www.ditl.org

Yeah, sometimes I look at the conceit that we're "higher" than animals and then look at the news...

Fun fact: a lot of Christians don't believe animals can feel pain because they lack a soul. Which is funny, because I still feel pain even after I traded mine for some lik-a-stik.

EDIT: BTW, I am not attacking people's beliefs, I'm attacking the end result, or execution of those beliefs.

If animals don't feel pain, why do they scream and cry? Inquiring minds want to know....

Mark wrote:If animals don't feel pain, why do they scream and cry? Inquiring minds want to know....

Right.

This has been a random fluxuation. Please continue your conversation.

The previous post was also a random fluctuation, and should be ignored.

Well, obviously we're much higher life forms than the other animals, because we've got digital watches.

Anyway, yes - I understand that many people on the board here like to belong to the religion of bashing religions. I'm sure it's very comfortable. However, religion is only one of many excuses used by bad people to do bad things over the years; and if there were no religions, then the same number of bad things would have been done under different auspices. My own religion has been one that has been prominently attacked in the name of other religions; but do I blame the fact of the existence of other religions in general? You'd all say that such an attitude would be illogical, and that if I wanted to blame someone I should blame the individuals who used their faith as an excuse. For example, I wouldn't blame the mdoern RC Chrch and all its constituents for the writing of the Malleus Maleficarum and subsequently the Spanish Inquisition; but in effect that's exactly what you're doing when you blame religion for the acts of individuals who claim to be religious.

Mikey wrote:Well, obviously we're much higher life forms than the other animals, because we've got digital watches.

Anyway, yes - I understand that many people on the board here like to belong to the religion of bashing religions. I'm sure it's very comfortable. However, religion is only one of many excuses used by bad people to do bad things over the years; and if there were no religions, then the same number of bad things would have been done under different auspices. My own religion has been one that has been prominently attacked in the name of other religions; but do I blame the fact of the existence of other religions in general? You'd all say that such an attitude would be illogical, and that if I wanted to blame someone I should blame the individuals who used their faith as an excuse. For example, I wouldn't blame the mdoern RC Chrch and all its constituents for the writing of the Malleus Maleficarum and subsequently the Spanish Inquisition; but in effect that's exactly what you're doing when you blame religion for the acts of individuals who claim to be religious.

Mikey, no offense but the issue I think people have with religion is that it provides an easy excuse to shut off your brain and do all manner of horrible things. Rather like certain people in various militaries use the "I was only following orders when I executed those villagers". Now can other things lead to this? Of course but religion is the most prominate one simply due to the fact that the majority of human history has been dominated by it. Hell there wasn't even a word in Hebrew for religion in the early Jewish states because the entire concept of a seperate church and state was unthinkable.

All that you say is true - but as to religion being the most prominent excuse for atrocities in the history of the world, I will die believing that if there were no religion, that number of atrocities would not be less; there would just be different excuses. People are people, so why should it be... (sorry.)

The root of the point I'm trying to make is that there are sweeping generalizations made about religion and the religious that the very people who make them would scoff at if applied to other demarcations of people. There are intelligent people on this board who claim that religion - and by extension the religious - are absurd and irrational; but if I made a generalization in the same vein about African-Americans, or English people, or vegetarians, or cricket fans, or whatever, those same intelligent people would tell me that my arbitrary generalization was incorrect and prejudicial. Why is that double standard so acceptable?

Mikey wrote:Well, obviously we're much higher life forms than the other animals, because we've got digital watches.

Anyway, yes - I understand that many people on the board here like to belong to the religion of bashing religions. I'm sure it's very comfortable. However, religion is only one of many excuses used by bad people to do bad things over the years; and if there were no religions, then the same number of bad things would have been done under different auspices. My own religion has been one that has been prominently attacked in the name of other religions; but do I blame the fact of the existence of other religions in general? You'd all say that such an attitude would be illogical, and that if I wanted to blame someone I should blame the individuals who used their faith as an excuse. For example, I wouldn't blame the mdoern RC Chrch and all its constituents for the writing of the Malleus Maleficarum and subsequently the Spanish Inquisition; but in effect that's exactly what you're doing when you blame religion for the acts of individuals who claim to be religious.

Not sure that I'm one of the accused, but I'll throw my $02 in anyway...

What I most prominently bash is the extreme religious conservative element which seeks to impose its morals on the entire US, and to sharply curtail our scientific enlightenment. As to the religious in general, while I do not share their faith and believe that in no way must morality always flow from religion I find that most are well meaning and the bad cases of the sort I mentioned or the sort Mikey uses as an example of evildoers using religious excuses are most certainly in the minority. Famous psychological experiments have shown that anyone can be made to do bad things, especially if they feel they are doing the right thing (who was it that said that there is nothing more dangerous than a man who thinks he's doing the right thing?). Many such experiments cast the researchers in an authoritarian role, reassuring the subjects that what they are doing is OK; how convenient must it be to claim that this and this must be done in the name of the supreme moral authority (i.e., God)?

I agree with you Mikey...If it wasn't for Religion the same kinds of things would have happenned just in different forms/for different reasons.

However, I'm also against religion because of all the excuses it gives. While it may have been the individuals involved in the Inquisition that were really the ones to blame, they had the full endorsement of the pope and their faith.

Religion may not be the thing to blame outrignt, but it can't be ignorred as a mojor cause of the instinces.

Take for example the capaign against homosexuality, while several people would sitll be very anti-gay without the churches stance, several of the "on the edge" people or people that don't really care could be less hostile towards homosexuals if they weren't part of an anti-gay religion.

Also: I've oft noted the extreme hubris of claiming to know the will of God - ironically, hubris is a great sin!

Captain Picard's Hair wrote:Also: I've oft noted the extreme hubris of claiming to know the will of God - ironically, hubris is a great sin!

Like Jerry Falwell saying God made terrorists attack NY on 9/11 because of gays and lesbians and pagans and the ACLU?

Lt. Staplic wrote:However, I'm also against religion because of all the excuses it gives. While it may have been the individuals involved in the Inquisition that were really the ones to blame, they had the full endorsement of the pope and their faith.

I am against organized religion when that organization seeks to cement itself in political power. I don't see any good that comes when religion can rule the people.

I'm as fully against wrong-minded or inflexible dogma as anyone here - I just don't think it's correct to equate that with the concept of religion in general.

yes, I have problems with other stuff too, but particularly with religion.

It devides people in such a fundimental way, and that's one thing I really hate about it.