Thread: Question for athiests...

I think that first religion afects people's beliefs and then over time they get more and more influence and economic power, when that happens they can mold everything that people do, what we eat , see, listen, touch , do, dance, pray etc etc. Even religion can be all a lie created with the intention of controling people, maybe elite groups are behind this... dunnoo.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

I don't want creationism taught in schools.

It turns my stomach to think of some creationist lying to its kids about what we are and where we comes from.

I almost had a creationist idiot as a vice president because christians voted for mccain not in spite of but because she was his running mate

Two of my best friends can't get married because christians think they own the country

I don't like ignorance

I really loathe willful ignorance.

@Xaquaria, Your answer is pretty silly. I understand that it's the conventional, politically correct belief (and applicable in a lot of areas) that forcing your beliefs on others is a form of seeking security. It's not applicable here. A lot of atheists really don't give a fuck what other people believe as long as they keep it to themselves. Christianity doesn't do that by virtue of what it is. It is a mind parasite and you know it as well as I do.

Eh, keeping your beliefs to yourself shouldn't really be a virtue, IMO.

If you are concerned with truth as an agnostic/atheist, you should talk to people about it. That isn't being forceful or intolerant. On teh flip-side if you are are religous and are concerned about salvation, it would be immoral NOT to share your beliefs with people- whether or not they are right.

And it's kind of too easy to just write it off as a mind-parasite. Sure, you can argue that it can be used politically. AND debate the logic of fundamentalism. But that really isn't the root of the problem, is it?

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

I think that first religion afects people's beliefs and then over time they get more and more influence and economic power, when that happens they can mold everything that people do, what we eat , see, listen, touch , do, dance, pray etc etc. Even religion can be all a lie created with the intention of controling people, maybe elite groups are behind this... dunnoo.

Precisely.

This is exactly why Emperor Constantine brought major religions together; to avoid conflict and have an easier civilization to manage. Just look into the origins of the holidays and the days of the week and you see the evident merging of Paganism and Christianity.

Religion is the sovereign power.

~

Originally Posted by spockman

Eh, keeping your beliefs to yourself shouldn't really be a virtue, IMO.

It should be if you're a fundamentalist.

Originally Posted by spockman

If you are concerned with truth as an agnostic/atheist, you should talk to people about it. That isn't being forceful or intolerant. On the flip-side if you are are religous and are concerned about salvation, it would be immoral NOT to share your beliefs with people- whether or not they are right.

This is precisely why these people should keep their mouths shut. That way, there aren't more of them for future generations to deal with.

Originally Posted by spockman

And it's kind of too easy to just write it off as a mind-parasite. Sure, you can argue that it can be used politically. AND debate the logic of fundamentalism. But that really isn't the root of the problem, is it?

No, the root of the problem is that it's a collection of ideas that insert themselves into the persons mind and replace their sense of self-worth. In this way, they manage to spread. It's a fine tuned system, there is no doubt about that. Look at the evolution debate for instance. You have this system of ideas preventing people from seeing obvious truths because those obvious truths threaten the need for their system of ideas. But that system of ideas has replaced their sense of self-worth so they are not so easily abandoned. That's a big problem.

This is the result of extremists. Every religion I have looked at has a basis of non-violence... some form of "Thou shalt not kill" or "Do no harm" some people just twist their beliefs to justify violence. If everyone truely followed these non-violent beliefs there woule be no war.

Originally Posted by imran_p

Religion is inherently dangerous, it always has and always will spark mass conflict, also, its a load of bollacks that is preventing our advancement as a spieces.

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

It should be if you're a fundamentalist.

Everyone has a right to state their belief, any reasoning behind it. That does not imply the right to cram that belief down someone else's throat in an attempt to get everyone else to believe the same.

Originally Posted by Raven Knight

Everyone has a right to state their belief, any reasoning behind it. That does not imply the right to cram that belief down someone else's throat in an attempt to get everyone else to believe the same.

meh.......

While what you say is technically true, you really shouldn't be encouraging them into thinking that their point of view is at all close to valid. They certainly shouldn't have to right to talk about it in the presence of children. That's like a junkie getting her kids hooked on heroin because it makes her feel better. It's downright child abuse.

Wow... very long thread. I should have kept up with it when it was first made, but I didn;'t start reading it until about an hour ago lol. I gave up on the last 3 pages.

There were a lot of very interesting points made by everyone though!

Allow me, please, a very brief "sermon":
The name of my God is Jehovah. He created the world, untold thousands or millions or billions of years ago. I don't know. The Bible doesn't specify. All I do know is that the Bible says: 'A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are as if a day to God'.
It also says that God is still "resting" in his "seventh day". I can't even imagine what God's timeline is and it's not important to me.
What I do know, is that the creation account (before "science") gave an order of creation which turned out to be in harmony with the scientic theory of evolution (as far as I understand it to be).
God said that everything would reproduce according to "their kind". But when you get right down to the scientific ground-zero DNA level of exactly what a "kind" consists of- who knows, maybe reptiles became birds and the DNA deteriorated or branched off after time.
I won't even pretend to know anything about DNA.

What I do know is that Jehovah was the God of the Israelites. They were his nation and they had agreed to do everything God wished.
Anyone who reads history knows how well that went *dripping sarcasm*. When the Jews didn't accept Christ, God disowned the Jews as his chosen people and the way was open for Gentiles.
But when Jesus was on earth, certain Jews tried to kidnap him in order to appoint him King, but he hid from them. His "kingdom" had not yet come and those who became Christians would strive to follow the example of Christ in all that he did:
>Do not pick up weapons against man
>Love your neighbor and God
>Abstain from the works of the flesh, from politics, from things sacrificed to idols and from blood.
>Teach people about the God who promises a better future of ever-lasting life on EARTH.

Okay... so not very short. Sorry about that lol... but what I wrote is much shorter than what I would like to write

Should gay's be allowed to marry? According to the constitution, yes. God no longer has a nation, and there is supposed to be a separation of church and state.
Should creationism/evolution/safe sex be taught in school? I think all should be taught so each side can be studied by everyone.

Should parents teach their children their religion? Absolutely. It's a command from God. But children won't live with their folks forver, and when they grow up and move out they can choose what they want to do with both their secular and religious educations.

I don't understand why people feel compelled to "rescue" the children of other people.
My parents thinks it's abusive of me to not have a television in my house or that I can't give my kids absolutely everything they want. They think it's abusive that I don't celebrate holidays even though I do give them gifts at other times of the year.
They think my religion is abusive because I will deny them a blood transfusion but insist on other quality medical care (but at their age, they can decide for themselves, and half of them would probably accept).

I don't understand why other people should care one way or the other.
Yes, when I am active in my congregation I go to strangers house to share the Bible with them. But I keep it very short:
"Hello, my name is April, and I'm briefly visiting with my neighbors in the community to offer some encouragement from the Bible.... Are you much of a Bible reader.... Would you like a free Bible study... have a nice day."
90% of the people I actually find at home are polite but not interested.
I don't force my way into their home and shove my Bible down their throats...

I essentially agree... When a child is old enough to understand the theories they should be presented with all of the available theories and evidence so they can make up their minds as an individual. They shouldn't have a specific theory shoved down their throats... although I think that happens much too often that the parents will present their children with only one view instead of giving them a choice...

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

meh.......

While what you say is technically true, you really shouldn't be encouraging them into thinking that their point of view is at all close to valid. They certainly shouldn't have to right to talk about it in the presence of children. That's like a junkie getting her kids hooked on heroin because it makes her feel better. It's downright child abuse.

But P. Stoned, religion doesn't have to be a tool. It can be used by someone who legitamently is searching for truth. One can believe that their own religion is rational without closing their minds to outside ideas.

Originally Posted by spockman

But P. Stoned, religion doesn't have to be a tool. It can be used by someone who legitamently is searching for truth. One can believe that their own religion is rational without closing their minds to outside ideas.

What religion is rational? If outside ideas contradicted their religion, would they give their religion up? In what way can it be used as a tool for finding truth? I'm not sure that I follow you.

I think all should be taught so each side can be studied by everyone.

Are you advocating creationism be taught in science classrooms here? Or are you saying it should be mentioned as part of other subjects?

What versions of creationism do you teach as well? What about the Ancient Greek version for example?

Originally Posted by spockman

But P. Stoned, religion doesn't have to be a tool. It can be used by someone who legitamently is searching for truth.

I lol'd.

Originally Posted by Zhaylin

Should creationism/evolution/safe sex be taught in school? I think all should be taught so each side can be studied by everyone.

Unfortunately, science class is for science and there is no science in religion. No matter how much creationists would like there to be so. Schools teach about religion, but they don't teach how one should go about being a follower of any religion.

"Woes to you, oh Earth and Sea, for the devil sends the beast with wrath because he knows that time is short." Revelation 12:12

"Let him who hath understanding recon the number of the Beast, for it is a human number. His number is six hundred and sixty-six." Revelation 13:18

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAgIh...om=PL&index=47

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

What religion is rational? If outside ideas contradicted their religion, would they give their religion up? In what way can it be used as a tool for finding truth? I'm not sure that I follow you.

Because when a person, confronted with two alternatives, can say that one of those choices makes more sense to him/her and he/she goes with that decision, he/she is being rational. Religion can be the more sensible choice to someone. If it is, than they aren't just grasping for straws. Even if you think they are wrong- if it makes sense to them they aren't necesarily being coralled by a wily preacher like sheep.

As far as the second half, I phrased that poorly. I meant that religion doesn't necesarily have to be a tool, not that it should ideally be used as one. And, at it's core, religion should be a search for truth. In it's purest form, that is all any religion is.

I lol'd

Hmm. Why?

Originally Posted by davej

well then prove to me how the universe was created. and i don't just mean the planet and stars... space itself as well. how was it all created?

http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/0553380168

There, Dr. Hawkings can explain it a lot better than any of us can. Be careful though, he uses logic and math instead of magic, don't let it throw you.

Originally Posted by Zhaylin

Should creationism/evolution/safe sex be taught in school? I think all should be taught so each side can be studied by everyone..

All of them should be thought in school, but not in the same class.

Science is science, it belongs in the science class.
The Bible is literature, it should be taught in a literature class.
The Bible is also Christian mythology, it should be taught in a history class (but not as history)
Safe sex should be taught in sex-ed.
Abstinence only sex ed should never be taught.

Originally Posted by Zyaylin

What I do know is that Jehovah was the God of the Israelites.

No, only to latin speaking Israelites and Indiana Jones was actually correct; it was Iehovah until about 1650. God has different names depending on the language spoken. The earliest jews called him YHWH. Ehyeh asher ehyeh was the name given to Moses in the Tora. Jesus spoke aramaic, so he would have called god "Allah," I always find that very amusing.

i dont think we should even teach sex ed at all

then the kids wont even know HOW to have sex

That's the problem with abstinence only sex ed, they don't know how to have sex, so they do it wrong and get pregnant and full of STDs.

i mean, if you dont teach sex ed at all then the kids will not even have sex on their minds, and the little 6th and 7th graders wont even know the anatmy of it

No, no, they definitely will still have sex on their mind and be having sex. We are biologically programmed to think about sex and to have sex. Males hit their sexual peak between 17 and 20.

Not to mention that most kids knows something about sex before sex ed, and that the kids are certain to get urges when they're getting older. And what the hell is wrong with them having sex anyways, as long as it's safe sex? I never got that mentality.

I think the only solution is to teach both abstinence and safe sex. Teach kids that they are playing with fire if they have sex because dealing with a pregnancy is way more than what they are ready for, but then teach them that IF they do it any way, this is the safEST way to do it. I don't agree with teaching abstinence only or safe sex only.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Jesus spoke aramaic, so he would have called god "Allah,"

THAT is the trippiest piece of information I have come across in a while. I wonder what Rush Limbaugh would say to that one.

Originally Posted by khh

And what the hell is wrong with them having sex anyways, as long as it's safe sex? I never got that mentality.

It's not completely safe. Condoms can break, and Herpes can be spread even if the condom stays intact. It's just a whole lot safer than otherwise.