Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 SonofCourage
Joined: 1/30/2013
Msg: 61
Does Religion cause WarsPage 3 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
Oh and here are some facts btw.

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.

That means that all faiths combined – minus Islam – have caused less than 4% of all of humanity’s wars and violent conflicts. Further, they played no motivating role in the major wars that have resulted in the most loss of life.

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003
 looking4her2335
Joined: 1/23/2013
Msg: 62
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/16/2013 11:08:47 AM

Then you probably wont have a problem in answering by what measure do you use to determine what is good and bad? What is the standard? Or do you believe in objective morality at all?


By what measure do I determine what is good and bad? By my own standards. I value human life, I enjoy the company of other humans and stemming from these values it leads me to determine quite a few things that are good. If you like people, and you like people being around you, its probably a good idea to be honest first of all. It's probably a good idea to keep your hands to yourself. It's probably a good idea to give people their own space, and their own belongings. Inversely, its not good to murder, its not good to steal, its not good to be deceptive (well sometimes lying is not all bad).

I know what you're trying to do. It's a common game. By what standard do you judge morality? How do you know that the devil is bad and god is good? Do you not use your own judgement to determine that? Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?

I don't know what kind of music you like, but I like this band, its called 311. They're actually from my homestate, but I digress, in one of their songs, the lyric goes "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law...until you violate the rights of another, respect the space of your sister and your brother" I think that's a pretty much sums it up for me.
 Celje
Joined: 6/18/2012
Msg: 63
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/16/2013 11:25:38 AM
If I was God and I had to trust one person to relay a message: "tell them they can do whatever they want on earth as long as they do no harm, got it?"
And that one person would probably re-interpret my message onto a 2000 page book near the end, and hand it out to illiterate people.
"just refer to the pictures, see the sword stabbing that man? do that"
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 64
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/16/2013 11:34:46 AM

Oh and here are some facts btw.

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.

That means that all faiths combined – minus Islam – have caused less than 4% of all of humanity’s wars and violent conflicts. Further, they played no motivating role in the major wars that have resulted in the most loss of life.

Exaclty as nobody expects an inqunsition or calls the mass murder of millions of poeple a war.




Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003

You left out:

God - ~2,476,633
Satan - ~10
 looking4her2335
Joined: 1/23/2013
Msg: 65
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/16/2013 1:01:28 PM
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Adolf Hitler was non-religious? Hmmmm...maybe we should ask him yes?

“I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty
Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work.”
-Adolf Hitler


“I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of
the Almighty Creator.”
-Adolf Hitler


“This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the
practical existence of a religious belief.”
-Adolf Hitler


“And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove
those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God.”
-Adolf Hitler


Unfortunately enough, it's apparent that he was religious, if in name alone. But who is to say he wasnt in practice as well? You could say "Well a christian wouldnt act like that! A true christian wouldnt be supportive of genocide!" Oh, word? So what about all those people who went on crusades? They were not true christians? What about the folks who facilitated the inquisition...were they fake christians? What about the conquistador's who destroyed native empires in Meso-and south America? What about the "Christian background of America" that led our people to destroy Native American culture and kill them by the bushel?

Furthermore, I see what you are doing. You are essentially attempting to say that the non religious dictators of the 20th century killed more people than religion. Also, I'd wager that you think they did it, because of some objective morality which they had because they were atheist, or at best agnostic. When in all reality, none of the men you mentioned killed explicity because of Atheism, or a lack of religious belief, or in its name. There were not atheist banners, people did not march for the cause of atheism, they marched because if they didnt, they were killed.

Stalin, like Mao, and Lenin and Pol Pot was a meglomaniac. He supported a cult of personality, where he was basically the revered one, but so what if he was an atheist.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/16/2013 2:03:35 PM

Then you probably wont have a problem in answering by what measure do you use to determine what is good and bad? What is the standard? Or do you believe in objective morality at all?

Oh and here are some facts btw.

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.

That means that all faiths combined – minus Islam – have caused less than 4% of all of humanity’s wars and violent conflicts. Further, they played no motivating role in the major wars that have resulted in the most loss of life.

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003


Oh...no...son of courage. You've made a huge mistake with posts like that. Do you not have a clue beforehand of the smack-down you might receive in here? Do you know what kind of company you're in? You must really be the son of courage, because that's a stupid kind of brave.

The dialogue between the religious and non-religious on morality and moral standards has already panned out pretty far, such that we already know all of the self-deceiving tricks you're playing, and we've already come to understand all the basics, enough that I can tell that you've been living in a cave concerning this dialogue.

There're so many things wrong with what you're saying/asking already. You've left the starting-gate already stumbling into your own horse-sh!t.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 67
view profile
History
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/16/2013 3:30:08 PM
Ah, me. People are toting up lists of people who led groups, and claimed to do whatever they did in the name of a god, or in order to destroy religious belief. This is a false use of the data.

To do so, requires that you take as truth, the words of murderers, who had powerful reasons both to blame others for their acts, and who had legions of people to persuade to obey them, by catering to whatever THEY already believed. Others who claimed to have no faith, had strong reasons to pretend not to, and to oppose religious belief, because in the places they attempted to rule, religion was firmly dedicated to support of the overthrown predecessors, or to rivals.

I would say myself, that all that is proved by such lists, is that handing the power of life and death, and of who has the ear of a god, over to any human beings, is a mistake.
 sexandthepof
Joined: 10/1/2012
Msg: 69
view profile
History
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/17/2013 2:23:31 PM
"religion flys aiplanes into buildings......science flys man to the moon."

Religion does not fly airplanes into buildings, and science does not fly man to the moon. It is the guys who made up their own weirdo religion who flied airplanes in to buildings. And it is the scientists who studied science who flied to the moon.

It's not religion that causes wars. It is people who are greedy and want to have more money and power over others who cause wars at the beginning. And there are people who fight back for their own rights.
 looking4her2335
Joined: 1/23/2013
Msg: 70
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/17/2013 4:25:49 PM

Religion does not fly airplanes into buildings, and science does not fly man to the moon. It is the guys who made up their own weirdo religion who flied airplanes in to buildings. And it is the scientists who studied science who flied to the moon.


Sorry, but in the instance of religion, especially those of the fundemental type, those individuals can claim that they are more religious than any other (moderates, regular joe's who pick through their holy books and take what they like and throw out the rest).

They can levy charges that they follow their books more to the letter, thereby being more devout than a moderate. Like the people who say that Islam, or Judaism, or Christianity are not violent religions. Really? I think people should re-read, or perhaps read their holy books.

As to science, well yes of course its the men who literally flew to the moon, but the method is what lead them to the conclusion of how to actually get it done.
 hey_yall_watch_this
Joined: 2/15/2013
Msg: 71
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/17/2013 6:51:36 PM
Many wars have been fought in the name of freedom. So does Freedom cause wars? Does Liberation cause wars? I suppose you could say they do, but actually they dont. It's the lack of freedom and the need of liberation more likely. But that has little to do with whether or not religion causes war. It only poses the question of whether or not the percieved cause is the actual cause. It's only fair to blame religion for wars if it's also fair to blame freedom, democracy, independance, and liberation. None of these ideas in and of themselves are responsible for war.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/18/2013 1:03:53 AM
^ and ^

When we talk about science, we're talking about a desire for an enlightened and uplifted future (not just the wish or idea of or a fruitless careless gesture for)...and when we talk about religion, we're talking about a state of infantilism to different extents and legitimizing a bad habit of being lazy intellectually and socially. So it has accurate and applicable substance to say that science flies men to the moon and religion flies planes into buildings - When we remember that it's not an example of good or bad deeds, but a metaphor representative of what really defines what each is. It doesn't even matter that science sometimes results in bad things and religion results in good things - to define what each are requires a different approach than this. Also, how productive is it to punish two children on the playground when maybe one of them was being a good boy (in whatever ways applies for this example) but the other one was bullying him, and they eventually got into a fight which was unavoidable unless the former was to 'submit'? So, to blame freedom as much as the things religion causes for a war is an unproductive and dishonest approach. Also, when talking about things like greed or power as the culprit...try to look beyond that to why the particular greed or desire for power exists, where it comes from.

Once again I'll say the following, and try to see how it applies to everything...

Religion causes a stunting of intellectual, social, and emotional development...for the individual mind, and collectives/group psychology.

This causes strife and drama in all areas of life of the kinds that are unnecessary and otherwise avoidable.

And this causes wars, which are only one manifestation of this damage and destruction that it does to us, which is manifested in many other ways in everyday life.

But part of the trick in the special case of religion is that the evil it brings is apart from simply good versus bad things that people do in the name of, or because of, religion...and seeing what it's about cannot be done by simply looking at these good versus bad actions.

And religion continues to endure, precisely because this "unbalancing" keeps people from seeing what's really going on, and they continue to buy into those ideas and images of religion being harmless and even a good thing, as well as blameless and not connected to it's effects.

For example, some posters in here are commiting an old mistake of emphasizing the "politics" of (alledgedly secular) actions and events in history, suggesting that it was a "political" matter instead of religious, and far removed from religion in general. But there are specific elements of structure, and dynamics of operation, as well as states-of-mind, psychology, and ways of thinking, which define religion, such that phenomena that are conventionally recognized as religion are not all that religion is. You couldn't be a methodist saying that baptist is not religious, and you couldn't be a muslim saying that christianity is not religion, or vice versa, etc etc, and so you can't say that, for example, hitler and the nazis were not a religion nor is an example of non-religion. Conventionally recognized formal religion is only an unhidden blueprint for something that can take many superficial forms. If it's structured like religion, and it operates like religion, then it is religion. And, the affects that even conventionally recognized religion has on how people think and behave are likewise more subtle and seemingly disconnected than is immediately perceived, they manifest in unobvious ways.
 hey_yall_watch_this
Joined: 2/15/2013
Msg: 73
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/18/2013 7:40:22 AM
I would be more inclined to say that religion is and always has been infiltrated by evil. I think in a round about way, that might be what they mean. A lot of the ways of thinking seen in religion has little to do with religion as it has to do with that infiltration. If you were to take some red paint and mix some blue into it, what you would see is purple. That doesnt mean the red is any less there. It means it has been blurred from view by the infiltration of the blue. Maybe to them, the blue is politics. I think a lot of people looking at religion from outside only see purple. While those looking from within might see purple, red, and blue. Many religious people can see the evils associated within. That's why they can recognize that, often times, things perceived to be from religion arent actually religious in nature, while others looking from other perspectives can only see purple.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/18/2013 3:26:12 PM

I would be more inclined to say that religion is and always has been infiltrated by evil. I think in a round about way, that might be what they mean. A lot of the ways of thinking seen in religion has little to do with religion as it has to do with that infiltration. If you were to take some red paint and mix some blue into it, what you would see is purple. That doesnt mean the red is any less there. It means it has been blurred from view by the infiltration of the blue. Maybe to them, the blue is politics. I think a lot of people looking at religion from outside only see purple. While those looking from within might see purple, red, and blue. Many religious people can see the evils associated within. That's why they can recognize that, often times, things perceived to be from religion arent actually religious in nature, while others looking from other perspectives can only see purple.


The problem with this is that when we inspect the heart of any religion - the associated holy document(s) - which is the only thing that makes sense to do when wondering "what is the religion really supposed to be", the picture gets both worse and more ambiguous. First of all, often it turns out that the integrity or authenticity of the holy document itself cannot be nailed-down. And second of all, it becomes evident that there is not only few explicit and definitive good qualities, but also that it is quite malign. Looking closer at the heart of a religion can just make it appear more evil. In fact, religions are tempered and toned-down as much as they are today as a result of science, humanism, and secularism chipping away at them over time. If left alone, religion will bring, and has always brought, destitution.

So the above suggestion is just another attempt to allow religion to side-step and mis-place culpability.
 hey_yall_watch_this
Joined: 2/15/2013
Msg: 75
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/18/2013 7:15:27 PM
Looking closer at the heart of a religion can just make it appear more evil

I'm not sure you and I have the same idea of what the heart of religion is. To me, it's the basic concepts of morality, love, and good. Of course, you could say these are all relative terms. Still, though, I am having a hard time seeing how these concepts have the appearance of evil. I understand these ideas themselves are not religion, but they are at the heart of many religions.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/19/2013 12:59:42 AM

I'm not sure you and I have the same idea of what the heart of religion is. To me, it's the basic concepts of morality, love, and good. Of course, you could say these are all relative terms. Still, though, I am having a hard time seeing how these concepts have the appearance of evil. I understand these ideas themselves are not religion, but they are at the heart of many religions.


How strange, to say what you said here.

You were talking about knowing what religion really is, apart from the infiltration of evil within it which corrupts what the religion is, or seems to be, or the effects it has.

You're saying the basic concepts of morality, love, and good represent what an uncorrupted religion really is that hasn't been infiltrated by evil from within.

But how do you know that the basic concepts of morality, love, and good are what explicitly defines what that religion is really supposed to be? That would have to be an interpretation of something...a conclusion of some kind of evidence, and of course only evidence that's relevant to finding out what a religion is supposed to really be. Be careful - make sure you don't put the wagon before the horse. That the basic concepts of morality, love, and good is what a religion is...is something that you decide, a judgement you make, based on something. You can't "just decide" that's what it's all about. If the basic concepts of morality, love, and good is a good thing, that's irrelevant to whether or not that's what a religion really is. And just because you embrace the basic concepts of morality, love, and good in your life doesn't make you religious at all. That can't be expressed as an intrinsically religious quality, unless we have some reason for thinking it is.

If we want to know what religion really is, uncorrupted/uninfiltrated by evil from within, how do you do that? You can't look at any denomination, religious endeavor, or particular practice or behavior of any group of people. If people embrace the basic concepts of morality, love, and good in their lives, then that's all that is...but that's not telling you what the religion itself is supposed to really be. By that approach, you don't know if that's what the religion is supposed to really be.

And, you're recognizing that the basic concepts of morality, love, and good are relative terms...and that these ideas themselves are not religion, so it seems that you're already beginning to jump from one foot to the other. And you're also doing this jumping back and forth by talking about what the heart of religion is but then talking about what's at the heart of religion.

When proposing that religion appears a certain way from the outside because it's been infiltrated by evil from within, how do you know that the basic concepts of morality, love, and good is at the heart of a religion? How do you find that out or decide that?
 hey_yall_watch_this
Joined: 2/15/2013
Msg: 77
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/19/2013 7:43:59 PM
You're saying the basic concepts of morality, love, and good represent what an uncorrupted religion really is that hasn't been infiltrated by evil from within.

I guess as a matter of technicallity my statement can be read this way, with exception of the part about evil from within. I'll address that later. Yes, it's my opinion that morality, love, and good are part of what represent an uncorrupted religion. I used these examples only to pose question how can those aspects be viewed as evil. I never intended to state that they are all that religion is. I'm sure there are other aspects also at the heart of religion that one would be hard pressed to view as evil.

But how do you know that the basic concepts of morality, love, and good are what explicitly defines what that religion is really supposed to be?

I never mentioned explicitly.

You can't "just decide" that's what it's all about.

Sure I can decide what religion is all about to me. You decide what it's all about to you as well. We both do this based on personal study, consideration, and experience. This was the entire purpose of acknowledging that the concepts of morality, love, and good are relative terms.

If we want to know what religion really is, uncorrupted/uninfiltrated by evil from within, how do you do that?

Again with the "evil from within". Your statement, not mine. I did in an early post mention evil associated within, but not evil "from" within. I said that religion has been infiltrated by evil. The infiltration could not have come from within. Evil shouldnt naturally exist within.

And you're also doing this jumping back and forth by talking about what the heart of religion is but then talking about what's at the heart of religion.

Circular talk, nit-picking technicalities.

It appears we have different agendas here. Your agenda appears to be to win a debate. Using technicalities and manipulation to make what I said appear the way you want. I never had such an agenda. I simply offered a point of view. As someone who appears to embrace science, it was merely my hope that you would have an open mind to possibilities. After all, keeping an open mind is one of the fundamental aspects of science. If you truley want any kind of answer to what a religion is really supposed to be, I would suggest challenging your own preconceptions. Instead of rejecting any and all possibilites, give consideration to them. Otherwise it's fruitless to even pose the question. I'm sure by the knowledge that you possess that you have either given consideration of some sort to the matter or spent considerable effort into rejecting it all together. However, a closed mind after consideration is still a closed mind.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/20/2013 4:13:44 PM
...this conversation has went to hell. Just like they always do. And for the same old reasons.
 strongrr
Joined: 2/14/2013
Msg: 80
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/28/2013 1:36:46 PM
religion doesn't cause Wars people cause wars. I have yet to have God come down stand in front of me and say go kill people go kill this race go kill people of this religion.
 looking4her2335
Joined: 1/23/2013
Msg: 81
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/28/2013 5:22:03 PM
You must not be reading the holy books then. Alot of them explicitly advocate for the murder of unbelievers and people who propogate other faiths.
 hey_yall_watch_this
Joined: 2/15/2013
Msg: 82
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/28/2013 7:31:19 PM
If you read the Old Testament of The Bible, it may appear that way. The Bible is a teaching that works as a whole rather than in bits and pieces. Many of the teachings of Jesus seem contradictary to the laws of Moses. Well, that's because they are. The laws and principles Jesus taught were always the correct ones. From the beginning, the Laws of God have always been the same, and they are about love and acceptance, not murder. I think when Jesus said that he didnt come to change the law, but to fulfill it, he meant that he came to bring the old laws of Moses to an end.

When asked about divorce by the Pharisees, Jesus said that Moses allowed it, but from the beginning, it wasnt so (Matthew 19:8). So, clearly Moses allowed things not condoned by God. This is a recurring theme in the teachings of Jesus. Those old stoning laws, the eye for an eye thing.... they simply were never the Laws of God, but the laws of man. This being the case, anyone believing in a good and loving God would have to believe that anything not adhering to those concepts must have come from somewhere else.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/28/2013 8:56:38 PM
You shouldn't overlook one of the most important things - good or bad, we're still talking about laws or commandments coming from a god. That's what's wrong...the idea itself, at the bottom of everything, that how to behave comes, or needs to come, from a supernatural being. One who alledgedly created and owns us, and insists on sticking his nose in our existence, and insists on being the center of attention.

We can squirm and justify all we want about good and bad and correct or incorrect interpretations, but it's all still about our purpose or our morality coming from some all-superior being who isn't even evidenced at all. There's something undeniably, fundamentally, and irreconcilably wrong with that.
 hey_yall_watch_this
Joined: 2/15/2013
Msg: 84
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/29/2013 10:44:28 AM
If he sticks his nose in our existance, wouldnt that be evidence of his existance? Or maybe he doesnt really stick his nose in our existance nearly as much as people who think they are representing him do.

If you wanted a person to trust you.... say.... to not cheat on them, lie to them, or steal from them... whatever you may want to them to trust you for.... Would you think it necessary to let them observe you 24/7 so there would be not doubt? Or would you think they should trust you based on their relationship with you? You really cant prove you're trust worthy if your not being observed at all times, but I'm sure you would expect to be trusted by certain family, friends, significant others, employers, etc. Should someone having faith in you require you to provide some absolute proof to them that it's justified? Faith in someone does not require some absolute scientific evidence. If it did, then it would be impossible to have faith in each other without such proof. The only thing required is belief. If someone believes they can have faith in you, they will.

but it's all still about our purpose or our morality coming from some all-superior being who isn't even evidenced at all. There's something undeniably, fundamentally, and irreconcilably wrong with that.

Where exactly should our morality come from then? From ourselves? Should we just sit and hope that murderers and such will come to some realization that what they are doing is wrong? We make laws for the betterment of society. Unfortunately, there are some who dont have these ideals just come to them without an outside source. What better source could there be than an all-superior being that has an understanding that we might not even be able to comprehend? Does how to behave need to come from a supernatural being? I dont know. Most manmade laws are born of necessity after a demonstrated need for them. I would imagine it's probably much the same in the case of God's Law. They probably came about from necessity. Maybe I'm wrong.
 Kings_Knight
Joined: 1/20/2009
Msg: 86
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/29/2013 2:04:05 PM

" ... If believing in God is good then why is so much pain and suffering caused by Religion. We in the west have had our times the crusades thirty years war in Germany not to miss the catholic churchs idea of burning innocent people. So who's to blame=) ... "


Who's to blame ... ? Why, everyone in the 'My God's Better Than YOUR God' club ... religion is a game in which the ignorant are led by the intolerant against the implacable. Think it'll end anytime soon ... ? Wait 'til that Twelfth Imam or whatever comes back to bring about the ( ahem ) 'end of daze' ...
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/29/2013 8:26:21 PM
Sometimes you want to ask somebody if they're trying on purpose to be extremely stupid. There's a point past which it has nothing to do with a simple difference of opinion, and there's no perceivable excuse.


If he sticks his nose in our existance, wouldnt that be evidence of his existance?


What we're talking about here is religious people's love of the idea like it was a good thing.


If you wanted a person to trust you.... say.... to not cheat on them, lie to them, or steal from them... whatever you may want to them to trust you for.... Would you think it necessary to let them observe you 24/7 so there would be not doubt? Or would you think they should trust you based on their relationship with you? You really cant prove you're trust worthy if your not being observed at all times, but I'm sure you would expect to be trusted by certain family, friends, significant others, employers, etc. Should someone having faith in you require you to provide some absolute proof to them that it's justified? Faith in someone does not require some absolute scientific evidence. If it did, then it would be impossible to have faith in each other without such proof. The only thing required is belief. If someone believes they can have faith in you, they will.


Wow. I'd like to refer back to the very first sentence in this post. This is an example of how religion messes up people's minds - they way you are trying to reason here is wacked out and you're not even able to see it yourself.

We are talking about god here. God. Read that again - god. You prove no points at all by comparing having trust in a person, who you actually do see and interact with, and...and you even did a metahpor-mixing sleight-of-hand here...having proof of god's behavior, or having proof of god's existence. And btw...we have proof of religion's alledged god's behavior. His behavior is aweful. I wouldn't trust that fuuker for a second.

I wouldn't ask a person to believe me the way people so unconditionally and blindly believe god. Very bad comparison dude.


Where exactly should our morality come from then? From ourselves? Should we just sit and hope that murderers and such will come to some realization that what they are doing is wrong? We make laws for the betterment of society. Unfortunately, there are some who dont have these ideals just come to them without an outside source. What better source could there be than an all-superior being that has an understanding that we might not even be able to comprehend? Does how to behave need to come from a supernatural being? I dont know. Most manmade laws are born of necessity after a demonstrated need for them. I would imagine it's probably much the same in the case of God's Law. They probably came about from necessity. Maybe I'm wrong.


Holy cow. I find myself wanting to refer again to the first sentence of this post. People like you really don't see how preposterious what you say here is??

Where can our laws or morality come from? I want to use the phrase "are you serious?!" but that'd be a stupid question. Where do you think they come from? You don't think they come from us humans already? If you think some come from god...how in the hell do you freaking know that? That's the problem - too many people think their laws come from god, therefore it doesn't matter how much their laws conflict with others who claim the same thing, and it doesn't matter how disgusting that law is...because if it came from a god, then it's ok. You make me want to fuucking throw up...I feel dirty and sick when hearing of such bullsh!t. And why is it such a bad thing for laws to come from us little ole humans? You mean to tell me that us humans aren't fuuking good enough to create our morality? The kind of reasoning you're using here is just so damn old and makes no sense whatesoever...yuck. I just threw-up a little in my mouth.

One problem with the idea of our morality coming from anywhere but ourselves...is that it comes from us already. There's no way around that. If you think something comes from god in any way, you're mistaken, and you're only talking about believing that it does.

Another problem with this idea is that, no matter how much you point out how our laws or morality is insufficient or unjust...you're talking about thinking that you solve the problem by getting the laws from a god, and you do not solve the problem that way. That is not an option in the first place.

And yet another problem with this idea is that it's sometimes alledgedly a problem of people only obeying certain moralities if they think they came from god...but the problem here is not that they need a god to stand behind the morality - it's that they believe that they do. It's that they believe that about their own nature or us as a society, and that belief comes from religion in an attempt to create a market for itself.

Any time our laws or morality aren't what they should be, it's because we couldn't put enough proper reasoning into the development and creation of those laws...and if we weren't infected with the various religious dynamics which undermine and sabotage our ability to apply or develop our reasoning, then our laws or understanding of morality would be a lot better.
Does Religion cause Wars
Posted: 3/29/2013 9:28:22 PM
I'm telling ya'll - we really do need a morality thread. I really wish someone would start one. (they won't let me start a thread) There is so much we could learn from that...there's so much that needs to be said about it and explored. I mean more specifically focused on morality.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >