man that does. I have a right to not believe in their God just like they have a right to believe in their God. The lines are crossed when people feel they need to "make others see their way of life", through logic or faith.. it doesn't matter. It's all just a case of "I'm right and you're wrong". If everyone were born with tinted pupils in which they saw the world through various shades of various colors.. how could anyone possibly explain to anyone else how they view the world when they haven't seen it "through their eyes"? Literally and metaphorically.

Do not get me wrong. We're curious beings so it's good to question things. Question everything. I would not be a former Christian if I did not start questioning the religion. However, if you know something for yourself.. why seek to question others about something they haven't figured out for themselves? Perhaps they don't want to figure it out. Perhaps they don't think there's anything to figure out. They're content and happy. At least from the standpoint of how they define happiness. Why would you want to take that away from them just for them to see things from your perspective?

I was having a conversation with my relative today about New York legalizing gay marriage. They were of the mindset that it was wrong. I posed the question, which is better.. to be happy for life and sinning in the eyes of the lord or be miserable for life but righteous in the eyes of god? What is life if not meant for us to enjoy it?

Mario, your earlier post goes hand to hand with my own viewpoint as well. But as usual other people write down my own thoughts better and much clearer than me.
I should take some writing courses in English, I think too much on my own language

Originally Posted by Jeff777

Agree up until these few lines. When you say that religious people should keep their religious beliefs to themselves, how is your questioning and atheistic viewpoints any different from their questioning and religious viewpoints you're wanting them to "keep to themselves"? What you are essentially wanting them to stop doing is what you are saying you have a right to do. You can't have your cake and eat it too, my friend.

Above all, I want them to get out of the way. This is rather a case of not tolerating intolerance. I preach no boundaries, no limits, no beliefs. They can limit themselves, if they wish. That's not my business and not my target.

Originally Posted by Jeff777

I live in Mississippi. I come from a super religious family. I myself was raised Baptist, converted to the Apostolic faith when I was 13.. was fire baptized with the evidence of speaking in tongues and then converted to non-denominational. Now, I consider myself merely a seeker of knowledge and understanding. I don't believe in the Christian God the way things were put but hey, that's just me. My hats off to the next man that does. I have a right to not believe in their God just like they have a right to believe in their God. The lines are crossed when people feel they need to "make others see their way of life", through logic or faith.. it doesn't matter. It's all just a case of "I'm right and you're wrong". If everyone were born with tinted pupils in which they saw the world through various shades of various colors.. how could anyone possibly explain to anyone else how they view the world when they haven't seen it "through their eyes"? Literally and metaphorically.

Do not get me wrong. We're curious beings so it's good to question things. Question everything. I would not be a former Christian if I did not start questioning the religion. However, if you know something for yourself.. why seek to question others about something they haven't figured out for themselves? Perhaps they don't want to figure it out. Perhaps they don't think there's anything to figure out. They're content and happy. At least from the standpoint of how they define happiness. Why would you want to take that away from them just for them to see things from your perspective?

To spare the thousands they make unhappy. Would you support the fire bombing of abortion clinics or the shooting of stray dogs because it makes someone happy? I have no problem with someone with a personal set of beliefs. I do have problems with people who go out of their way to inflict suffering on others for arbitrary reasons.

I was having a conversation with my relative today about New York legalizing gay marriage. They were of the mindset that it was wrong. I posed the question, which is better.. to be happy for life and sinning in the eyes of the lord or be miserable for life but righteous in the eyes of god? What is life if not meant for us to enjoy it?

Exactly my point. I don't know what will make a person happiest in life, but I do know that people putting down teenagers seeking abortions cannot be justified, least of all by religion. Again, if people kept beliefs to themselves, or religion didn't organize (unless like the freemasons where everything is internal and nothing is directed at gathering followers), or if it was all strictly peaceful and essentially free of boundaries, then no problem. It is the handicaps and limits that it imposes on society wherein evil lies. In the entire history of the United States Congress, even in this day and age, there is exactly one member who has ever been openly atheist (elected in 1972, no less). There is nothing about being a congressman that should encourage religious people to become one, or qualify them better. Based on the latest census, about 17% of the nation is atheist at the moment. Sort of a disparity, eh? The people who decide the laws of our country are clearly selected, at least in part, based on what invisible man they pray to. This isn't just some trivial suspension of reason. This is a decision that essentially impacts the future of the nation. When an excellent candidate can be ruled out based on a completely arbitrary and entirely unrelated factor, something is broken. George W. Bush cut all funding and prohibited embryonic stem cell research, costing the nation nearly a decade in progress. What was his reasoning? Purely religious. No rationality, not a thought to the hundreds of thousands we could have treated and cured by now. THAT is primarily what I'm fighting. THAT is what I'm striving to prevent. The end of religion as a major factor is my goal.

What a truly calamitous situation not staying strictly on topic has led to. Oh if only Auron locked this sooner, we might never have had to see this terrible display of polite and reasoned discussion.

Originally Posted by Jeff777

Agree up until these few lines. When you say that religious people should keep their religious beliefs to themselves, how is your questioning and atheistic viewpoints any different from their questioning and religious viewpoints you're wanting them to "keep to themselves"? What you are essentially wanting them to stop doing is what you are saying you have a right to do. You can't have your cake and eat it too, my friend.

You have a problem with the lines in particular or you have a problem with the consistency of his position with respect to those lines?

What about the supposition that everybody has the right to try to spread their views, followed by what Mario said?

Perhaps I should clarify. Everyone has a right to discuss what they believe, absolutely. But indoctrinating children, recruiting masses that have no say, and otherwise intruding on freedom of thought is unacceptable. Ideally, people would choose their own religion, if any, after being equally educated about a wide variety, rather than blindly following the faith of their parents, as so often is the case. Talk about religion, go ahead. Talk about your own views and faiths. But please don't ram it down my child's throat. Don't frighten them by saying they'll go to hell unless they accept Jesus. Don't afflict them with unjust panic and guilt. Don't give them false hopes in salvation if only they adhere to your 10 part moral doctrine. In fact, don't do that to any other human being, please. Give them freedom, let them figure it out in their own good time. Recognize religion for what it is: unsubstantiated beliefs and not fact.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Perhaps I should clarify. Everyone has a right to discuss what they believe, absolutely. But indoctrinating children, recruiting masses that have no say, and otherwise intruding on freedom of thought is unacceptable. Ideally, people would choose their own religion, if any, after being equally educated about a wide variety, rather than blindly following the faith of their parents, as so often is the case. Talk about religion, go ahead. Talk about your own views and faiths. But please don't ram it down my child's throat. Don't frighten them by saying they'll go to hell unless they accept Jesus. Don't afflict them with unjust panic and guilt. Don't give them false hopes in salvation if only they adhere to your 10 part moral doctrine. In fact, don't do that to any other human being, please. Give them freedom, let them figure it out in their own good time. Recognize religion for what it is: unsubstantiated beliefs and not fact.

Wow...this is the biggest load of crap. Let them figure it out in their own good time? Is that what you do? It doesn't seem like it.

My seven year old nephew just asked me yesterday what happened to his Grandpa that died a few months ago. He wanted to know where he was now. I guess I'm a bad person for not telling him that his grandfather was nothing but worm food and he would never see him again because Almighty Science says so, but personally I think he will have a happier childhood thinking that his grandfather is happy somewhere else and not in pain anymore. When he grows up, maybe he'll hate me for "lying" to him and trying to "indoctrinate" him, but I'm willing to take that risk.

Also, please stop saying that my belief in God is a "lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic", you're intruding on my freedom of thought. You'd get all butt-hurt if some bible-thumper came in and told you that not believing in God is a lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic and then you would cry about how they're trying to shove their beliefs down your throat.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Wow...this is the biggest load of crap. Let them figure it out in their own good time? Is that what you do? It doesn't seem like it.

I do not attack the beliefs of children, nor do I impose non-belief onto them. The people actually capable of making their own choices, I question.

My seven year old nephew just asked me yesterday what happened to his Grandpa that died a few months ago. He wanted to know where he was now. I guess I'm a bad person for not telling him that his grandfather was nothing but worm food and he would never see him again because Almighty Science says so, but personally I think he will have a happier childhood thinking that his grandfather is happy somewhere else and not in pain anymore. When he grows up, maybe he'll hate me for "lying" to him and trying to "indoctrinate" him, but I'm willing to take that risk.

Or, state that he's simply in a better place, or that he's not coming back. There are a hundred secular ways to approach that that isn't traumatic.

Also, please stop saying that my belief in God is a "lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic", you're intruding on my freedom of thought.

I can demonstrate it. Is there anything else that you believe in that cannot be observed? Just religious teachings? Intredasting.

You'd get all butt-hurt if some bible-thumper came in and told you that not believing in God is a lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic and then you would cry about how they're trying to shove their beliefs down your throat.

Pure ad hominem attack, better known as bait. Sorry, you'll have to do better. Learn to troll properly.

Originally Posted by Mario92

I do not attack the beliefs of children, nor do I impose non-belief onto them. The people actually capable of making their own choices, I question.

Questioning is not an issue, belitting someone for their beliefs is.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Or, state that he's simply in a better place, or that he's not coming back. There are a hundred secular ways to approach that that isn't traumatic.

He's in a better place? So...you believe there's a better place to go after death? I'm confused now. And try telling a 7 year old simply that "he's not coming back". A million questions will follow that statement that you're going to have to answer. I assume you're not a parent.

Originally Posted by Mario92

I can demonstrate it. Is there anything else that you believe in that cannot be observed? Just religious teachings? Intredasting.

I know, I know. If I can't show it to you or prove it with facts, it's not real. Science trumps everything. Blah blah. Still, I deserve freedom of thought, as you stated, which means I'm free to think/believe illogical things if I wish. You really shouldn't try to put me down for my own personal beliefs which I've never tried to force upon you. Oh, and I don't believe in religious teachings. Try not to assume things.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Pure ad hominem attack, better known as bait. Sorry, you'll have to do better. Learn to troll properly.

You mistake me, I'm not trying to debate with you or even really argue. I just found your posts to be full of hypocrisy and extremely annoying, so I wanted to tell you about it. Just because I'm disagreeing with you doesn't mean I'm trying to troll you.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

He's in a better place? So...you believe there's a better place to go after death? I'm confused now. And try telling a 7 year old simply that "he's not coming back". A million questions will follow that statement that you're going to have to answer. I assume you're not a parent.

If his grandfather experienced any sort of suffering at the end of his life, then death may as well be that "better place."

Being afraid of revealing the facts of death to a 7 year old is not sufficient justification for lying to them.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Wow...this is the biggest load of crap. Let them figure it out in their own good time? Is that what you do? It doesn't seem like it.

My seven year old nephew just asked me yesterday what happened to his Grandpa that died a few months ago. He wanted to know where he was now. I guess I'm a bad person for not telling him that his grandfather was nothing but worm food and he would never see him again because Almighty Science says so, but personally I think he will have a happier childhood thinking that his grandfather is happy somewhere else and not in pain anymore. When he grows up, maybe he'll hate me for "lying" to him and trying to "indoctrinate" him, but I'm willing to take that risk.

Also, please stop saying that my belief in God is a "lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic", you're intruding on my freedom of thought. You'd get all butt-hurt if some bible-thumper came in and told you that not believing in God is a lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic and then you would cry about how they're trying to shove their beliefs down your throat.

I'm sorry to hear about your nephews grandfather, I wish the family all the best in this time. However, buriedmonsters.. religion is a poor display of logic. This is why religious people use faith to justify their rationale instead of using logic when engaging others in a debate or explaining why they believe in God. It's somewhat impossible for a religious person to win a debate on the basis of logic when their beliefs are called into question.

Originally Posted by Jeff777

I'm sorry to hear about your nephews grandfather, I wish the family all the best in this time. However, buriedmonsters.. religion is a poor display of logic. This is why religious people use faith to justify their rationale instead of using logic when engaging others in a debate or explaining why they believe in God. It's somewhat impossible for a religious person to win a debate on the basis of logic when their beliefs are called into question.

Thank you Jeff, I appreciate that.

I'm not trying to win a debate about anything. I'm not trying to convince anyone that religion is logical. Hell, I hate religion, truly the world would be better without it. It just really irritates me when I see people like Mario putting others down because of their beliefs. I find it unbearably hypocritical.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Wow...this is the biggest load of crap. Let them figure it out in their own good time? Is that what you do? It doesn't seem like it.

My seven year old nephew just asked me yesterday what happened to his Grandpa that died a few months ago. He wanted to know where he was now. I guess I'm a bad person for not telling him that his grandfather was nothing but worm food and he would never see him again because Almighty Science says so, but personally I think he will have a happier childhood thinking that his grandfather is happy somewhere else and not in pain anymore. When he grows up, maybe he'll hate me for "lying" to him and trying to "indoctrinate" him, but I'm willing to take that risk.

You find honesty to be a pile of crap? Really?

What would have been so bad about saying 'nobody knows for sure. Some people think X, some people think Y'? I was scared about death as a child; my parents didn't feel obliged to tell me 'we know for sure that you go to the most wonderful place in the world with Jesus and all your friends forever [unless you don't believe in this, in which case it's eternal burning]', in other words to outright lie; neither did they say 'you cease to exist and get eaten by worms', don't be ridiculous, why do you feel the need to set up strawmen? They said they didn't know and I should work it out for myself, and no, that did not traumatise me for life.

Also, please stop saying that my belief in God is a "lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic", you're intruding on my freedom of thought. You'd get all butt-hurt if some bible-thumper came in and told you that not believing in God is a lapse of judgement and a poor display of logic and then you would cry about how they're trying to shove their beliefs down your throat.

An absolutely ridiculous comment. If somebody finds God to be illogical then they are at liberty to say that to you, how on Earth does that encroach upon your freedom of thought?? You don't have to accept it and belt up. Somebody can only shove something down your throat if you have a propensity to swallowing anything. Speaking for myself, no, of course I wouldn't get 'all butt-hurt' if somebody told me my theological positions were illogical. Why would I? I'm sane enough to have convictions in what I think and not be bothered by somebody saying 'you're wrong' without any reasons. If I have the time I'd ask them why they think I'm being illogical and rethink my position if necessary, just like any non-theological issue. I certainly wouldn't make the bizarre claim that their criticism is intruding on my freedom of thought, I can't even work out what this is supposed to mean.

Originally Posted by Xei

You find honesty to be a pile of crap? Really?

What would have been so bad about saying 'nobody knows for sure. Some people think X, some people think Y'? I was scared about death as a child; my parents didn't feel obliged to tell me 'we know for sure that you go to the most wonderful place in the world with Jesus and all your friends forever [unless you don't believe in this, in which case it's eternal burning]', in other words to outright lie; neither did they say 'you cease to exist and get eaten by worms', don't be ridiculous, why do you feel the need to set up strawmen? They said they didn't know and I should work it out for myself, and no, that did not traumatise me for life.

Wait...when did Jesus come in? I never outright lied to anyone, and I certainly did not make up some fairytale about Jesus and heaven. I don't know why you used that example, it doesn't really apply.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Questioning is not an issue, belitting someone for their beliefs is.

Was I belittling? Last I checked, I was stating that I take issue with those who force religion on others. I take issue with the bigots and ass-hats who either get their intolerant beliefs from religion or hide behind it as some sort of justification. People who just believe in something don't do any real harm.

He's in a better place? So...you believe there's a better place to go after death? I'm confused now. And try telling a 7 year old simply that "he's not coming back". A million questions will follow that statement that you're going to have to answer. I assume you're not a parent.

Let's assume nothingness exists. In many ways, it is indeed a better "place." Absent of suffering or thought. The ultimate form of peace. It's a matter of perspective, and at least it isn't an outright lie. Besides, what would religion offer? If you're going with brutal honesty, let's say someone in family Z died. This person was a prick, and absolutely going to hell. Are you going to tell a child they are in a place with fire and evil and torture to rot and burn and suffer for all eternity?

I know, I know. If I can't show it to you or prove it with facts, it's not real. Science trumps everything. Blah blah. Still, I deserve freedom of thought, as you stated, which means I'm free to think/believe illogical things if I wish. You really shouldn't try to put me down for my own personal beliefs which I've never tried to force upon you. Oh, and I don't believe in religious teachings. Try not to assume things.

Never have I said you aren't free to think and believe and do as you wish. I would simply rather you didn't force your beliefs on others. Discuss them, talk about them, explain why you believe them and think they make sense. Go for it. It would just be nice if you didn't climb on a podium and shout fire and brimstone, or lurk around outside of schools and tell kids about why Jesus loves them. Most importantly, I would love it if parents gave their children a choice. Unlikely, sure. But it would be nice.

Side note: My use of "you" does not translate to a direct statement regarding only you, the person I replied to, but in general to all readers.

You mistake me, I'm not trying to debate with you or even really argue. I just found your posts to be full of hypocrisy and extremely annoying, so I wanted to tell you about it. Just because I'm disagreeing with you doesn't mean I'm trying to troll you.

Re-read them, you seem to have missed what I was saying. Disagreeing is one thing, but attacking with the intention of pissing off is quite another.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Wait...when did Jesus come in? I never outright lied to anyone, and I certainly did not make up some fairytale about Jesus and heaven. I don't know why you used that example, it doesn't really apply.

It's an analogy, I know you're not a Christian.

Regarding Satan, the popular image owes more to Dante than to the Bible.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

spinach

I was tempted to extend that metaphor by a mile or two, but instead I'll respond with the following:

Originally Posted by MindGames

What if we all had false beliefs?

If you consider that scenario a hypothetical, then you have false beliefs. We all have false beliefs on a much deeper level than the stories we tell ourselves about how the universe started. The level at which we start telling ourselves stories about Big Bangs, breathing life into mud, a big man upstairs, and survival of the fittest is superficial. Beneath are much more fundamental assumptions about how we relate to other beings, where we invest our identity, what experiences we value, and the best means of attaining those experiences. If one person's way of organizing their thoughts around an external deity brings those deeper principles into clearer alignment with each other and with here-and-now reality, and another person's Materialist notions leave them more confused and adrift, then the that theist's views are more true--more illuminating of reality--than that Materialist's. The same cannot be said of every theist and every Materialist, but can only be taken on an individual basis.

Yes, the vast majority of people who subscribe to theism have at least some cartoonish notions, quite divorced from reality, about deities. The vast majority of people who subscribe to evolution also have at least some cartoonish notions, quite divorced from reality, about survival of the fittest.

It doesn't matter whether you draw on Genesis or Stephen Hawking, the Bhagavad Gita or B.F. Skinner, if your way of believing is at best a distorted caricature of any reality to which the original sources may refer.

Originally Posted by Mario92

It does not, however, fill any exclusive role.

If your commitment to rationalism is as great as you insist, you will remove this empty sophistry from your repertoire. What human enterprise, particularly social institutions, fills any exclusive role? By definition, no enterprise which fills any role served by religion has exclusive domain over that role, and is open to the same "criticism." Some people arranging their lives around a therapist, a lawyer, The Simpsons and a book club does not invalidate other people using religion in one or all of those roles.

Originally Posted by Mario92

This is much of what we're seeing now; religion slowing progress, getting in the way and delaying it. Gay people condemned because of one arbitrary line in a 2000 year old book. Women continually abused and treated unequally. Abortion clinics protested, shut down, and fire bombed...

You're misattributing causality from bias, at least in substantial part. I doubt you believe that no one would have strong negative feelings about homosexuality and abortion if humans had somehow come to exist without developing religions, or if we all gave up religion and concentrated on golf. Religious texts (nearly all of them) codify an opposition which derives from the strong feelings surrounding pregnancy, birth, and reproduction in general (but particularly one's own and one's offspring's reproduction). Ingraining opposition to homosexuality and abortion in one's children increases the likelihood that one will have grandchildren, regardless of whether one's children are in fact homosexual or ill-equipped to be parents. At a societal level, those attitudes also breed dysfunction which may inhibit collective fitness, but first and foremost they do breed. You get two currents of evolution butting heads, which is going to cause turbulence regardless of what books you're reading.

It's all exacerbated by patriarchy in our culture, which is likewise codified in the religious texts, and certainly there's a feedback by which the texts support the cultural attitudes which keep the emphasis on those portions of the text, but trying to disentangle the two and assign blame is a game of "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

Furthermore, there are both conservative and progressive elements within religion and without. The marriage equality movement has drawn key support from clergy of various faiths, and we wouldn't have legal abortion if substantial numbers of religious voters didn't elect pro-choice politicians.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

It doesn't matter whether you draw on Genesis or Stephen Hawking, the Bhagavad Gita or B.F. Skinner, if your way of believing is at best a distorted caricature of any reality to which the original sources may refer.

Well said.


If you base your life heavily on faith and beliefs it is pretty much like playing poker with daring lucky draws on straights or flushes and reraising after your opponent has made it clear that he has for sure better hand than you. It is not logical or clever. However, you might get lucky once in a while and win a big pot. Kind of like horoscopes.

What I don't like about faith is the fact that people "create" beliefs that soften their fall in to the reality. Take that heaven/afterlife analogy you discussed earlier. When I was young and my relatives died I was told that every life must end someday. This seems pretty natural fact. When I asked my father what will happen after that he answered : "I don't know. Honestly, no one can." That is the best answer he could have given. We all know we will end our journey in our mortal shell, but no one knows for sure what will happen next. I am curious person, but not curious enough to invent things when I cannot satisfy my curiosity from reliable source. Truth should be sought with open mind that is backed up with extreme skepticism. When I say this I do not refer solely on religion. I refer to everything. I am extremely annoyed when there are still people who try to put science and religion as absolute opposites.

Whatever the truth might be I would always want to know it no matter how cruel and hideous. This is the same reason why I think Inception is actually a very, very sad movie. Because for me it is all about betraying your own self and living in a illusion, which you have created. Nothing is as sad as that.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Was I belittling? Last I checked, I was stating that I take issue with those who force religion on others. I take issue with the bigots and ass-hats who either get their intolerant beliefs from religion or hide behind it as some sort of justification. People who just believe in something don't do any real harm.

My problem came in at your statement of "a lapse of judgment and poor display of logic, no doubt, but nothing directly harmful". To me, that's saying, "Hey, I think you're an idiot, but you're a harmless idiot so I guess I'll leave you alone". That feels belittling and offensive to me. Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seemed pretty clear.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Let's assume nothingness exists. In many ways, it is indeed a better "place." Absent of suffering or thought. The ultimate form of peace. It's a matter of perspective, and at least it isn't an outright lie. Besides, what would religion offer? If you're going with brutal honesty, let's say someone in family Z died. This person was a prick, and absolutely going to hell. Are you going to tell a child they are in a place with fire and evil and torture to rot and burn and suffer for all eternity?

You're right, it is a matter of perspective.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Re-read them, you seem to have missed what I was saying. Disagreeing is one thing, but attacking with the intention of pissing off is quite another.

I don't think it was an attack. My words sound harsher than I mean them to sometimes. All the same, you pissed me off first, so I blame you.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

My problem came in at your statement of "a lapse of judgment and poor display of logic, no doubt, but nothing directly harmful". To me, that's saying, "Hey, I think you're an idiot, but you're a harmless idiot so I guess I'll leave you alone". That feels belittling and offensive to me. Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seemed pretty clear.

It IS a poor display of logic. It is what it is.

I don't think it was an attack. My words sound harsher than I mean them to sometimes. All the same, you pissed me off first, so I blame you.

"Hey, I can't control how I feel and what I read. Everyone else should back off and get out of my way."