I don't agree with his views on the new "active" atheist movement.
I see atheist activism as a reaction. Without the stubborn elbowing into every issue by the religious right there would be no need for atheist "proselytizing"
But overall this guy has a point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgd6TJnCPYQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZvpWgMAPQs&feature=fvwrel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wo1tw6RvfM&feature=related
I tend to agree with him on a lot of points. The atheist activism point as well...I do not believe in a personal god in the old man with a beard and a bad temper way...but I still think the "New Atheism" movement is going at it wrongly and they are quicky becoming what they fight.
At the very least they are not going to convert anyone by saying everyone else is stupid and maybe even evil.
Seriously...and we should not start doing so either. I can dig religious peoples' styles as long as they do not hurt anyone. And the majority are decent folks.
My only gripe with some atheists are that they shove their ideals down other peoples throats as much as Christians tend to do. Don't get me wrong, my wife is atheist. But she doesn't push her beliefs (or lack of) on anyone else. Just my opinion.
2 lines and you managed to say what I needed a small rant for :P
http://afterall.net/quotes/490993
Friedrich Nietzsche on Fighting Monsters
BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL, (1886) APHORISM 146.
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 03, 2012, 04:06:32 PM
I tend to agree with him on a lot of points. The atheist activism point as well...I do not believe in a personal god in the old man with a beard and a bad temper way...but I still think the "New Atheism" movement is going at it wrongly and they are quicky becoming what they fight.
At the very least they are not going to convert anyone by saying everyone else is stupid and maybe even evil.
Seriously...and we should not start doing so either. I can dig religious peoples' styles as long as they do not hurt anyone. And the majority are decent folks.
There would be no activist atheist movement if it were not for people like the Dominionists who vocally and actively state that their goal is to assume control of all American institutions and finally and legally turn the country into a religious state.
And this is not a fringe movement. Michelle Backman and Rick Perry were both active Dominionists.
When people are making moves like that being the one that sits back and is "open minded" simply assures a total loss of the freedom to be open minded.
I personally support redefining every type of irrational religious belief as synonymous with ignorance and superstition. I consider it an inevitable stage and necessary stage in human evolution.
And as far as Nietche goes (mentioned in another thread) I don't support substituting irrational adoration of a god head for the same irrational adoration of some other false idol. Das Ubermensch.
Every actual realization of that results in something like the Third Riech or North Korea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEzGekC1044
As far as not hurting anyone... I don't believe that is possible for religion.
A belief in leprechauns doesn't hurt anyone either. But the point is that we don't make belief in leprechauns functionally a prerequisite to high office.
Leprechaun believers don't insist that all moral values stem from belief in leprechauns.
Irrational religious beliefs undermine so much in our society and the everyday casual religious person does not get a pass. The reality is that the very criteria that we can use to say that they are decent folks is the extent to which they do not follow the edicts of their own religion.
If a person was to follow the bible to a word then they would necessarily support slavery, stoning of unruly children, genocide and a host of other atrocities.
By calling some religious people decent we are actually complimenting them on not following their own religion.
You ever read Penn Jillette's "God, No!"?
It's a pretty funny book, but he makes some decent points about prosthelytizing on both sides. As a dude, I just abide and contemplate these things, I'm not running out to practice.
He compares believing in God to believing in a train you can see and feel, while the atheist can't. If you knew an atheist was standing on the tracks, oblivious to a train that's coming right at him, you would feel compelled to warn him. If you didn't try to tell him about the train, you'd be a major asshole.
But it's the atheist's right to ignore you, and to point out that there is no train. Or tracks. And maybe if he convinced you of that, you'd be free to eat whatever food you pleased.
Both sides prosthelytize. They have that right. What's great about dudeism? We can just abide.
Quote from: NobleElement on September 04, 2012, 11:27:39 AM
You ever read Penn Jillette's "God, No!"?
It's a pretty funny book, but he makes some decent points about prosthelytizing on both sides. As a dude, I just abide and contemplate these things, I'm not running out to practice.
He compares believing in God to believing in a train you can see and feel, while the atheist can't. If you knew an atheist was standing on the tracks, oblivious to a train that's coming right at him, you would feel compelled to warn him. If you didn't try to tell him about the train, you'd be a major asshole.
But it's the atheist's right to ignore you, and to point out that there is no train. Or tracks. And maybe if he convinced you of that, you'd be free to eat whatever food you pleased.
Both sides prosthelytize. They have that right. What's great about dudeism? We can just abide.
In my experience the religious cheer for the train.
In fact in actual practice they are the train.
For most casually religious people it isn't really about faith. It's about identity.
I really wish that someone would go into you average suburban country club catholic church and put a lie detector on the parish. The truth is that I'd be willing to bet that at least half the congregation would fail a lie detector test if they were asked if they believe in God.
But they also would absolutely insist they did. Why?
Because it would be social suicide to do otherwise.
That is pretty deep biker dude
That's what Penn (and someone before him, but I forget his name) calls a hardcore atheist. "I don't believe people who believe in God, believe in God."
Quote from: NobleElement on September 04, 2012, 11:59:31 AM
That's what Penn (and someone before him, but I forget his name) calls a hardcore atheist. "I don't believe people who believe in God, believe in God."
Well when the people who claim to believe in God continually pull "what God is" out of their ass over and over in every conversation to suit whatever argument it's pretty difficult to believe them.
Wanna see a religious person get flustered?
Just ask them what they believe and why they believe it.
Typically they spiral down hill till they eventually end up at a sort of "well I'm not sure what or why but I just feel it / believe it."
It's not "belief" in the sense that we use the word in any other context.
It's something else.
I choose to call it self deception and intellectual cowardice.
And the testimony from people who have become atheists just further convinces me.
Almost without exception people don't "change". They just admit it. To themselves.
That might be true, but the devout still exist, and I think they're allowed to do that. Exist, just like we do. No judgment. I just don't want them to interrupt me if I'm about to throw some solid rocks.
Quote from: NobleElement on September 04, 2012, 12:15:42 PM
That might be true, but the devout still exist, and I think they're allowed to do that. Exist, just like we do. No judgment. I just don't want them to interrupt me if I'm about to throw some solid rocks.
They are allowed to exist.
And they and their beliefs should be judged just like any others.
Religion has been off limits for too long.
It does not get a pass.
Being devout is not a virtue.
But that is just my opinion.
I mean Cmon. Mother Theresa did not believe.
It didn't come out till she died but she had been and atheist for years.
MOTHER FREAKING THERESA!!!
Religion should be treated like the tumor that it is.
It is not harmless. Ever.
Just because some of it's followers who choose not to follow it very closely and hence live a harmless life free of the intolerance and violence that the bible clearly advocates does not make it any less harmful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rwioe1SGkQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCovYF51qHE&feature=fvwrel
There are hilarious..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpV9nHdRiiE&feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir5M2XuEROY&feature=relmfu
What about Dudeism, then? We call ourselves a religion, do we not?
My big gripe with the New Atheism movement is simple
Nobody is allowed to play thought police. EVER.
Nobody. Neither Michelle Backmann nor Richard Dawkins.
A friend of mine is a teacher. Recently, he wanted to go see a showing of " The Ghost of Canterville" with his class. And one father forbade his son go with the others because he did not want his child get introduced to the idea of the supernatural.
That is where I draw the line.
This is EXACTLY the same reasoning atheists accuse religious folks of.
And yes, it is the same.
Because, just as Carl Sagan said, you cannot prove god exists and you cannot prove god does not exist.
Atheism is an opinion. A stance on a philosophical question. An unsolvable question.
Nothing more.
Is it right to say that religious bias has no place in politics?
Hell yes! If you cannot prove the basis of your bias/agenda, keep it to yourself.
Is it right to say dangerous and harmful religious practices ought to be abolished?
Of friggin course! Simply human decency should always come before faith. In all things.
But is it right to forbid people to believe there might be more to this world than what we can see? Is it right to demand that we never ever even consider the fact that there may be some things about the universe we do not know and might never know?
NO.
And anyone who wants to force their worldview upon me, theistic or atheistic, can go f... themselves.
And I personally am not a theist. Besides Dudeism, I am not a religious person. Never have been.
But I will not sacrifice my mental independance to anyone. No matter how many doctorates they have or how convinced of their personal truth they are.
Sorry for letting out my inner Walter there but as you might see, I feel very strongly about this.
I hate to break it to you but as much as people want to say that Dudeism is a religion it's not.
It's a website. It's a religion in the same sense that the church of the flying spaghetti monster is a religion.
It's a parody of religion. Not to say that the zen aspects of it are without merit etc etc.
But if you are leaning on a character from a movie for meaning then....
As far as the proof of God this gets very old.
I'm not interested in proving the existence or non existence of God.
I simply find the claims that others make about God preposterous.
They can defend them or not.
All claims are open to criticism. That is the basis of a free society.
It is unique to religion that they try to insulate themselves from criticism by defining it as intolerance or mean spirited. It's a cowardly move that religion always insists upon.
Given that fact that people of faith actively and vocally advocate taking over all aspects of American society in the name of their non sense makes it extremely important to call them to the matt.
I do not feel that this sort of thing is out of bounds in any way. And it is not being the thought police to comment on the merits of other claims.
Nobody is forbidding people from believing anything.
But religion insists on belief in ideas that simply do not hold up.
A lot of the basis of the dogma practiced by many of our political leaders vocally advocates things like criminalizing heresy.
And pointing out that there are people who casual enough in their religion to not shove their faith down others throat does nothing to change the fact that we have a real growing climate of serious religious intolerance. Extending an attitude of tolerance to people who have no such inclination and actively work to create a society that legally is intolerant is foolish.
I have to laugh at the "unsolvable mystery" part.
It's unsolvable just because it's nonsense.
Religious people make specific claims about God. Continuously. They claim that they are on God's mission.
Even if we strip that away and just go to the heart of the question with the most basic set of belief typical to theists it's a specific belief that is ludicrous.
1. God created everything. That means that even if we are speaking of just the observable universe then it is several billion light years in size. So they are claiming specifically that there is an actual being who created every single thing in at least all of that.
2. That same "being" (see number 1) also cares if you get the job at Walmart. He hears your prayers and he knows if you've been bad or good.
Now I don't think that I'm being thought police or unreasonable by saying that those claims either individually or especially together require at least some sort of reason for believing them.
That is to say some sort of proof.
I'm sorry but it is not unreasonable to go with the premis that the larger the claim the larger the proof required. When people resort to saying the God is unprovable I agree.
There is a reason for that.
CAUSE IT'S PREPOSTEROUS.
I have the right to say that and it's not playing thought police.
Ok, since the tone between us is quickly getting more snide and emotionally laden, I am bowing out here. My opinion and yours do match in many places and not at all in others. I can accept that. See you on the board and...
Peace :)
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 04, 2012, 05:52:56 PM
Ok, since the tone between us is quickly getting more snide and emotionally laden, I am bowing out here. My opinion and yours do match in many places and not at all in others. I can accept that. See you on the board and...
Peace :)
I actually thought I was being pretty polite.
Actually, I was talking more of myself. I felt myself get agitated too much and that is just not necessary. Hope we're still cool :)
I've just read this whole thread, watched most of the videos, and I have to say - people like Biker Dude, myself, and many others are at the edges of society; we're people who think for ourselves, without bending to ANY social, political, or religious pressure to conform. Because we refuse to join any club, church, political party, or what have you, there's very little representation of such - what I believe to be - common sense. My own approach is to listen to the atheists, and use some of their well articulated arguments against religion. I just don't swallow their strident full frontal attack on religion... such as Sam Harris who thinks we should blow up the middle east.
BD - you've said things way better than I could have. Saved me a lot of typing. ;-)
Quote from: Hominid on September 04, 2012, 06:45:23 PM
I've just read this whole thread, watched most of the videos, and I have to say - people like Biker Dude, myself, and many others are at the edges of society; we're people who think for ourselves, without bending to ANY social, political, or religious pressure to conform. Because we refuse to join any club, church, political party, or what have you, there's very little representation of such - what I believe to be - common sense. My own approach is to listen to the atheists, and use some of their well articulated arguments against religion. I just don't swallow their strident full frontal attack on religion... such as Sam Harris who thinks we should blow up the middle east.
BD - you've said things way better than I could have. Saved me a lot of typing. ;-)
TY
I have always been someone who has ducked every discussion of religion in any social situation.
That has changed.
In my lifetime the tone of the religious has changed greatly.
I really believe we MUST begin to meet intolerance with intolerance or we will lose.
I am talking about our basic freedoms here Dude!
Across this line.....
Ok, doing this against my better judgement here...
I just want to clarify something.
I value my mental independence greatly. These days, being able to think for oneself is a valuable ability, especially when everyone wants you to fall in line.
Now, I can only speak from an outsider's perspective, since in Germany, anyone trying to push a religious agenda in politics would quickly be met with ridicule and scorn.
I, too, am worried about what happens in the USA. The separation of church and state must be upheld at all costs. And I completely agree that religion has no place in politics.
Just to make that clear. I am absolutely, zero percent on the side of the nutjobs.
But as much as the thought of a theocratic USA frightens me, I am equally terrified of a world without even the allowance to mention anything that is irrational or not scientifically backed, even in fiction. Both are places I'd rather die than to live in.
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 04, 2012, 07:24:30 PM
Ok, doing this against my better judgement here...
I just want to clarify something.
I value my mental independence greatly. These days, being able to think for oneself is a valuable ability, especially when everyone wants you to fall in line.
Now, I can only speak from an outsider's perspective, since in Germany, anyone trying to push a religious agenda in politics would quickly be met with ridicule and scorn.
I, too, am worried about what happens in the USA. The separation of church and state must be upheld at all costs. And I completely agree that religion has no place in politics.
Just to make that clear. I am absolutely, zero percent on the side of the nutjobs.
We get it Dude.
Quote from: BikerDude on September 04, 2012, 07:27:43 PM
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 04, 2012, 07:24:30 PM
Ok, doing this against my better judgement here...
I just want to clarify something.
I value my mental independence greatly. These days, being able to think for oneself is a valuable ability, especially when everyone wants you to fall in line.
Now, I can only speak from an outsider's perspective, since in Germany, anyone trying to push a religious agenda in politics would quickly be met with ridicule and scorn.
I, too, am worried about what happens in the USA. The separation of church and state must be upheld at all costs. And I completely agree that religion has no place in politics.
Just to make that clear. I am absolutely, zero percent on the side of the nutjobs.
We get it Dude.
Why does religion have no place in politics? If a person has heart felt deep beliefs, why shouldn't she or he have the right to vote, run for office and express opinions based on sincere religious beliefs? That is called democracy for ALL, not just the non-religious.
If my religion is Dudeism, should I be excluded from politics because of such?
Not when public policy is influenced by religion. Example: the right wingers want to tell you what your kids learn in school (i.e. creationism, homosexuals are damned to hell, etc.) I'm not OK with that. It's the hidden agenda of any seriously religious person in politics to influence political decisions with their opinions of how the world should turn.
DB refers to them as dominionists... they wants God's dominion to extend to the entire country, essentially creating a theocracy.
But would that not exclude a hell of a lot of people from politics in societies everywhere thus creating a "tyranny of the non-religious" over the religious? And who decides what is religion? Is atheism a religion? Is Buddhism a religion? Communism? Or, is religion limited to believing in a deity? Many religions have no central deity.
Also, Hominid dude; "DB refers to them as "dominionists?" Me, or a different DB? Not sure of what that is.
IMHDO :)
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 04, 2012, 10:29:05 PM
But would that not exclude a hell of a lot of people from politics in societies everywhere thus creating a "tyranny of the non-religious" over the religious? And who decides what is religion? Is atheism a religion? Is Buddhism a religion? Communism? Or, is religion limited to believing in a deity? Many religions have no central deity.
Also, Hominid dude; "DB refers to them as "dominionists?" Me, or a different DB? Not sure of what that is.
IMHDO :)
Ya, I meant BD - Biker Dude. That's my dyslexia for you...
I think the import of what I'm trying to say is this: keep church and state separate. If someone's religious opinion becomes their political platform, then they're imposing their personal beliefs on others who may not agree, as in the case of classrooms ONLY teaching creationism. That simple.
We've been tyrannized by the religious long enough, and they do NOT have a corner on morality, which is their argument for keeping God in the classrooms. It's time common sense and scientific facts ruled. I'm not saying anyone of any faith shouldn't hold public office, or design our children's school curriculum... I'm just opposed to having religion shoved down society's throat.
Quote from: Hominid on September 04, 2012, 11:24:59 PM
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 04, 2012, 10:29:05 PM
But would that not exclude a hell of a lot of people from politics in societies everywhere thus creating a "tyranny of the non-religious" over the religious? And who decides what is religion? Is atheism a religion? Is Buddhism a religion? Communism? Or, is religion limited to believing in a deity? Many religions have no central deity.
Also, Hominid dude; "DB refers to them as "dominionists?" Me, or a different DB? Not sure of what that is.
IMHDO :)
I'm just opposed to having religion shoved down society's throat.
As dudeists, we are way too much into slacking to achieve that. ;)
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 04, 2012, 10:29:05 PM
But would that not exclude a hell of a lot of people from politics in societies everywhere thus creating a "tyranny of the non-religious" over the religious? And who decides what is religion? Is atheism a religion? Is Buddhism a religion? Communism? Or, is religion limited to believing in a deity? Many religions have no central deity.
Also, Hominid dude; "DB refers to them as "dominionists?" Me, or a different DB? Not sure of what that is.
IMHDO :)
It would broaden the dialog and let people decide for themselves.
But religion has been "out of bounds" for criticism for much too long.
As far as I'm concerned we have been conditioned to accept a lot of things that we shouldn't.
People are so conditioned that we actually have "debates" about the merits of certain religious beliefs that if not classified as religion would be on face value absurd.
For instance the contention that a God created everything. The entire universe.
What people fail to mention in all the "debating" about evolution and astro physics and all the usual irrelevant non sense is that this very belief stems from a bronze age view of the natural universe.
At the time when the bible was written people believed that the earth hung from a gilded chain and the moon and sun revolved around it. The stars were holes in a dark cloak.
So here we are 2000 years later and people feel perfectly justified clinging to the idea of a God creator despite the fact that the entire fairy tail from which it comes is easily seen as ridiculous.
If people feel that they should elect someone who's stated goal is to "take back America" in the name of this sort of non sense then clearly they should be able to.
But the choice should be put in context. If religion insists on elbowing it's way into politics then it needs to be "brought to the matt".
And I will state my personal opinion that it is tragic that we are at a place where these beliefs essentially stand as a prerequisite to high office. For me I am much closer to classifying them as a disqualification for high office. Not in any official sense but I am unlikely to vote for anyone who manages to hold this non sense in high regard. I simply can't trust someone who displays such an intellect.
Quote
Albert Einstein
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text."
I actually think and hope that religion is likely to undergo some tough skating in the years ahead.
Trust me, if religion became a hindrance rather than a help in gaining public office you'd see politicians drop the religious non sense in a heartbeat. At least half of it is pure pandering just like it is from preachers and every other type of snake oil salesman.
For those who didn't they'd just be in the same boat as anybody who isn't a christian now.
I don't have a problem personally with religions that don't have a deity.
Of course it's also a pretty good example. When do you suppose we will have a Buddhist president?
Don't hold your breath. Not as long as the American Taliban remains on the rise.
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 05, 2012, 02:47:07 AM
Quote from: Hominid on September 04, 2012, 11:24:59 PM
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 04, 2012, 10:29:05 PM
But would that not exclude a hell of a lot of people from politics in societies everywhere thus creating a "tyranny of the non-religious" over the religious? And who decides what is religion? Is atheism a religion? Is Buddhism a religion? Communism? Or, is religion limited to believing in a deity? Many religions have no central deity.
Also, Hominid dude; "DB refers to them as "dominionists?" Me, or a different DB? Not sure of what that is.
IMHDO :)
I'm just opposed to having religion shoved down society's throat.
As dudeists, we are way too much into slacking to achieve that. ;)
I'll never accuse Dudeism of being a serious religion; that on top of the fact we preach non-preachiness, leaves Dudeism far from ever being accused of influencing politics (or society) in a negative manner. As a matter of fact, the more society adopts the philosophy of Taoism, the better off we'd be. No inquisitions, no roadside bombs, no ethnic cleansings.
Quote from: Hominid on September 05, 2012, 08:27:09 AM
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 05, 2012, 02:47:07 AM
Quote from: Hominid on September 04, 2012, 11:24:59 PM
Quote from: DigitalBuddha on September 04, 2012, 10:29:05 PM
But would that not exclude a hell of a lot of people from politics in societies everywhere thus creating a "tyranny of the non-religious" over the religious? And who decides what is religion? Is atheism a religion? Is Buddhism a religion? Communism? Or, is religion limited to believing in a deity? Many religions have no central deity.
Also, Hominid dude; "DB refers to them as "dominionists?" Me, or a different DB? Not sure of what that is.
IMHDO :)
I'm just opposed to having religion shoved down society's throat.
As dudeists, we are way too much into slacking to achieve that. ;)
I'll never accuse Dudeism of being a serious religion; that on top of the fact we preach non-preachiness, leaves Dudeism far from ever being accused of influencing politics (or society) in a negative manner. As a matter of fact, the more society adopts the philosophy of Taoism, the better off we'd be. No inquisitions, no roadside bombs, no ethnic cleansings.
Here here Dude!
May we all spark a fatty in celebration.
Or hoist an oat soda.
What I fear though, is that if the vehicle of religion was removed for all these haters, war mongers, oppressors, and abusers to use as their means to propagate their agendas, would they not find some other means of expressing their un-evolved, greedy, self-centeredness? It's my understanding of human nature that makes me fearful of the Hitlers of the world.
I've always said, it's mankind's heart that needs to evolve. Yes, get rid of oppressive and unevolved belief systems, and it would help tremendously, but the vacuum would quickly be filled with something else that would be used to justify hatred, greed, and every other negative human trait.
So fuck it, let's smoke a big fatty and go bowling!!!
Quote from: Hominid on September 05, 2012, 10:52:29 AM
What I fear though, is that if the vehicle of religion was removed for all these haters, war mongers, oppressors, and abusers to use as their means to propagate their agendas, would they not find some other means of expressing their un-evolved, greedy, self-centeredness? It's my understanding of human nature that makes me fearful of the Hitlers of the world.
I've always said, it's mankind's heart that needs to evolve. Yes, get rid of oppressive and unevolved belief systems, and it would help tremendously, but the vacuum would quickly be filled with something else that would be used to justify hatred, greed, and every other negative human trait.
So fuck it, let's smoke a big fatty and go bowling!!!
Quote
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil, that takes religion.
Can't help but plug another Sam Harris vid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqyTSSPIUF4&feature=related
And sorry Homonid I don't agree that he wants to blow up the middle east.
Paraphrasing a direct quote by him. "We can either fight the war of ideas or we can fight a real war. The war of ideas is not being waged because of Political Correctness. It is no coincidence that we don't see Buddhist suicide bombers. This is unique to Islam because of specific passages in the Koran. But it is taboo to mention that."
Quote from: BikerDude on September 05, 2012, 03:26:31 PM
Quote from: Hominid on September 05, 2012, 10:52:29 AM
What I fear though, is that if the vehicle of religion was removed for all these haters, war mongers, oppressors, and abusers to use as their means to propagate their agendas, would they not find some other means of expressing their un-evolved, greedy, self-centeredness? It's my understanding of human nature that makes me fearful of the Hitlers of the world.
I've always said, it's mankind's heart that needs to evolve. Yes, get rid of oppressive and unevolved belief systems, and it would help tremendously, but the vacuum would quickly be filled with something else that would be used to justify hatred, greed, and every other negative human trait.
So fuck it, let's smoke a big fatty and go bowling!!!
Quote
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil, that takes religion.
Can't help but plug another Sam Harris vid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqyTSSPIUF4&feature=related
And sorry Homonid I don't agree that he wants to blow up the middle east.
Paraphrasing a direct quote by him. "We can either fight the war of ideas or we can fight a real war. The war of ideas is not being waged because of Political Correctness. It is no coincidence that we don't see Buddhist suicide bombers. This is unique to Islam because of specific passages in the Koran. But it is taboo to mention that."
Well then dude, you should read his book "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason". I'm in the middle of it... he makes more than a strong suggestion that before we get nailed by a nuke from the middle east, that we should probably strike first. His words, not mine...
Quote from: Hominid on September 05, 2012, 04:25:56 PM
Quote from: BikerDude on September 05, 2012, 03:26:31 PM
Quote from: Hominid on September 05, 2012, 10:52:29 AM
What I fear though, is that if the vehicle of religion was removed for all these haters, war mongers, oppressors, and abusers to use as their means to propagate their agendas, would they not find some other means of expressing their un-evolved, greedy, self-centeredness? It's my understanding of human nature that makes me fearful of the Hitlers of the world.
I've always said, it's mankind's heart that needs to evolve. Yes, get rid of oppressive and unevolved belief systems, and it would help tremendously, but the vacuum would quickly be filled with something else that would be used to justify hatred, greed, and every other negative human trait.
So fuck it, let's smoke a big fatty and go bowling!!!
Quote
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil, that takes religion.
Can't help but plug another Sam Harris vid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqyTSSPIUF4&feature=related
And sorry Homonid I don't agree that he wants to blow up the middle east.
Paraphrasing a direct quote by him. "We can either fight the war of ideas or we can fight a real war. The war of ideas is not being waged because of Political Correctness. It is no coincidence that we don't see Buddhist suicide bombers. This is unique to Islam because of specific passages in the Koran. But it is taboo to mention that."
Well then dude, you should read his book "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason". I'm in the middle of it... he makes more than a strong suggestion that before we get nailed by a nuke from the middle east, that we should probably strike first. His words, not mine...
Good read?
I may have to check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtN4-lwnHX4&feature=related
Ya, the guy's a genius. A bit much for me at times, but his intellect blows me away. I'll let you know when I'm done the book to give you a more thorough take.
He can be a bit more metaphysical that the other 3 horsemen, which I like - he's not totally dismissive of all things unseen. I'm looking forward to his "Letter to a Christian Nation" which I have tucked away on my Kindle as well...
One thing hardcore religious folks also do not like to hear is this...
The only three reasons they are praying to an Israelite desert deity Yahwe (which was basically a war deity before it became their only god, which tells you a lot, if you think about it) are blood, steel and dumb luck. Luck. Nothing else.
For a while in the Roman Empire, the biggest rival to underground Christianity was Mithraism, whose main object of reverence, Mithras(originally a Persian god), had quite a few similarities to Christ.
If not for Constantine, the same people might be praying to Mithras these days...
And the fact that some people will want to kill you if you point that out to them is enough...
A bit of a history buff myself...and if you are, there is no way you could still take the Abrahamic Faiths seriously ever again...
As for Harris, while I do not totally share his opinion on free will (i.e. that we, according to him, have none), I have to commend that he argues not from a perspective of wanting to be right but from one of compassion, arguing against the Abrahamic religions because their dogma is bad for us. Also, he's quite the spiritual sort, actually :)
Quote from: Hominid on September 05, 2012, 08:27:09 AM
I'm just opposed to having religion shoved down society's throat.
Fuckin' eh, I totally agree!
Quote from: AspiringDude on September 05, 2012, 06:20:02 PM
One thing hardcore religious folks also do not like to hear is this...
The only three reasons they are praying to an Israelite desert deity Yahwe (which was basically a war deity before it became their only god, which tells you a lot, if you think about it) are blood, steel and dumb luck. Luck. Nothing else.
For a while in the Roman Empire, the biggest rival to underground Christianity was Mithraism, whose main object of reverence, Mithras(originally a Persian god), had quite a few similarities to Christ.
If not for Constantine, the same people might be praying to Mithras these days...
And the fact that some people will want to kill you if you point that out to them is enough...
A bit of a history buff myself...and if you are, there is no way you could still take the Abrahamic Faiths seriously ever again...
As for Harris, while I do not totally share his opinion on free will (i.e. that we, according to him, have none), I have to commend that he argues not from a perspective of wanting to be right but from one of compassion, arguing against the Abrahamic religions because their dogma is bad for us. Also, he's quite the spiritual sort, actually :)
I've heard all that as well... ever heard of a documentary called "Zeitgeist"? It covers all the Christian history, basically stating that it's derivative of more ancient religions. All the same stories, just the names are changed. The movie's worth a look. http://zeitgeistmovie.com/
Edit: I'm referring to the 2007 movie.
Bill Mayer is a hoot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORpiAc1f_A&feature=g-vrec