Should religion be eliminated

[emilynghiem]

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

ding It's not about eliminating religion but religious abuse of by collective authority and collective organizations.

The same problem with govt abusing collective power, which necessitates the Bill of Right to delineate individual
liberties that can't be disparaged, becomes equally necessary to police with ANY large collective organization
with ability to oppress individuals with less power: this includes ALL corporations that can become as
abusive as govt, from religious to political groups like parties, media conglomerates that can start bypassing
due process and punishing people without conviction or due process, nonprofits or business corporations
that can commit mass fraud, misrepresentation or abuse of collective resources, influence or authority, etc.

If we teach, enforce and help resolve conflicts based on Constitutional standards and ethics,
this tool will empower people to address ANY such abuses by ANY such organization.
See www.ethics-commission.net for the minimum principles and policies I would recommend that all citizens be trained in and have access to address by legal mediation assistance - in order to fulfill the promise of Equal Protection of the Laws for all people regardless of class.

Not only does knowledge of the laws empower people with authority to redress grievances as an equal voice in policy,
but training and assistance in mediation, conflict resolution, and legal settlements would assure Equal Justice and protection
for all people instead of the monopoly we have now by corporate influence and interests on our govt, judicial/legal, political and media systems.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Evolution will doom religion.

That's doubtful. Faith / religion offers functional advantages that atheism does not.

And it is functional advantage which drives evolution.

Like I said in my previous post, it's not always a straight line.

You are a linear thinker in a cyclical universe.

As humans evolve to be smarter, they are abandoning organized religion. It's a fact.

As humans become more hubristic and THINK they're smarter, they abandon anything that contradicts their egos. That's a REAL fact.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Jesus did not come for the strong, he came for the weak. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us.

The exalted will be humbled and the humble will be exalted. Word.

"Word"?, what are you, black for a day?

Jesus is your crutch, thanks for clearing that up.

Conceit is your crutch; and unlike Jesus, it makes you neither a better person nor a happier one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Keep it to yourself and it will all work out for the best.

Honey, political leftists and atheists in this country evangelize far more than Christians ever considered doing. It's pretty hypocritical for you to demand that other people "keep it to themselves".

 

[Taz]

Evolution will doom religion.

That's doubtful. Faith / religion offers functional advantages that atheism does not.

And it is functional advantage which drives evolution.

Like I said in my previous post, it's not always a straight line.

You are a linear thinker in a cyclical universe.

As humans evolve to be smarter, they are abandoning organized religion. It's a fact.

As humans become more hubristic and THINK they're smarter, they abandon anything that contradicts their egos. That's a REAL fact.

With a post like that, it's no wonder that you're religious.

 

[Taz]

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.

Jesus did not come for the strong, he came for the weak. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us.

The exalted will be humbled and the humble will be exalted. Word.

"Word"?, what are you, black for a day?

Jesus is your crutch, thanks for clearing that up.

Conceit is your crutch; and unlike Jesus, it makes you neither a better person nor a happier one.

Conceit, isn't that a bible word?

 

[ding]

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

Keep it to yourself and it will all work out for the best.

Keep it to myself or let it be?

as in "mother mary said let it be....." la la la yeah--that

A time and a place for all things.

kohellet

God bless you.

 

[ding]

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.

You know this how?

If someone is truly seeking guidance from above, do you think he would turn his back on them because they did not address him by the correct name. God goes by many names. He only cares that we seek him. He'll take care of the rest. It's not always a straight line.

Yeah, uh, no. That whole "You're praying, so it must be to God, even though you're calling Him something else" thing? Not how it works. If you are praying to a supernatural being who is very clearly, by description and definition, NOT the Judeo-Christian God, then it's a lot more than just "calling Him by another name", and He's NOT going to treat it that way. He cares that we seek HIM. He is not going to accept seeking something else as seeking Him just because it's vaguely godlike.

Why do you suppose He gave us all those instructions about the right way to do things if just any old behavior would do just fine?

What do instructions exactly? OT? NT?

 

[ding]

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.

I don't think it would. I don't think people understand that gifts are not taxable unless they are over a certain amount.

The reality is that people would no longer receive a deduction for their charitable contribution. I don't think that would make them stop giving.

But if it did, that would only cause the government to give more. So in the end, the government would be paying 100% of the "charity" instead of giving a tax break on say 20% of the charity.

I think it is an emotional thing. They hate religion so much they can't look at it analytically.

The reality is that "taxing churches" is not the same thing as "not making the giving tax-deductible". You need to start listening to what people say, instead of to what you want to think they're saying.

And don't even get me started on "And it'll be okay, because government will just give more, and that's the same." Government =/= charity.

They can’t tax donations below a certain threshold.

 

[ding]

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

ding It's not about eliminating religion but religious abuse of by collective authority and collective organizations.

The same problem with govt abusing collective power, which necessitates the Bill of Right to delineate individual
liberties that can't be disparaged, becomes equally necessary to police with ANY large collective organization
with ability to oppress individuals with less power: this includes ALL corporations that can become as
abusive as govt, from religious to political groups like parties, media conglomerates that can start bypassing
due process and punishing people without conviction or due process, nonprofits or business corporations
that can commit mass fraud, misrepresentation or abuse of collective resources, influence or authority, etc.

If we teach, enforce and help resolve conflicts based on Constitutional standards and ethics,
this tool will empower people to address ANY such abuses by ANY such organization.
See www.ethics-commission.net for the minimum principles and policies I would recommend that all citizens be trained in and have access to address by legal mediation assistance - in order to fulfill the promise of Equal Protection of the Laws for all people regardless of class.

Not only does knowledge of the laws empower people with authority to redress grievances as an equal voice in policy,
but training and assistance in mediation, conflict resolution, and legal settlements would assure Equal Justice and protection
for all people instead of the monopoly we have now by corporate influence and interests on our govt, judicial/legal, political and media systems.

Emily, I’m not advocating eliminating religion. Just playing devil’s advocate.

 

[irosie91]

Keep it to yourself and it will all work out for the best.

Keep it to myself or let it be?

as in "mother mary said let it be....." la la la yeah--that

A time and a place for all things.

kohellet

God bless you.

WATTA coincidence -----I had a fit of sneezing just five
minutes ago----THANKS

 

[ding]

Keep it to myself or let it be?

as in "mother mary said let it be....." la la la yeah--that

A time and a place for all things.

kohellet

God bless you.

WATTA coincidence -----I had a fit of sneezing just five
minutes ago----THANKS

There are no coincidences.

You’re welcome.

 

[irosie91]

as in "mother mary said let it be....." la la la yeah--that

A time and a place for all things.

kohellet

God bless you.

WATTA coincidence -----I had a fit of sneezing just five
minutes ago----THANKS

There are no coincidences.

You’re welcome.

the angel SNEEZIEL was involved?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Evolution will doom religion.

That's doubtful. Faith / religion offers functional advantages that atheism does not.

And it is functional advantage which drives evolution.

Like I said in my previous post, it's not always a straight line.

You are a linear thinker in a cyclical universe.

As humans evolve to be smarter, they are abandoning organized religion. It's a fact.

As humans become more hubristic and THINK they're smarter, they abandon anything that contradicts their egos. That's a REAL fact.

With a post like that, it's no wonder that you're religious.

Because I'm smart enough to recognize trends in human history and human nature? Because I've studied and learned from great philosophers and writers, instead of dismissing them because I assume I've "evolved" past them?

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Jesus did not come for the strong, he came for the weak. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us.

The exalted will be humbled and the humble will be exalted. Word.

"Word"?, what are you, black for a day?

Jesus is your crutch, thanks for clearing that up.

Conceit is your crutch; and unlike Jesus, it makes you neither a better person nor a happier one.

Conceit, isn't that a bible word?

No, it's just an English word. The Bible actually calls it "Pride", and it's considered the deadliest of the Seven Deadly Sins.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

You know this how?

If someone is truly seeking guidance from above, do you think he would turn his back on them because they did not address him by the correct name. God goes by many names. He only cares that we seek him. He'll take care of the rest. It's not always a straight line.

Yeah, uh, no. That whole "You're praying, so it must be to God, even though you're calling Him something else" thing? Not how it works. If you are praying to a supernatural being who is very clearly, by description and definition, NOT the Judeo-Christian God, then it's a lot more than just "calling Him by another name", and He's NOT going to treat it that way. He cares that we seek HIM. He is not going to accept seeking something else as seeking Him just because it's vaguely godlike.

Why do you suppose He gave us all those instructions about the right way to do things if just any old behavior would do just fine?

What do instructions exactly? OT? NT?

I have no idea what point you think you're making here.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

I don't think it would. I don't think people understand that gifts are not taxable unless they are over a certain amount.

The reality is that people would no longer receive a deduction for their charitable contribution. I don't think that would make them stop giving.

But if it did, that would only cause the government to give more. So in the end, the government would be paying 100% of the "charity" instead of giving a tax break on say 20% of the charity.

I think it is an emotional thing. They hate religion so much they can't look at it analytically.

The reality is that "taxing churches" is not the same thing as "not making the giving tax-deductible". You need to start listening to what people say, instead of to what you want to think they're saying.

And don't even get me started on "And it'll be okay, because government will just give more, and that's the same." Government =/= charity.

They can’t tax donations below a certain threshold.

For the 1432nd time, there is far more to it than just $5 put in the offering plate.

The US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) classifies churches as 501(c)(3) nonprofit charitable organizations, which are exempt from federal income tax and are able to accept tax-deductible donations. [1] Unlike secular charities, however, churches are automatically considered to be 501(c)(3) organizations, and, while they may do so voluntarily, they are not required by law to submit an application for exemption or pay the application fee (up to $850 as of Oct. 24, 2011 [42]). [1]

In addition, using a benefit known as the "parsonage exemption" (or "parish exemption"), "licensed, commissioned, or ordained" ministers of religion may deduct most of the money they spend on housing from their federal income tax, and these properties are often exempt from state property taxes. [41] [43] [44] The exemption has existed since 1921, and no equivalent tax break is available to leaders of secular nonprofit charities.

Background of the Issue - Churches and Taxes - ProCon.org

I don't personally know of any church which records its offering donations individually. Every church I've ever gone to counts the contents of the offering plate (separate from money specifically designated for tithes, building funds, etc.) and then enters them in the books as a lump sum for that date. Depending on the size of the congregation and how generous they are, that's pretty much going to blow past your "clever" gift scheme.

Also, why should churches - out of every charity and non-profit in this country - be limited in the donations they're allowed to receive, or have their donors limited in how much they want to contribute well beyond the limits already imposed by what can be deducted from one's taxes, so long as they're actually using the money to fulfill their stated purposes, rather than amassing personal wealth for the leaders?

 

[Moonglow]

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

Keep it to yourself and it will all work out for the best.

Honey, political leftists and atheists in this country evangelize far more than Christians ever considered doing. It's pretty hypocritical for you to demand that other people "keep it to themselves".

Atheist can shut the he'll up also.

 

[Karl Rand]

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

Keep it to yourself and it will all work out for the best.

Honey, political leftists and atheists in this country evangelize far more than Christians ever considered doing. It's pretty hypocritical for you to demand that other people "keep it to themselves".

Atheist can shut the he'll up also.

But what of your continuing ministry?
Are you all going to do us a favour and forget Mathew Ch:4.V:23? or do I have to continue putting the hose on your besuited brethren as they advance down my front path?
It may assist your meditations to ponder Proverbs Ch: 16. V: 19 ?

 

[Moonglow]

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

Keep it to yourself and it will all work out for the best.

Honey, political leftists and atheists in this country evangelize far more than Christians ever considered doing. It's pretty hypocritical for you to demand that other people "keep it to themselves".

Atheist can shut the he'll up also.

But what of your continuing ministry?
Are you all going to do us a favour and forget Mathew Ch:4.V:23? or do I have to continue putting the hose on your besuited brethren as they advance down my front path?
It may assist your meditations to ponder Proverbs Ch: 16. V: 19 ?

The bong works better and is a gift from some god.