Fed2k Showdown: Religion

[nemafakei]

But still, compare an atheist starting a charity, and a christian doing the same. Which are more likely, and boy how far, do you think: a charity called 'Christian West African Fund', 'Atheist West African Fund' or 'Fund for aid to West Africa'? Granted, they will all have moral codes of conduct, but religion (or atheism) will not likely be inherent in the charity created by the atheist.

[Nyarlathotep]

Phage, for your infi, I wasn't "nit picking". Like said, I honestly didn't know what you exactly meant with that point.

As far as influence of behaviour goes, I still don't see why someone that goes to church every day and lives a peacefull life can be bad. How ? I agree with you though, if someone kills out of religion, or believe, that's moraly wrong. I seriously doubt anyone will agrue that.

And as far as Generalization goes.. You've made the point I was trying to make. People are discussing religions here, in which you can't generalize everyone.

Like I said earlier, I can't tell (and will not) or discuss religions. I won't state if they're honest or true, as I simply do not hold that knowledge to be a judge of that.

[Acriku]

I was discussing religion as a whole, Nyar. And then I went to discuss people of a religion that do evil things for their religion. If you tell me to be more specific, I'd have to say Catholics, Christians, and Islamics. But then again I'm generalizing again, with probably millions of sects of each of these religions.

A joke better explains what I am talking about:

The heretic

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well, are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are your Christian or Buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, Me too! Are your Episcopalian or Baptist? He said, "Baptist!" I said, "Wow! Me too! Are your Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord? He said, Baptist Church of God!" I said, "Me too! Are your Original Baptist Church of God or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?" He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God!" I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum!" and pushed him off.

The point is, I'm not saying all religious people are doing these evils. I'm saying that religious people are doing this, and that is a fact. Catholics, Christians, Islamics, Puritanism, Anglican christians, whatever.

[Nyarlathotep]

If that joke makes what you want to discuss, yes, I agree with you. Like I said in my earlier post, killing out of religion is moraly wrong and I doubt any one will argue that.

[Edric O]

The problem, Acriku, is that people can (and DO) kill in the name of just about EVERYTHING. Their religion, their country, their leader, their race, their culture, or even just themselves.

People kill in the name of anything they feel strongly about. Eliminate religion, and they still have a thousand other things to feel strongly about and kill in the name of. Even atheism. I know plenty of atheist fanatics who are no better than religious fanatics.

So tell me, why don't you just try to eliminate hate instead?

[Acriku]

I've addressed this before, Edric. I'm doing things one at a time, stopping hate is impossible all at once. We must go at it one by one, two if possible. For now, I'm against religion.

And I don't understand how anybody can do something for the lack of beliefs in god(s).. There's no substance in it, nothing to do anything in the name of. It just doesn't make sense.

[Dude_Doc]

And I don't understand how anybody can do something for the lack of beliefs in god(s).. There's no substance in it, nothing to do anything in the name of. It just doesn't make sense.

If you take a good look at our world, all the sick thigs people do ON PURPOSE, then you'll understand that a person can die for just about everything. You see, a person can be so fanatic that he would die for his beliefs in atheism. We can proove it ourselves: If there was two sides of a war, the atheists and the religious ones, who would you fight for?

[Acriku]

There are no beliefs in atheism. If you want beliefs, it'll be something other than atheism. That is my point, there is nothing in atheism to be in the name of anything.

[Caid Ivik]

Look at communistic regimes. In 50s they were killing in the name of atheism, to destroy the religious depth in population, because it distracted it from the "true" cause, the socialistic paradise. You can fight purely destructive fight, when the target stands in your way.

[Acriku]

It wasn't in the name of atheism, it was in the name of what ever perverted communism existed. Pure politics. How many times are you going to try that?

[nemafakei]

It was in the nameof Atheism, but in name only, not in purpose. It was in the purpose of communism. There have been very few deaths for the purpose of Atheism, but many for the purpose of religion (and indeed others in the name of religion, but not purpose, but religion can hardly be blamed for that; religious-based hierarchies, on the other hand...).

[Acriku]

In Stalin's form of communism (satisfied Edric?), it was religion that Stalin thought brought disorder. Now what is atheism? Lack of belief in gods. Nothing to do with religion. So, just because Stalin was an atheist, does not mean what he did was in the name of atheism. If so, then he also did it in the name of white people, in the name of people with mustache's, in the name of people who wear shirts, pants, shoes.

[TMA_1]

And I don't understand how anybody can do something for the lack of beliefs in god(s).. There's no substance in it, nothing to do anything in the name of. It just doesn't make sense.

that is naive man. Some athiests (you included) have an agenda, and have a nemesis or negative that you attack. THat is just obvious right? well now take somebody who is fanatical, and hates religion even more than you, to the point where he loses his moral background. He will kill those that he disagrees with. Same with christians. there are many here that hate athiesm. that is wrong inanofitself but that isnt the issue at hand. Some christians that have lost any sort of moral standing will kill though, because they dont like their enemy. Religion is a very good way to kill somebody in the name of it. it has all the requirements. it isnt right at all but people will use religion and abuse it. Some on the other side though hate religion. Those who cannot contorl themselves will kill those who are worshipers of a religion. This IS killing in the name of athiesm. There are beliefs in athiesm. Athiesm itself does not carry any beliefs when it is pure, I agree with you there. Once you start adding your own personal agendas though, like hating religion, it becomes your belief and your opinion that you need to teach others the truth. Take the brights for example. They believe it is their place to spread the true facts.

You cant hide behind your own warped ideas of life for long.

[Nyarlathotep]

Somehow I think you all agree on most of the things. What keeps this discussion going is that most of you can't seem to say I agree. Instead you bring up a whole new reply, which only results in confusion and more discussion (while you basicly already agreed).. isn't that weird ? ;)

[Acriku]

that is naive man. Some athiests (you included) have an agenda, and have a nemesis or negative that you attack. THat is just obvious right? well now take somebody who is fanatical, and hates religion even more than you, to the point where he loses his moral background. He will kill those that he disagrees with. Same with christians. there are many here that hate athiesm. that is wrong inanofitself but that isnt the issue at hand. Some christians that have lost any sort of moral standing will kill though, because they dont like their enemy. Religion is a very good way to kill somebody in the name of it. it has all the requirements. it isnt right at all but people will use religion and abuse it. Some on the other side though hate religion. Those who cannot contorl themselves will kill those who are worshipers of a religion. This IS killing in the name of athiesm. There are beliefs in athiesm. Athiesm itself does not carry any beliefs when it is pure, I agree with you there. Once you start adding your own personal agendas though, like hating religion, it becomes your belief and your opinion that you need to teach others the truth. Take the brights for example. They believe it is their place to spread the true facts.

And that is when it isn't atheism, but whatever beliefs you add in there. So glad we agree.

Nyar, maybe some of us just like to argue ;)

[Nyarlathotep]

Nyar, maybe some of us just like to argue ;)

I understand that, I just doubt everyone else sees it the same way...

[Caid Ivik]

It was in the nameof Atheism, but in name only, not in purpose. It was in the purpose of communism. There have been very few deaths for the purpose of Atheism, but many for the purpose of religion (and indeed others in the name of religion, but not purpose, but religion can hardly be blamed for that; religious-based hierarchies, on the other hand...).

When you were trying to get on school, you had to write your view on religions. Question was: "Have you solved religiousity question?" By "solvement" was ment that you've "found" that religion is truly an opium of mankind, and you prefer atheism. What communists did was a djihad against religiozity.

[Edric O]

Yes, yes, Caid, you can slander the name of Communism all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that Communism itself has nothing against religion. As both a Christian and a Communist, I'm living proof of it.

Acriku:

I've addressed this before, Edric. I'm doing things one at a time, stopping hate is impossible all at once. We must go at it one by one, two if possible. For now, I'm against religion.

Alright, but why are you against religion and not religious hatred? Why don't you combine your efforts with the religious people who also fight against religious hatred?

And I don't understand how anybody can do something for the lack of beliefs in god(s). There's no substance in it, nothing to do anything in the name of. It just doesn't make sense.

What is there to not understand? Person X is an atheist who thinks that religion is the source of all evil. So he buys a gun and kills religious people in order to purge this evil from the world. That is how someone can kill for atheism.

[SurlyPIG]

Alright, but why are you against religion and not religious hatred? Why don't you combine your efforts with the religious people who also fight against religious hatred?

Sometimes, they are one in the same. The intended purpose of religion is to unite humanity, no? The trouble is, that is the purpose of every one of umpteen religions. So, in order to keep one strong, an often successful approach is to undertake an "us vs them" attitude. This is why Islam has been so successful. This is why the Catholics and Protestants are still going at it in Northern Ireland. Who the 'them' is in their attitude is dynamic. It can be responsive to the times.

What is there to not understand? Person X is an atheist who thinks that religion is the source of all evil. So he buys a gun and kills religious people in order to purge this evil from the world. That is how someone can kill for atheism.

First, how often does this happen? And second, is he really killing for atheism? Or is he, like you said, killing religious people because he thinks religion is the source of all evil?

[Phage]

but still, compare an atheist starting a charity, and a christian doing the same. Which are more likely, and boy how far, do you think: a charity called 'Christian West African Fund', 'Atheist West African Fund' or 'Fund for aid to West Africa'? Granted, they will all have moral codes of conduct, but religion (or atheism) will not likely be inherent in the charity created by the atheist.

That is pure conjecture. Certain secular organization do many things, like Amnesty International, and other groups that for example, buy back african slaves from Muslim slave traders so they free them and send them back to their villages. It's just that there are a lot fewer rationalistic atheists then there are christians. If you were living in a Muslim country or Japan I could probably say the same "How come Christians do so much less charity work then Muslims?" Or "Buddhists".

[Phage]

As far as influence of behaviour goes, I still don't see why someone that goes to church every day and lives a peacefull life can be bad. How ?

Because their beliefs are false, can cloud important issues and preserve outdated beliefs/practices.

I'm not saying that it's a serious moral crime or anything, just that I'd rather people go by what is true.

I mean if a belief system is true and based on evidence, isn't that a good enough reason to try and spread it?

Everyone belief system tries to spread itself. Especially Xianity(Jesus in fact commands this), is it ok for them and wrong for rationalists?

[Phage]

If you take a good look at our world, all the sick thigs people do ON PURPOSE, then you'll understand that a person can die for just about everything. You see, a person can be so fanatic that he would die for his beliefs in atheism. We can proove it ourselves: If there was two sides of a war, the atheists and the religious ones, who would you fight for?

You need to be more specific, like what are the different faction's goals? In the above it sounds like I would not be so much fighting for atheism as I would be fighting against religious opression and for freedom of conscience.

That's like asking "If there was a war between people who believed in ghosts and people who did not what side would you be on?"

I mean generalizing on the basis of those who do not believe in ghosts is just like generalizing on the basis of atheism.

Whereas generalizing on something more specific and substantial, like Nazism, is warranted.

[Acriku]

Acriku:

Alright, but why are you against religion and not religious hatred? Why don't you combine your efforts with the religious people who also fight against religious hatred?

And where is this religious hatred that produces violence and corruption within the educational system? Is it more prevalent than religion? A lot of religious hatred is done by religions. So, fight the religion - fight the religious hatred.

What is there to not understand? Person X is an atheist who thinks that religion is the source of all evil. So he buys a gun and kills religious people in order to purge this evil from the world. That is how someone can kill for atheism.

As ACE pointed out, this is not in the name of atheism or for atheism. Atheism has nothing to do with religion. It's like saying I am not Irish and I kill a bunch of Scottish, thus killing for all none Irish (which includes the Scottish I killed).

[nemafakei]

"Certain secular organization do many things, like Amnesty International, and other groups that for example, buy back african slaves from Muslim slave traders so they free them and send them back to their villages."

Yes: there are many, many charities out there unrealted to any particular religious position.

And I also agree that there are probably fewer 'rationalistic' Atheists than theists, because there are fewer Atheists.

But I would also say that there are disproportionaltely few Atheist charities because there are not morals central to Atherism per se, and nor does Atheism have a particualar 'agenda' or 'establishment', and so naming a charity 'Atheist' adds nothing. Therefore why do it? On the other hand, any religion with some form of church associated with it can gladly gain support by canvassing his own community and obtaining the support of existing organisations to enhance its income.

[Acriku]

It would be named secular, not atheist, right?