Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
While much harm has indeed been done by religion and harm of the headline grabbing variety, it is therefore all too easy to overlook the good that has been done in the name of religion. Its a quiet good, it doesnt scream out in headlines. Its from the good news is no news school.
What religion gave us is a blueprint for good and honest day to day living. We know its wrong to steal from our neighbour but somebody along the evolutionery line had to decide that it was indeed wrong to do so. My contention is that religion gave us these guidelines from early times. Todays society does not perhaps ponder for a second on where the rules came from or why they are there...they are just there.
So to put it in Keefs terms..religion has changed owt...but its been a long slow change towards general good.
Society though is now left high and dry without religion, but always needs its icons or pathfinders...now with the decline in religion our religious icons have been replaced by two-bit celebs of the Jordan variety...anyone who has seen those ads for Get CLOSER magazine will know what I mean. All aimed particularly at empty airheaded young women who idolise Posh Spice and Jordan and little else. Sad.
Keef - I am one of the PC brigade and proud of it, but don't see it in the same light as some! PC is better than un-pc. Given the choice between racism and pc-ism, or bigotry and pc-world I know what I choose!
PaulB - you are right - we often overlook the positives in the equation. Anyone witnessing the vacuum being filled by celebs and eejits will surely identify the need for something meaningful rather than empty-icon-syndrome....?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i read an article about 5 years back that reckoned that foctball clubs had filled a vacuum for many.
crowds had then and still now are rising,evn though the prices are prohibitive.
most clubs now have shiny new stadiums and they are the equivalant to cathedrals to many supporters.
the cult of celebrity works for others, as has been said many times, people buy magazines that show the vulgar and tasteless homes of those that have become "stars".
mind you, not much different to hollywood in times past.
I think there's a good reason why people follow such hollow idols and celebrities - because they have seen religion for the dumb-ass nonsense it really is, but sadly there are no reasonable alternatives. The air-head celebs are the only other idols out there, selling their empty promises and crappy novels. But hey. I never said the alternatives were any good either.
As this debate comes up from time to time I think it's about time I made some strong comments about my faith, as a devout, dedicated and 100% committed athiest. It is rare that athiests get to make their point in a meaningful way so darn it, I'm gonna have my five minutes worth!
The good that religions do:
PaulB and others have rightly said that religions provide a good moral framework (for example, rules on being "good' such as not stealing or killing each other, or providing care for the sick). Fine. But why then should these good contributions be made ridiculous by introducing a belief in a fictional super-being? Athiests do good too, in many ways, but without silly beliefs in god figures or super-beings.
Right and wrong:
Can religion define right from wrong? Behaving in a "right" way is usually guided by our own ideas of morality, and this morality can come from a number of sources as we grow up and develop, including religious influences. But religion does NOT teach people to be "moral". Most of the major religions tend to preach that only people who believe in that particular religion and that particular god can get into heaven, which is very true of many Christian-based religions and Islam. This indicates that most religions are more interested in member loyalty BEFORE morality. It also creates a skewed morality whereby a less-than-good Muslim (or other religion) person is still better than a wholly good non-Muslim person.
Casual misogyny:
It's well know that most religions have a problem with women. Islam considers women inferior; their form is so shameful that they must cover up at all times, they cannot talk to men unless the man is a close relative, and they need permission from a man to do most normal things. Christian history is also smeared with misogyny and sexism.
Belief or Power?
A lot of athiests are suspicious of religions because they think that it is more about brain-washing and control than it is about teaching ancient wisdom. Being a priest or someone in high religious authority suggests that those individuals have a direct line with god and special access to god-like secrets. Such individuals are worshipped, followed, and wield huge influence. Oh, and they probably get rich in the process. Does the Catholic Pope really have more access to "God" than you or me or is it all just a different form of celebrity worship?
Death:
Most religions have death at their center. They focus on some form of afterlife, meeting their god-like creator, or being reunited with long-dead loved ones. To make matters worse, many religious people tend to live their lives missing out on lots of enjoyable or worthwhile experiences because it is incompatible with their "judgement" fears - in other words, they live quiet, obedient lives now in order to get more from their heavenly afterlife. Athiests believe in life, not death, and believe that LIFE is where it's at. Given the reasonable uncertainty of an afterlife, I think athiests have got this one well sussed.
Science and Reason:
The dumbest argument you will ever hear in your life is when a religious person claims that "science is a type of religion / faith too". It is not. Science is a process of reason ("reason" is absent from religious belief which is why religious people fail to grasp it). Let's illustrate with a made-up example. If I see a fallen tree across a path I might use reason to ponder on how it got there. Was it strong wind? Were the roots weak? Did a person chop it down? It is reasonable to suppose that one of those causes might be true, and further investigation into the cause may eventually reveal the truth. I might find axe marks in the stump, which will yield a big clue. A religious person will see the tree laying across the path and wonder who placed it there, and what it's deeper meaning is? Unable to answer this question, they will conclude that God has a higher purpose for causing the tree to fall which is beyond our understanding and leave it at that. You see, science is NOT a faith or a religion as it is purely based on what can be seen, measured, recreated, and eventually understood with evidence to back it up. Religion is based on old stories and actually depends on the total removal of reason in order to continue to exist. Science has probed so deeply into space now that if there were a heaven, we would have surely seen some evidence by now. Religion is also hampering good science. Christian-based religions assert that the earth is only a few thousand years old, simply because it says so somewhere in an ancient book, whereas science can prove with real physical evidence that the earth is billions of years old. And don't even get me started on evolution... I'm actually not offended by the fact that my ancient ancestor might have been an ape rather than Adam.
Secular society:
Many people believe that "secular" society is a religious-free society or anti-religious society. It is in fact a society that wants religion separated from politics. At the moment Church of England representatives hold privileged positions and are able to input some influence on government and policy. Religions also regularly want special exemptions from laws that the rest of us must abide by. A great example is the Catholic hatred of gay people and their so-called "right" to refuse gay people certain access or job positions. A secular group would not get such exemptions granted and would probably not even hold such damning views against a minority in this way. Many athiests believe that a truly secular society would be a lot more healthy and inclusive. Schools are another key area that athiests get fed-up about. Considering that most schools are funded from the public tax purse, all religious influences should be removed from schools which currently allow themselves to be choosy about its pupils and staff based on the religious overtones that govern that school. They should have this element totally removed and be fully inclusive, instead of trying to fill its classrooms with Catholics (or whatever religion the school is) with a few token variations just to appear "diverse".
The "Athiest" Monster:
Quite often, athiests are branded as the ones to blame for society's ills. Secular society has "lost its way", consumed by greed, consumerism, money, sex, drugs, celebrity, and so on. The people most likely to "demonize" athiests in this way are, surprise surprise, religious people. Many Christian groups actually regard the growing number of athiests as a real threat, with prominent athiest spokespeople such as Richard Dawkins targeted as blasphemous enemies who want to destroy the religion and rob them of Jesus. The fact is, athiests are the only ones who will ever challenge, criticize, and question religion, and the religious don't like this. They would rather portray athiests as monsters than face up to the challenges that athiesm presents.
Sex:
Most religions have strong views on sex. Most athiests love having sex! The sad fact is, so do most religious people, yes even the Catholics. I have NEVER understood why sex is seen as sinful, dirty, perverse, or wrong in the eyes of certain religions. Why is a basic and fundamental human need - to feel pleasure, to feel loved, or just to have a harmless wild time - treated with such disgust by religions? Even the birth of Jesus had to happen without the sex (virgin birth indeed). This is a hopelessly outdated world view, and religions really need to get with it. In fact, if these people had a bit more sex and enjoyed themselves a bit more, they might chill out more and be less uptight about their beliefs. They might also stop all the wife-beating and child abuse if they are able to give vent to their passions in more natural ways (mentioning no Catholic or Islamic religions). Sex is natural, and the desire to do it is built-in to our psychology whether we like it or not. To deny it is to deny one of the most basic things that makes us human in a misguided view that it makes us more "god-like". I once heard a remarkable one-liner that I loved - "If everybody in the world f**ked more often, the world wouldn't be so f**ked today". I apologise for the suggested language, but I just had to share that nugget of wisdom!
Prophecy:
I'll end with prophecy. I hate prophecy. I particularly hate self-fulfilling prophecy because I believe that this is the only type of prophecy that there is. The famous athiest Bill Maher said it better than I ever could, so I will use his views on this as they reflect my own. Many religions, especially Christian-based, have a strong belief that we are in "end times". Islam is currently locked in Jihad against infidels, working towards a great catastrophe. Religious influences guide many of the world's government, those same governments that are usually busy fighting wars. Religions are behind many, in fact most, wars. Many quote the Book of Revelations, the End of Days, or whatever you call it, but if enough people believe in it and work towards it then it will likely happen. It becomes self-fullfilling. It's quite possibly the most terrifying aspect of religion. We have built bombs capable of destroying the world and these people are in charge of them. Bill Maher said that it is the one true testament of religion, the one overriding aspect that makes it such a dangerous force in the world, that the human race developed weapons that can destroy the world long before they figured out the wisdom not to want that outcome.
Guest 644- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,214
Some excellent arguments from Rick. However, I would have to take issue with one point, that of 'Religions are behind many, in fact most, wars'. This isn't really the case - certainly most major 19th and 20th century conflicts do not have religious elements as their base, rather that of geo-politics, race and economic competition for resources. A religious element may creep in to some via an element as a factor of cultural identity, but is not usually the primal cause. For example, even The Final Solution was not basically down to religious differences, but that the Jews were perceived by Hitler as an economic threat to Germany, albeit rooted in a deep anti-Semitic European tradition.
And yet even with these non-theistic dictatorships, Stalin, Mao, Korean Kim, Hitler etc, the imagery of the systems they produced seemed to occupy a void in idolatry - the imagery and swaying obedience have a common ground. Whenever I see the masses of devout Catholics lined up underneath the Pope's parapet in St. Peter's Square I cannot help but be reminded of the Nuremberg Rallies. The look of anticipation in the faces as they wait for the shower of verbal gold to drip from the Popes mouth and a wave is akin to a scene from Leni Riefenstahl. I am aware I have probably just offended a few readers, but please bear in mind of course I am not suggesting such devotees have the same mindset as the Nazis - of course not, that would be outrageous, but purely on an aesthetic level parallels can be drawn. Uncomfortable ones and a dangerous area.
A classic line in the hilarious Father Ted summed it up well: "Father Ted: I'm not a fascist, I'm a priest. Fascists dress in black and go around telling people what to do, whereas...priests..."
Personally, I cannot fathom why anyone's world view of the organisation of the cosmos is deemed as correct when it is pretty much rooted in where one is born on the planet, and the culture one is brought up in. Who am I to argue with a Buddhist, Jain, Shinto - and who are they to argue with us? Well, each to their own as long as religious types keep to themselves and their own communities. When the dreaded knock at the door comes, I just smile and say 'no thanks' and close the door - arguing about science, evolution or what not just gets one nowhere, beliefs are simply too deeply entrenched.
On just one positive note, without religion some of the world's greatest architecture would never have been built...Stonehenge, the Valley of the Kings, Karnak, European Medieval Cathedrals, Buddhist temples etc...etc...
To get practical I'm much more worried about being beaten up by a gang of hoodies walking home one night after work than religious extremists trying to annex our freedom of thought.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Two very good postings there - thank you guys.
Nothing to add.
Roger
I can't be bothered to address most of the points (sin number 4 I think: sloth). But I would add that Science is indeed a belief system. It depends on constant enquiry and research and is often proved "wrong" when developments show new concepts and define new paths. Scientists have a faith that what they have done and what they have demonstrated is right, but then someone else comes along who has a different belief and proves something else. Without their faith in what they do it would be meaningless. Faith and religion are not one and the same thing.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Wow! great posts of course. I am overwhelmed by argument. As with Bern there I would like to be able to answer piece by piece but not able for the moment...maybe one night in the pub lads!!
Two small things though. Glad Phil made the point that not all wars are the direct fault of religion. This is often said but is not really the case, not in modern times anyway. And in previous times, it was the maniacal few trying to subject others to their own religion that caused it, each believing their own faith to be the right one. but this is/was more about political power than religious faith. Cromwell did such a maniacal job of this on the citizens of Wexford, as was topically mentioned in Coast last night on BBC2, annihilating the local Catholic population , because they were Catholics, but was this a power thing rather than a religious act?
The second small thing though is that I loved the joke from Father Ted. Clearly no similarity to Fascists there...
Guest 644- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,214
I would have to respectfully disagree with Bern there - science is most certainly not a belief system. Science is a tool used to explain how the universe functions via natural laws through repeatable independently verifiable evidence obtained via testing, it requires no subjective belief. If I was to join the Amish community and reject medical care, it would not stop me contracting a treatable virus. If I were to reject Newtonian Laws, it's not as if everything in my house will suddenly start floating. The point is physical laws apply universally whether or not there is an observer present to ''believe' in them. For example, dinosaur metabolism is well understood, and the physical evolution of the planets and moons of the Solar System obey well understood geological principles.
When exactly has science been proven wrong? If science is found to be lacking to adequately explain an event, then it will requires revision to the theory; this does not undermine the principles of science itself. In fact, I would challenge anyone to come up with an observable phenomenon that lies outside known scientific laws and requires a different framework of explanation.
PaulB - don't get me started on Cromwell - home town Enniscorthy, County Wexford. Remember Vinegar Hill, lads!!!!
Phil - steady lad. Science is de facto always being proved wrong - and that is absolutely right! We are learning new stuff ll the time: the world isn't flat, the planets orbit, they don't "fly", we are always believing something only for aomeone, quite rightly, to mprove us wrong. It's called learning, development, whatever. That is, actually, the exciting thing about it. Stephen Hawking is right!!
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
Some very good posts, some I can agree with others not.
Just to pick up on one point of RICK'S
The muslim women do NOT have to wear headgear, I raised this at a mosque meeting, I tell you this from leaders there.
They replied that the KORAN does not say women have to wear head gear, often its the women's choice.
I don';t post this in support of there claims, purely the reply given at this meeting.
There was some other interesting replies given to
like all religions we should not pick out 1 religion and blame them for the wrongs of the world, all religions have there problem fanantical people.
Good debate those guys/girls
ps; Paulb what did you mean in my terms?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
quite right keith, the headgear is a cultural, not a religious thing.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Ah Keef me oul mucker no worries there.. was just referring to your lingo "owt"...thats one of dem northern words isnt it! eee by gummm!
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Keef
I wasn't meaning to infer competition in my posting above but was merely attempting to illustrate that RC attendance figures were rising because of the recent influx of East European Catholics who for years were not allowed to practice their religion freely in their home country.
I don't feel it's necessary to justify one's reasons for or against religion.You either have faith and believe or you don't.It's as simple as that.
We all have a free choice. Religion doesn't make anyone a better or worse individual than anyone else. Just treat everyone the way that you would like to be treated.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,698
Rick you have it wrong in regard to Islam and women - Islam directs that women dress modestly as MEN cannot be trusted to control their urges otherwise, also whilst women defer to men in public they generally do not do so in the home which is their domain and run the way they need it to be run, further this external deference to men is nothing to do with Islam (which clearly holds women in the highest regard and puts them on a level footing with men) but everything to do with the social mores of the societies they come from.
Religions suffer from the same problems as secular society - the frailty of human spirit and resolve - so yes there are many cases of religious leaders being corrupt etc. but this is equally true of our political, civil and business leaders.
As for your comments on sex, what trott, what religions are against is promiscuity hence the emphasis on monogamy and/or sex only in a marriage. This is founded in the desire to differentiate ourselves from animals who rut freely and indiscriminately. The virgin birth of Christ is nothing to do with opposition to sex but is about demonstrating divinity.
Oh and by the way I am an atheist and humanist but if you really are going to attack religion then get your facts right, it is pretty easy as religion is littered with irrationality, contradiction etc.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
God is always with you 24/7 365days ayear.
You might say there is no GOD you might say that for years ,but one day you will turn to him for help,and he will not turn away from you.
WE have all done this,you are trying to do something someone comes up to you and says "Can I help you" and you turn round and say "No thank you I am all right" so off they go,you then think to yourself"Why did I say that I do need help"but to late they are gone,but the good thing with God he will not go away he will stay there with you and will help just aske him.
When our son died God was with Lesley and myself and he was of great help and still is .I try to thank him each day.You might tell all that there is no GOD but when you are on your own---
God will never turn his back on you,it might be your last day and you turn to him and he will be therestill waiting to help you,
Ross - your posts are always refreshing.
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
Islamic learning was the key to the eventual emergence of a rational Europe.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
sadly i have no beliefs in organised religion.
i wish i had vic's faith, it must give structure to his life.
most religious people i know are very certain that their faith is right, sadly none of us, whether infidels, atheists or believers in a superior being are clever enough to know the truth.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Yes it does but I know he is there it not a faith.
Vic M