Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Christian Doctor Chemically Castrated Boy As Part Of 'Gay Cure'.


Sharpshooter

Recommended Posts

What's there to argue with.

Religion enables people to do bat-sh** crazy things? Agree.

The world would be better off without religion? Debatable (as we have never seen a world without religion) but it probably couldn't be any worse. At least people would use reason instead of a 2000 year old book to figure out what is right and wrong. I think it's obvious that religion does do a lot of good for the world as well as bad. It's really hard to say for this one. An example that comes to mind, I don't know if you've read The Better Angels of our Nature by Steven Pinker but he pretty shows that the news tends to focus on the bad and we get this misconception that the world is getting worse and more bad, but in reality it's actually getting better (more moral, less crime etc) but the news is reporting more bad things than ever before. Similarly with religion, the crazy people, and evil things done in the name of religion get a lot more press than the good.

Religious moderates? I don't think they have to be enablers for the extremists. I think they might be able to make a change from the inside (say with issues like homosexuality and promote acceptance and tolerance). It might even work better than having atheists ridicule their beliefs. In fact the ridicule is probably doing more damage than good and making religious people even more convicted in say their beliefs on homosexuality (perhaps they feel persecuted and that God will reward them).

So I didn't ignore your post, I thought it was interesting, I just didn't think you said anything I would argue with except for maybe your view (or Harris's view I should say) on religious moderates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen the argument so many times. Someone will bring up a heinous tidbit of history (ex. the crusades) demonizing religion, and then someone fires right back with an equally heinous tidbit of history demonizing atheism (ex. Stalin).

What needs to be noted here, is that it's foolish to lump all these people under the terms Atheist and Theist. The terms are so broad that including that many people in one group is a surefire way to have massive holes in your argument.

The point is, we have to look at the motivations for said actions. Were the motivations for the Crusades religious? Obviously they were, although one could easily argue that there were other motivating factors as well. What about Stalin? Sure, you can say he was an Atheist, but were his actions motivated by a non-belief in a god? No, they weren't.

See, people all over the world, regardless of race, religion, or sex are very similar in that we share some distinctive traits. People always want more. More power, more money, more land, more oil, more of what-have-you. These traits span across every culture, every continent, pretty much every group of people anywhere.

Atheists and religious people alike have committed crimes to these ends, because it's human nature. Therein lies the my main point. People will always do terrible things to one another, but it takes unquestioning faith in the supernatural to do things that a normally-sane person would otherwise find heinous. People throughout history have committed atrocious crimes upon one another simply because they were different. It's the simple us vs. them mentality that many of us can easily understand from the perspective of a sports fan.

So what I'm getting at, is that religion in itself, the fundamental central theme - unquestioning faith without tangible proof - is a very dangerous idea. It firstly serves to set groups of people apart, thus adding to the division of people, but more insidious, is that at its core, it seeks to reduce your critical faculties. The core ideal is to believe in something of which there is no evidence. This, at its core, is what incites fanaticism. By giving up one's ability to reason and think critically, one's ability to question, one's ability to think for oneself, is it possible to do things that you would otherwise find immoral. Religion allows a person to justify actions towards others that they would otherwise consider righteous or sane. It's akin to psychopathy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen the argument so many times. Someone will bring up a heinous tidbit of history (ex. the crusades) demonizing religion, and then someone fires right back with an equally heinous tidbit of history demonizing atheism (ex. Stalin).

What needs to be noted here, is that it's foolish to lump all these people under the terms Atheist and Theist. The terms are so broad that including that many people in one group is a surefire way to have massive holes in your argument.

The point is, we have to look at the motivations for said actions. Were the motivations for the Crusades religious? Obviously they were, although one could easily argue that there were other motivating factors as well. What about Stalin? Sure, you can say he was an Atheist, but were his actions motivated by a non-belief in a god? No, they weren't.

See, people all over the world, regardless of race, religion, or sex are very similar in that we share some distinctive traits. People always want more. More power, more money, more land, more oil, more of what-have-you. These traits span across every culture, every continent, pretty much every group of people anywhere.

Atheists and religious people alike have committed crimes to these ends, because it's human nature. Therein lies the my main point. People will always do terrible things to one another, but it takes unquestioning faith in the supernatural to do things that a normally-sane person would otherwise find heinous. People throughout history have committed atrocious crimes upon one another simply because they were different. It's the simple us vs. them mentality that many of us can easily understand from the perspective of a sports fan.

So what I'm getting at, is that religion in itself, the fundamental central theme - unquestioning faith without tangible proof - is a very dangerous idea. It firstly serves to set groups of people apart, thus adding to the division of people, but more insidious, is that at its core, it seeks to reduce your critical faculties. The core ideal is to believe in something of which there is no evidence. This, at its core, is what incites fanaticism. By giving up one's ability to reason and think critically, one's ability to question, one's ability to think for oneself, is it possible to do things that you would otherwise find immoral. Religion allows a person to justify actions towards others that they would otherwise consider righteous or sane. It's akin to psychopathy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whether you are an athiest or you believe in a god , this is a choice YOU make . as much as i hate religion , i do not believe it allows a person to justify their actions , we have the ability to CHOOSE , and the ability to REASON .

people will always find ways to rationalise and validate their actions .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to agree with you, but evidence and history have shown otherwise.

How else can you convince someone to strap on bombs, run into a building full of people and blow themselves up? How else does someone justify that other than the fact they believe they are doing the will of god, and that they will receive however many virgins upon their demise?

Religion allows people to justify and commit actions that a normally-sane person would never be able to justify.

That's what I'm getting at. People will always do terrible things to one another in the pursuit of power, money, land, oil etc. Religion just allows people do terrible things for imaginary reasons.

And that's my whole point. Religion takes one's ability to reason away. Belief in something without evidence is believing something without reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

two words , FREE WILL. bottom line a person choose's to act in a certain way , how he validates that is irrelevant if you take responibility for your own actions, and if you do not it does not really matter , you are then excusing your behaviour .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing is that atheists could not possibly fathom the fact that they also have crazies in their community. It's a reason why I don't identify myself as an atheist anymore and would probably now say I'm a pragmatic agnostic. The worst atheists are just as intolerant as the some of the worst christians. Personally I can't understand spending my life being intolerant and ridiculing the lives of others which is something a segment of both the atheist and christian populations like to enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...