The Religion of Peace?

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by Pearl

In that case, perhaps. But I don't see how religion played a role in generations of Chinese parents binding their daughters' feet so they would be unable to walk or even runaway from their husbands, lest they bring shame to their families. Same for the Kayan Lahwi (Long-Necked Kayan) women, who's necks are stretched from neck rings. If they displease their husbands in anyway, that husband can remove those rings and since necks that long aren't strong enough, they fall over and the women suffocate and die. I have yet to hear religion being blamed.

I've said it many times, but I don't think religion is the sole reason for all the problems in the world. I think it is a lot more complex than that.



Actually, I was refering to smaller cults, like Jonestown or Heaven's Gate. Those members were lost and confused, and were easy targets for those cults. You may say the same thing for the mainstream religions.

And I don't think its pure fantasy that humans are eerily similar. I think you got judgmental there, and that was out of line.

I get the impression you are not going to stop until everyone in FYM starts believing what you believe, Jive, and that's not cool. If atheists aren't delusional like theists are, then they would be well aware that people are going to believe what they want, and they really don't care what others think.

Originally Posted by Pearl

I'm honestly bothered that you said this. Maybe I've given you the impression that I am a Christian who thinks everyone else is wrong.

The truth is, I don't think everyone else is living in a fantasy and anyone who agrees with me is in reality. I think there are many paths to reaching the divine and explaining the meaning of life. I think there's a divine spark in a Hindu, a Sikh, a neopagan. I doubt I ever said only Christians do.

Also, I really don't know how to define my beliefs. I mean, yeah, Christianity maybe the foundation of my faith but its not the only belief system I look to. I am more of the "spiritual but not religious" types, the one foot in one faith and the other in miscellaneous. I don't even rely on the Bible as a guide, I turn to the Spirit within.

If it sounds confusing to you, sorry but that's how it is for me.

Well, I mean it is what it is. You're obviously welcome to believe whatever you please.
But a Christian can't believe Islam is true, because Islam doesn't believe Jesus was the son of god. Similarly, a Jew can't believe Christianity is true, because Jews don't believe Jesus was a prophet or the son of god, either (poor Jesus!!). What's partially why I always feel a Christian using the term "Judeo Christian" is a big "Fuck you" to Judaism ("We believe in both books! You Jews are just a book behind. It's all the same, silly"). Most religions are inherently divisive.

Sounds like you might be leaning more toward being agnostic

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Sounds like you might be leaning more toward being agnostic

I am not an agnostic. Not at all. I am a firm believer that there is a God, and I have no doubt. Just because I don't attach to a religion does not make me agnostic in any way. It sounds like you are trying to label me and define me for myself. That's not cool, Jive.

[iron yuppie]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

The last bit as where you and I begin to diverge. If not for religion, how would you convince a father (many fathers. We aren't talking about an isolated case) to murder his daughter for talking to a man she wasn't related to? How would you convince a mob to hunt down, then hang bloggers for atheistic beliefs? The latter one alone wouldn't even be a thing if not for religion. The only way to rationally make your argument is to say there's a disproportionate amount of the population in these Middle Eastern countries predisposed to violence and radical behaviour. I'm not sure why that would be any more palatable (or maybe whether or not a fact is palatable is of little concern to you, in which case I tip my hat).

Well, like I said, my position on the relationship between personality and religious leanings is just a hunch. I don't have any way to offer quantitative evidence to back it up. I will say that the type of virulent misogyny you describe is not confined to societies with an Abrahamic religious tradition. Extreme patriarchal behavior has been a problem in many historical societies - even supposedly "rational" ones like classical Athens. There, as in Rome, a man could kill his wife or daughter with complete impunity for anything he considered a transgression. The question, though, is how often such punitive measures were actually enforced.

Another one that immediately comes to mind is systematic rape and murder of women in some war-torn African nations. Those are especially interesting examples, as radical Islam is catching on quickly in those countries - perhaps because there are segments of the population there already predisposed to fanatical behavior though decades and decades of turbulence and civil war?

[cobl04]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Religion seems to hold a lot of influence over a lot of the shitty things people do though. Reason enough to abandon it (in addition to other reasons)

I'm an atheist, but I really detest this type of militant atheism. There's truth to it, but a blanket statement saying we should abandon religion is as extreme as a lot of the things you accuse Indy and iron horse of. I really, really don't want to get involved in this debate but that comment bugged me.

[deep]

(CNN) -- A Syrian rebel carves the heart out of a dead man and bites it. His comrades nearby cheer: "God is great."

This is from a video that is circulating on the Internet. The appalling footage has all the world asking: What kind of people could do this?

We tell ourselves these men must be monsters, people utterly unlike us, people we could never understand. But we don't say this because it is true. We say this because it is comforting to think so. The far more frightening possibility we must face is that such evil is not diabolically inhuman or beyond understanding. It is human -- very human.

Opinion: Why a Syrian rebel eats a soldier's heart - CNN.com

[Kieran McConville]

What kind of people could do this???? People engaged in a brutal, protracted civil war, that's who. What an asinine take there from CNN.

[Jive Turkey]

Imma just gonna go ahead and point out a brother is replying to this at 4am on a thursday night. If anyone feels the situation isn't conduciven to a fair debate, I'm more than happy to reply in the morn'

Originally Posted by Pearl

I am not an agnostic. Not at all. I am a firm believer that there is a God, and I have no doubt. Just because I don't attach to a religion does not make me agnostic in any way. It sounds like you are trying to label me and define me for myself. That's not cool, Jive.

I don't mean to be an ass, but not attaching yourself to a particular religion, yet holding out belief that there might be a god is pretty close to the definition of agnostic. It's not a bad word; own it.

Originally Posted by iron yuppie

Well, like I said, my position on the relationship between personality and religious leanings is just a hunch. I don't have any way to offer quantitative evidence to back it up. I will say that the type of virulent misogyny you describe is not confined to societies with an Abrahamic religious tradition. Extreme patriarchal behavior has been a problem in many historical societies - even supposedly "rational" ones like classical Athens. There, as in Rome, a man could kill his wife or daughter with complete impunity for anything he considered a transgression. The question, though, is how often such punitive measures were actually enforced.

.

Another one that immediately comes to mind is systematic rape and murder of women in some war-torn African nations. Those are especially interesting examples, as radical Islam is catching on quickly in those countries - perhaps because there are segments of the population there already predisposed to fanatical behavior though decades and decades of turbulence and civil war?

Solid fucjking reply, iyup. Let me reply tomorrow on account of the drinking and what not (whon whonnnn)

Originally Posted by cobl04

I'm an atheist, but I really detest this type of militant atheism. There's truth to it, but a blanket statement saying we should abandon religion is as extreme as a lot of the things you accuse Indy and iron horse of. I really, really don't want to get involved in this debate but that comment bugged me.

let me ask you this, cobblerino... (again, I've been drinko, so I might have to come back to this), but what would we lose if we abandon religion? I assume your comment is the result of a loved one doing good in the name of religion? In the absence of religion, would the person you're thinking about act like a total twat? (....not sure what the australian term is)... or do you have confidence that their goodwill isn't a result of their religion? (I'll go ahead and have another drink, then pass out, then wake up and say "what the fuck?" them reply

Originally Posted by deep

Opinion: Why a Syrian rebel eats a soldier's heart - CNN.com

This is fucked, but a bullshit point for anyone to make.





Honestly, this is good. A couple new folks chiming in.

[Jive Turkey]

Oh, and just in response to the term "militant atheism" that makes me laugh: A militant religious individual points at you his gun, a militant atheist, his typewriter. In that regard, I'm proud to be a militant atheist

[LemonMelon]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

I don't mean to be an ass, but not attaching yourself to a particular religion, yet holding out belief that there might be a god is pretty close to the definition of agnostic.

1. There was no indecisiveness about her statement; she firmly believes that there is a god.

2. By her definition, I'd say she's Deist, but labels are whatever.

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Oh, and just in response to the term "militant atheism" that makes me laugh: A militant religious individual points at you his gun, a militant atheist, his typewriter. In that regard, I'm proud to be a militant atheist

Hahaha this reads like one of Iron Horse's hit and run bumper sticker posts. The distinction really isn't that simple because violence certainly has been committed by those of non-religious affiliation towards Christians or whoever.

Cobbler used the term incorrectly, but you know.

[Kieran McConville]

Anyhow a typewriter can do a lot of damage, especially if it's one of those industrial-grade old manual ones.

[LemonMelon]

Oh yeah, dropping a typewriter from a story or two up would put an end to that sanctimony, no sweat.

We need to have more drunk FYM debates in the future.

[Kieran McConville]

Who said anything about dropping?

[LemonMelon]

It's just an idea I had.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

I don't mean to be an ass, but not attaching yourself to a particular religion, yet holding out belief that there might be a god is pretty close to the definition of agnostic. It's not a bad word; own it.

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

1. There was no indecisiveness about her statement; she firmly believes that there is a god.

2. By her definition, I'd say she's Deist, but labels are whatever.

Jive, you have officially pissed me off. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt here, because you seemed to be easy to debate with on FYM, but I will no longer think so.

You have no right to tell me who I am. You have no right to tell me how to live my life, how to define myself, how to feel, and how to think. You have no right to try to control me. If you are unable to realize that you are doing this, then you need to stop drinking, develop more self-awareness and realize how you affect others.

And if you're going to be such an expert on religion and non-belief, you should know exactly what an agnostic is.

Don't try to laugh it off as me over-reacting. I'm not insulted that you disagree with my beliefs. I am insulted by your insistence on trying to tell me who I am, which basically you trying to control me. That's pretty much abusive, even if its only in an Internet forum.

I'm done with this thread and you.

And I just want to add that for you to say that you mean to be an ass is just you saying I am being an ass and I don't care.

[BEAL]

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

Hahaha this reads like one of Iron Horse's hit and run bumper sticker posts. The distinction really isn't that simple because violence certainly has been committed by those of non-religious affiliation towards Christians or whoever.

OK, it is true that violence has been committed by non religious types. But did they commit this crime because of their lack of belief or some other idealogy? The example that always gets thrown out is Stalin. Stalin was an atheist, look how many people he killed!!!! Stalin did what he did because of his political idealogy, there's no proof/evidence that atheism was casual in the oppression of millions of people.

Jive's point stands. A militant atheist argues a lot, maybe is even a bit of a prick in doing so. You may get your feelings hurt, but that's about it. Can you say the same of a militant muslim or ask any abortion doctor if they fear an atheist over a militant christian.

Not THAT long ago non believers (or if you believed in the wrong God) were tortured, killed, etc for speaking out. Not sure I really feel any sympathy if feelings get hurt considering the past history of religion and it's treatment against the "heathens".

[Jive Turkey]

That's never a good idea, is it?

I need to talk to Gaf and Peef to find out how to do that right

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

1. There was no indecisiveness about her statement; she firmly believes that there is a god.

2. By her definition, I'd say she's Deist, but labels are whatever.



Hahaha this reads like one of Iron Horse's hit and run bumper sticker posts. The distinction really isn't that simple because violence certainly has been committed by those of non-religious affiliation towards Christians or whoever.

Cobbler used the term incorrectly, but you know.

Quality posts. And ya, deist doesn't come to easily to the mind of a drunkard at 4:30 am. I do agree with you. I still believe the term "militant atheist" is kinda hilarious, but who uses a typewriter??? A fucking hipster, maybe.

But the general point still stands. What damage has a militant atheist ever caused, besides hurting someone's feelings in FYM?

Originally Posted by Kieran McConville

Anyhow a typewriter can do a lot of damage, especially if it's one of those industrial-grade old manual ones.

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

Oh yeah, dropping a typewriter from a story or two up would put an end to that sanctimony, no sweat.

We need to have more drunk FYM debates in the future.

Originally Posted by Kieran McConville

Who said anything about dropping?

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

It's just an idea I had.

These are quality posts

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by BEAL

OK, it is true that violence has been committed by non religious types. But did they commit this crime because of their lack of belief or some other idealogy? The example that always gets thrown out is Stalin. Stalin was an atheist, look how many people he killed!!!! Stalin did what he did because of his political idealogy, there's no proof/evidence that atheism was casual in the oppression of millions of people.

Jive's point stands. A militant atheist argues a lot, maybe is even a bit of a prick in doing so. You may get your feelings hurt, but that's about it. Can you say the same of a militant muslim or ask any abortion doctor if they fear an atheist over a militant christian.

Not THAT long ago non believers (or if you believed in the wrong God) were tortured, killed, etc for speaking out. Not sure I really feel any sympathy if feelings get hurt considering the past history of religion and it's treatment against the "heathens".

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by Pearl

Jive, you have officially pissed me off. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt here, because you seemed to be easy to debate with on FYM, but I will no longer think so.

You have no right to tell me who I am. You have no right to tell me how to live my life, how to define myself, how to feel, and how to think. You have no right to try to control me. If you are unable to realize that you are doing this, then you need to stop drinking, develop more self-awareness and realize how you affect others.

And if you're going to be such an expert on religion and non-belief, you should know exactly what an agnostic is.

Don't try to laugh it off as me over-reacting. I'm not insulted that you disagree with my beliefs. I am insulted by your insistence on trying to tell me who I am, which basically you trying to control me. That's pretty much abusive, even if its only in an Internet forum.

I'm done with this thread and you.

And I just want to add that for you to say that you mean to be an ass is just you saying I am being an ass and I don't care.

I've done my best to step on egg shells for you, so I guess this doesn't really bother me all that much. If anything, it sort of strengthens my position that, had we been trying to define your political position, you wouldn't have gotten mad, but since this is religion, we aren't allowed to talk about it. Like it or not, the way you choose to view the whole topic has a definition. Similar to that thread months back about Sex and the City lady trying to make up her own definition of her Lesbianism, it's irrelevant. Call yourself a Pagan if you want; doesn't make it true

I guess I'm supposed to be offended or ashamed because I need to "stop drinking" as if I'm constantly drunk and posting here? Not in the least. I'm actually fairly surprised how on point I managed to keep (I do appreciate Lemel and McConville calling me out, however. Good times).

And all this nonesense about trying to "control" you, telling you who you are, being abusive really don't mean anything. It's a complete overreaction on your part. If you don't want to continue with the thread, that's fine. But ask yourself if you'd do the same had I said "I feel like you're more of a neo conservative"

[Diemen]

You keep equating politics and religion as if they occupy the same space in a person or serve the same purposes. Maybe you're being purposefully obtuse, but surely you can understand why people take religion more personally than politics.