Should religion be eliminated

[Cecilie1200]

You mean like God Lite. All the good and none of the accountability. Makes sense.

It's better than being guilty and afraid all the time.

Good thing I am neither.

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

Because you’re a weak individual.

ALL people are weak in some way and at some point in time. To require yourself to be completely strong, all the time, all by yourself is to set yourself up for failure by setting an impossible standard to meet.

Every relationship we have in life is intended exactly for the purpose of providing a support structure for those times when we cannot function and achieve individually. Why would our relationship with God be different?

You're weak too, apparently, so you invent in invisible being that you thing give a shit what you do. Totally deluded. And without foundation.

Was there some part of the sentence "All people are weak in some way and at some point in time" that was difficult for you to understand?

If you're trying to tell me that you are perfectly strong and perfectly self-contained at all times, then your weakness is that you're a pathological liar.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Good thing I am neither.

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

Because you’re a weak individual.

Apparently. But now I am strong.

No, you’re still a weenie who need a religion crutch.

And you're still an emotional cripple trying to make yourself be something you can't be, are not designed by nature to be. Again, you have my sympathy, because you are so much less than you could be, and you can't even see it.

Ya, because insulting people randomly gives you strength?

I didn't insult you, dear (and if I had, it wouldn't have been random). I made an observation. The fact that you don't like the observation doesn't make it an insult.

 

[sealybobo]

You mean like God Lite. All the good and none of the accountability. Makes sense.

They are still accountable to a god if they believe one exists especially if they believe in heaven and hell.

If no God exists, then there is no accountability to God. Do you agree with this logic?

So their belief that God exists - in and of itself - does not make them accountable. Do you agree with this logic?

So maybe you are trying to say something else.

Because a generic god doesn’t care what u do? That’s true

I don’t know what you mean by generic. I believe all people pray to the same God. Logically there is only one. They may have a different perception of who God is and I don’t see anything wrong with that. I believe our Founding Fathers got that part right.

In the context of what you are discussing the question is whether God is a personal or impersonal God. For all our sakes I pray he is a personal God.

Just because there's only one God doesn't mean everyone is automatically praying to him.

What a crock. Only 1 god? Did that God really come down and tell Mohammad all the things Mohammad says he told him? Then the god of the new testament is not real. Or the stories Christians tell are lies. Muslims may say they worship the same god we are worshipping but they are also saying that Christians lied about Jesus and Mary.

And Mormons claim that the Jesus stories are true but somewhere along the way Christians lost their way. So we are all praying to the same god but our religions is a lost religion that lost it's authority from God.

Very clever how Jews made up this Abraham god first and all the newer religions have figured out a way to invent their own religions without having to claim the other religions are lies.

It's called an unholy alliance.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You mean like God Lite. All the good and none of the accountability. Makes sense.

They are still accountable to a god if they believe one exists especially if they believe in heaven and hell.

If no God exists, then there is no accountability to God. Do you agree with this logic?

So their belief that God exists - in and of itself - does not make them accountable. Do you agree with this logic?

So maybe you are trying to say something else.

Why would one have to be accountable to god?

If God exists, then one would be accountable to Him because He made the universe and everything in it, including you.

Therefore, the post is saying that people choose not to believe in God because they do not wish to be accountable for their actions.

Where is the proof that we are accountable to an invisible being?

You are really struggling with this reading comprehension thing today, aren't you?

Tell you what, hon. Go back, read my post again, and then think really hard about it for ten minutes or so before you attempt to post one of your "devastating" rebuttals. Possibly the meaning of the word thingies will sink in if you give it a little time.

 

[sealybobo]

They are still accountable to a god if they believe one exists especially if they believe in heaven and hell.

If no God exists, then there is no accountability to God. Do you agree with this logic?

So their belief that God exists - in and of itself - does not make them accountable. Do you agree with this logic?

So maybe you are trying to say something else.

Because a generic god doesn’t care what u do? That’s true

I don’t know what you mean by generic. I believe all people pray to the same God. Logically there is only one. They may have a different perception of who God is and I don’t see anything wrong with that. I believe our Founding Fathers got that part right.

In the context of what you are discussing the question is whether God is a personal or impersonal God. For all our sakes I pray he is a personal God.

Just because there's only one God doesn't mean everyone is automatically praying to him.

How do you know there's only one god?

And why is it that the universe/cosmos can't be eternal but this god can? Where did he live before he invented our universe? He lived in the universe that existed before ours. Or he lived in another universe in another dimension.

And I doubt he lived alone. Why wouldn't he want a partner? I think there are at least 2 gods.

 

[Taz]

It's better than being guilty and afraid all the time.

Good thing I am neither.

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

Because you’re a weak individual.

ALL people are weak in some way and at some point in time. To require yourself to be completely strong, all the time, all by yourself is to set yourself up for failure by setting an impossible standard to meet.

Every relationship we have in life is intended exactly for the purpose of providing a support structure for those times when we cannot function and achieve individually. Why would our relationship with God be different?

You're weak too, apparently, so you invent in invisible being that you thing give a shit what you do. Totally deluded. And without foundation.

Was there some part of the sentence "All people are weak in some way and at some point in time" that was difficult for you to understand?

If you're trying to tell me that you are perfectly strong and perfectly self-contained at all times, then your weakness is that you're a pathological liar.

I don’t need to lean on a ghost.

 

[Taz]

Because you’re a weak individual.

Apparently. But now I am strong.

No, you’re still a weenie who need a religion crutch.

And you're still an emotional cripple trying to make yourself be something you can't be, are not designed by nature to be. Again, you have my sympathy, because you are so much less than you could be, and you can't even see it.

Ya, because insulting people randomly gives you strength?

I didn't insult you, dear (and if I had, it wouldn't have been random). I made an observation. The fact that you don't like the observation doesn't make it an insult.

You should buy yourself a dictionary.

 

[Taz]

They are still accountable to a god if they believe one exists especially if they believe in heaven and hell.

If no God exists, then there is no accountability to God. Do you agree with this logic?

So their belief that God exists - in and of itself - does not make them accountable. Do you agree with this logic?

So maybe you are trying to say something else.

Why would one have to be accountable to god?

If God exists, then one would be accountable to Him because He made the universe and everything in it, including you.

Therefore, the post is saying that people choose not to believe in God because they do not wish to be accountable for their actions.

Where is the proof that we are accountable to an invisible being?

You are really struggling with this reading comprehension thing today, aren't you?

Tell you what, hon. Go back, read my post again, and then think really hard about it for ten minutes or so before you attempt to post one of your "devastating" rebuttals. Possibly the meaning of the word thingies will sink in if you give it a little time.

Ya, like that was proof.

 

[sealybobo]

They are still accountable to a god if they believe one exists especially if they believe in heaven and hell.

If no God exists, then there is no accountability to God. Do you agree with this logic?

So their belief that God exists - in and of itself - does not make them accountable. Do you agree with this logic?

So maybe you are trying to say something else.

Why would one have to be accountable to god?

If God exists, then one would be accountable to Him because He made the universe and everything in it, including you.

Therefore, the post is saying that people choose not to believe in God because they do not wish to be accountable for their actions.

Where is the proof that we are accountable to an invisible being?

You are really struggling with this reading comprehension thing today, aren't you?

Tell you what, hon. Go back, read my post again, and then think really hard about it for ten minutes or so before you attempt to post one of your "devastating" rebuttals. Possibly the meaning of the word thingies will sink in if you give it a little time.

Lets examine what you wrote

"If God exists, then one would be accountable to Him because He made the universe and everything in it, including you."

First of all, does that have to be absolutely true? So your If Then statement is not a fact it's an opinion. How do you know if gods exist then you would be accountable to him? That may seem like logic to you but to me it smells fishy. And that's a big IF when you say IF god exists. But then you go off and say if he does exist you'd be accountable to him because he made the universe and everything in it? My mom made me and I'm not accountable to her right? Maybe this creator doesn't give a fuck what us bugs do. Ever think of that?

Therefore, the post is saying that people choose not to believe in God because they do not wish to be accountable for their actions.

We don't choose to not believe because we dont' want to be accountable. If I believed in him I would feel accountable. I can't fake belief and I can't pretend to not believe in something I know is true because I don't want to be accountable. It doens't work that way. That's brainwashed christianity talking.

 

[anynameyouwish]

There's quite a bit of opposition to religion here. I am just wondering how many of you people believe religion should be eliminated. It's been tried before and failed, but don't let that deter you in your quest.

Learn from their mistakes and give it another try.

Why the Soviet attempt to stamp out religion failed | Giles Fraser: Loose canon

I am truly sorry that the people you listen to have convinced you that liberals hate the christian god and want to destroy christianity.
LOTS of liberals ARE practicing christians. MOST Atheists merely don't believe in god and don't care if you do or not. Part of the problem is that when liberals try to deny conservatives the right to impose their religion on every one conservatives claim it is persecution. I am not actively trying to destroy religion. I am actively ignoring it.

Yes, lots of Christians are liberals. No argument there.

I hear a lot of people say that conservatives want to oppose their religion on them but I don’t see that. What I do see are citizens exercising their civic rights in a secular society.

No one is forcing religion on you. That’s an emotional statement.

And lastly the vast majority of militant atheists are liberals.

"No one is forcing religion on you. That’s an emotional statement."

There are elements of the evangelical community called DOMINIONSTS. They actually exist. They believe they should have dominion over the country, the government and the people. Newt Gingrich said (back in the 1990s) "we must change the laws of the land to reflect our religious beliefs and see to it that they can never be changed again". Mike Pence said "I am a christian first, a conservative second, and a republican third"....Never mentioned his patriotism. If he has any.

Because you are emotionally stunted and the truth scare you you can't admit the truth.

Keep trying!

And how did those two men - or anyone else - "impose" anything on you?

Keep trying!

There's quite a bit of opposition to religion here. I am just wondering how many of you people believe religion should be eliminated. It's been tried before and failed, but don't let that deter you in your quest.

Learn from their mistakes and give it another try.

Why the Soviet attempt to stamp out religion failed | Giles Fraser: Loose canon

I am truly sorry that the people you listen to have convinced you that liberals hate the christian god and want to destroy christianity.
LOTS of liberals ARE practicing christians. MOST Atheists merely don't believe in god and don't care if you do or not. Part of the problem is that when liberals try to deny conservatives the right to impose their religion on every one conservatives claim it is persecution. I am not actively trying to destroy religion. I am actively ignoring it.

Yes, lots of Christians are liberals. No argument there.

I hear a lot of people say that conservatives want to oppose their religion on them but I don’t see that. What I do see are citizens exercising their civic rights in a secular society.

No one is forcing religion on you. That’s an emotional statement.

And lastly the vast majority of militant atheists are liberals.

"No one is forcing religion on you. That’s an emotional statement."

There are elements of the evangelical community called DOMINIONSTS. They actually exist. They believe they should have dominion over the country, the government and the people. Newt Gingrich said (back in the 1990s) "we must change the laws of the land to reflect our religious beliefs and see to it that they can never be changed again". Mike Pence said "I am a christian first, a conservative second, and a republican third"....Never mentioned his patriotism. If he has any.

Because you are emotionally stunted and the truth scare you you can't admit the truth.

Keep trying!

And how did those two men - or anyone else - "impose" anything on you?

Keep trying!

"And how did those two men - or anyone else - "impose" anything on you?"

Silly conservative. Please try to focus and don't make up lies. That is trumps job.

I NEVER said they DID impose on me.

I merely pointed out that THEY SAY THEY WANT TO!

If a muslim said he wanted to impose sharia law in the USA (though practically impossible to happen) wouldn't you worry about that muslim?

And if lots of powerful muslims in a powerful political group felt and said the same thing wouldn't you be concerned?

Of course!

and rightly so!

I'd be concerned WITH YOU!

SO when I see that powerful people in politics espouse dominionism I worry.

DO you?

Would you want the bible used as the source of law?

Like this;

Roy Moore in 2005: 'Homosexual conduct should be illegal' - CNNPolitics


Senate candidate Roy Moore in 2005: 'Homosexual conduct should be illegal'

 

[anynameyouwish]

There is no ‘opposition to religion’ on USMB.

No one advocates for religion to be ‘eliminated.’

If it is bad as everyone says it is the logical conclusion would be to eliminate it. Right? Am I missing something?

For me the question is the vulnerable nature of our species, more specifically human psychology. Talk about eliminating religion and/or statism is beside the point. It’s aspects of psychology ( especially mass psychology) that make our species vulnerable to the control/ brainwashing of both organised religious and state authority that are the central problem. Instance, the yogi meditating in a mountain cave is a threat to nobody, popes and dictators are. Take for instance an extreme example, the teaching of Islam on the rewards to be gained in heaven for martyrs and the power this gives organised militant Islam.

Sweetie, I know you need to flatter yourself that atheists are somehow less susceptible to "brainwashing", but trust me, self-flattery is all it is.

The truth is that humans are built to need to believe in something larger than themselves. If it's not religion, it's going to be "look how much smarter I am than the primitives around me".

"The truth is that humans are built to need to believe in something larger than themselves. If it's not religion, it's going to be "look how much smarter I am than the primitives around me".


Primitive humans may need to believe in something larger than themselves but SUPERIOR SPECIMENS of humanity don't. However I would never deny YOU your right to believe in allah and I expect you to defend my right to disbelieve WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES. I think children using their imagination is a delightful thing!

I'm sorry if it offends you but there is, indeed, a touch of ""look how much smarter I am than the primitives around me". Or more rational and reasonable.

And, if you NEED to believe in something bigger than yourself, couldn't you invent a NICE god instead of a rotten one?

 

[Pogo]

There's quite a bit of opposition to religion here. I am just wondering how many of you people believe religion should be eliminated. It's been tried before and failed, but don't let that deter you in your quest.

Learn from their mistakes and give it another try.

Why the Soviet attempt to stamp out religion failed | Giles Fraser: Loose canon

How would you "eliminate" religion, let alone "why"?

The question is moot. Religion is a private matter and as such cannot be "eliminated" any more than one's opinion of ice cream can.

There is no ‘opposition to religion’ on USMB.

No one advocates for religion to be ‘eliminated.’

If it is bad as everyone says it is the logical conclusion would be to eliminate it. Right? Am I missing something?

Yeah. You're missing the fact that your "logical conclusion" is not a logical conclusion.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Religion does what governments can’t, they teach civility.

So, the only two sources of civility are religion or the state?
A chilling set of alternatives.

No. There is only one organization that does that; organized religion.

Yes, we can learn civility from our family, friends and our experiences.

But there is only one organization whose mission it is to teach it.

"
No. There is only one organization that does that; organized religion."

ALL organized religion?
islam?
christianity?

I won't spend a second arguing the nonsense that ONLY organized religion teaches CIVILITY or that it teaches civility at all!

I'm not sure how "gays will burn in hell" is very civil."

or "believe in ME or BURN FOREVER BWAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA"

doesn't sound too civil to me.

When I'm not on the internet I am the friendliest, most civil person you'll ever meet!

I've got doctor certificates proving it!

Even on the internet I'm more civil than most organized christian religion conservatives.

I gave up religion before I was 12.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Should we let it die on it's own? That's another question best answered after We, The People stop propping it up with tax favors

I didn't know we were keeping it alive.

I'm for eliminating all deductions including charitable and for a flat tax that is based on balancing the budget. That ought to get the talking monkey's attention. The churches will be fine.

Our town's little church that has been around since the 1830's can barely pay the minister and keep oil in the furnace. A tax and the nix on charitable deductions would completely wipe out our church. I have a feeling ours wouldn't be the only one.

So you're saying that only poor people (or is it cheap people?) go to church?

No, she's saying that taxing churches, which by definition are non-profit, would end up wiping many churches out of existence.

So nobody goes to churches so they're closing even with tax exempt status. Good plan.

I fail to see what church attendance and taxing or not taxing non-profits have to do with each other. Pick a topic, please.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Should we let it die on it's own? That's another question best answered after We, The People stop propping it up with tax favors

I didn't know we were keeping it alive.

I'm for eliminating all deductions including charitable and for a flat tax that is based on balancing the budget. That ought to get the talking monkey's attention. The churches will be fine.

Our town's little church that has been around since the 1830's can barely pay the minister and keep oil in the furnace. A tax and the nix on charitable deductions would completely wipe out our church. I have a feeling ours wouldn't be the only one.

I don’t believe it would. There is no tax on gifts less than 10k. People would still give.

Yeah, but taxing the church would have the result that the church wouldn't get to keep what they give.

And if people couldn't deduct it on their taxes as a charitable donation, some wouldn't give, or would give less.

Churches need to save up for the inevitable sex crime payouts.

Wow, more random crap-flinging. I wish I could say I'm surprised, but wild, flailing attacks and hatred are your modus operandi, aren't they?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Nope. Maybe that's typical of people YOU know

I was thinking of the history of European colonialism and missionary work, actually. Please note I was being at least mildly facetious.

(edit: and I imagine you could substitute the history of Muslim expansion in the middle east and into parts of Europe, if you prefer. The joke was that ethnocentrism is pretty universal)

No, you were being supercilious, and incredibly vague so that you could cast aspersions without having to substantiate them.

The real joke is that you thought it was going to be allowed to stand unchallenged.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Smart people have eliminated religions and have simply gone on a personal spiritual path. Simpletons still cling to the myths and folly.

I just heard, "I need atheism to make me feel smart, because I have nothing else."

It must suck to have to work so hard at feeling smart. I wouldn't know, having been ACTUALLY smart my whole life. You have my sympathy.

Next time you go to church, look around, it's a bunch of simpletons, like you.

Next ime you go near a mirror, look in it, and ask yourself what grounds you have for feeling intellectually superior to anyone.

Literally the only claim you have, or have ever had, to being smart is "Well, I think religion is stupid, because that's what all the smart people think."

Even among the religiophobes, you make the most vapid, nonsensical arguments. If you're looking to criticize and shame my religious beliefs on the basis of intelligence, you have the wrong target and you are DEFINITELY the wrong person to be aiming.

Thanks for proving my point.

First, I challenge any notion that you have a point, or ever really have a point, other than "Oh no, a religious thread! I must immediately rush in and spam it with posts about how much I hate religion, because that's the only topic I can ever allow!"

Second, you can post until your fingers drop off that religiophobia is proof that you're smarter than me, and it's still not going to convince anyone. Not that you're smarter than me, not that you're smart, and not that hatred of religion is prima facie evidence of intelligence.

The cold, hard truth is that I look at myself, and then I look at you, and if anything, I become that much more convinced that I'm right where I want to be.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Smart people have eliminated religions and have simply gone on a personal spiritual path. Simpletons still cling to the myths and folly.

You mean like God Lite. All the good and none of the accountability. Makes sense.

Yes, we can look at our society, drifting aimlessly with no moral underpinnings to anchor it, and see the results of all these pseudo-smart people and their God-substitutes.

The US is "One nation under god". How's that working out?

See above, re: vapid and nonsensical.

Also, “in god we trust”. Doing ok yet?

Also, your pseudo-point doesn't get less meaningless and silly with repetition.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You mean like God Lite. All the good and none of the accountability. Makes sense.

It's better than being guilty and afraid all the time.

I look around at the world and can't help but think we could stand for a lot more people to feel guilty more often.

As for fear, I cannot begin to count the number of ways your worldview is scarier than mine. The fact that you think Christians live in fear just goes to prove you neither know nor interact with Christians, and that you really don't understand the concept of fear very well.

You live in fear of your god. I feel sorry for you. Almost.

No, I don't. YOU live in fear of my God, and my beliefs, and your own inadequacy. I feel very sorry for you. If you shared my beliefs, you might someday become a good enough person to actually feel compassion, rather than just "almost". As it is, your horrifying philosophy of "The ideal state is to be utterly self-contained" continues to cripple your development as a person. I feel sorry for you for that, as well.

That’s not my philosophy, too bad for you. You just attack people because you need to deflect away from having to respond properly. Because you have nothing.

Sorry, but it's still not an attack. You can protest my characterization of your philosophy until the sun goes super-nova, and you're still stuck with the fact that words mean things, and everyone hear can read your words and understand what they mean.

If you don't want to open yourself to observations you find uncomfortable and unpleasant, I suggest you stop presenting yourself as an example of how much "smarter" religiophobia is.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The short answer conveniently ignores the fact that "enculturation" basically means "developing in a society steeped in Judeo-Christian teachings, and pretending we could have invented it all on our own".

No, other people who are not born into western cultures also have values and norms, including around civility. I'm not aware of any culture which entirely lacks these things. Norms which govern social cooperation are one of the most fundamental things that cultures produce, from a functionalist perspective.

I'm sure that you and I have a basic and general disagreement about whether these phenomena are the work of humans or some higher power, and we could even have an interesting discussion about it. In any case, I'm not "pretending" anything, I have an honest and at least reasonably educated opinion on what is admittedly a really big, complicated, and fascinating topic.

I find it interesting that you conveniently cut off the part where I mentioned other cultures with other religions so that you could present them as though they were some sort of refulation.

Try again with a post that honestly addresses what I said, because I won't be dignifying dishonesty any time soon.