[billw55]

mikeh, on 2012-December-19, 23:54, said:

You know, if you eliminate all who have violated any of the 10 commandments, or any of Jesus's alleged teachings, then you'd have a pretty small church At least in terms of the hierarchical power structure.

My latter comments may be somewhat unfair, since you don't exclude those who err through weakness

Indeed, Christian teaching expressly states that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. By itself, this certainly does not bar them from being Christians. Still, it is entirely reasonable to draw a line somewhere. If you get bad enough, sooner or later, your actions will show you as a non-Christian, by general agreement.

The good news, ostensibly, is that one can always repent and be saved, by accepting Christ in one's heart, and making real change in how one acts and lives. This can be viewed as quality or a flaw, depending on one's point of view.

[Trinidad]

Mbodell, on 2012-December-20, 04:24, said:

2. I don't think belief really is a choice, at least not for everyone. []

If I wanted to make a choice to believe in the fsm, I really can't. If I try to believe there's a pink elephant in the room, I'm not successful. So at least for some people belief is a little more a reflex or outside of conscious control rather than an explicit conscious choice. So for me, saying I'm an atheist does not describe a choice I've made.

Maybe you can't chose to believe in the FSM, but you can chose to make your children believe in the FSM. You can make children believe in Santa, the Tooth Ferry, the Easter Bunny, witches, ghosts, magicians, the FSM and God.

The crux is that children who are told about these first seven will at some point be told that they don't exist. And if the children figure it out for themselves, they will be praised that they found out.

Parents who tell their children that God exists, however, will keep insisting that He exists, and add to that that the child has to believe it or he and his parents go to hell, which supposedly doesn't look much like Disneyland.

Rik

[blackshoe]

VMars, on 2012-December-19, 23:05, said:

By saying that you judge something as harmless it implies that you are JUDGING it.

What's wrong with that?

[Hanoi5]

I really think people just love discussing for the sake of it. I got bored by the fifth page of this discussion, but maybe it was because I wasn't doing anything else at the same time.

Aren't religions born of the human need for explanations? I believe they are, though later they also became a tool for managing people. It lasted for as long as science could explain most of the things but this of course didn't come up all at once (and there are still 'gaps' as Mike very well pointed out). So the thing is religion could stop some bad behaviors of the people who were afraid of hell and stuff. (Of course some other people used religion as a license to kill/exterminate enemies/opposers). But since religion has been in decadence (at least Christianity, I don't know about the numbers of Islam) some people don't have that 'force' that guides them. And as the world is evolving/progressing faster everyday we see changes we cannot cope with and I think this is one of the reasons this sort of terrible things happen.

Of course there is also the other side. People who are induced to killing others in the name of a god. And these religions (or these sects in some religions) have to be controlled. Or maybe religions should 'evolve' too.

So in the end I conclude that the main problem is education. And not only formal education, for many things we believe in and find as true are those that were induced by our parents and the people who raised us. Why isn't parenthood legislated?

[blackshoe]

Do you perhaps mean "why isn't parenthood licensed and regulated?"

[Hanoi5]

I do. I thought 'legislated' covered that.

[dwar0123]

Hanoi5, on 2012-December-20, 16:01, said:

I do. I thought 'legislated' covered that.

How do you propose enforcing that? Forced reversible sterilization for everyone? How would you prevent people from just getting it illegally reversed? How do you deal with immigration, sterilization centers at all entry points?

Or do you just want to fine/jail/educate people for having children while unlicensed?

What would be the intent of the licensing? Would it be to limit dogma's that parents are allowed to teach their children? How would you enforce that? How would you determine which dogma's are acceptable?

I think legislate leaves way more to the imagination then you intend

[Fluffy]

I didn't mean to insult anyone really, was just pointing out that religion works into not letting people become mass murders, it works for me at least.

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2012-December-20, 17:14, said:

I didn't mean to insult anyone really, was just pointing out that religion works into not letting people become mass murders, it works for me at least.

I understand that may be your belief, but empirical evidence strongly...overwhelmingly as I understand it...is to the contrary. Please note: I am NOT saying that religious belief is a significant cause of mass killings, although the events at Jonestown and maybe Waco show that some extreme forms of religious belief do seem to lead directly to murder and mass enforced suicide.

I suspect that the fact that many mass murderers in the US, as an example, have been people of faith (or at least, church-goers) primarily and maybe exclusively arises only because most people in that country are believers.

I suspect that mass murderers are more mentally ill than anything else...I include serious depression, and extreme anger and so on in that catch-all.

Anyway, I appreciate that you wrote in good faith. And I am glad to see you posting.

Btw, I know you didn't mean this, but your last phrase 'it works for me' suggests that absent your faith you'd become a mass murderer! I very much doubt that. Look at all the atheists posting here....I've certainly butchered a lot of bridge hands but neither I nor any of the others appear to have yet taken to mass murder, so maybe you should think a little more carefully when you suggest that a view of the world shared by a lot of very well-educaated and intelligent people (some of us here qualify as such) is a cause of mass murder.

[Fluffy]

But I reallly meant that, when I was researching the existence of god years ago, some paths that impliead non existance of god led to logically kill myself or kill others; its a long story. This was bad for 2 reasons: I don't like to kill people and I am lazy, so doing nothing is better than doing something. I think it played some sort of role when I finally found 'some' evidence of God and choose to believe.

I don't mean to state that I would be a mass murder if I didn't hope for an aferlife, but at least it makes me reject the idea of becoming one very quickly if I ever think of it.

[blackshoe]

mikeh, on 2012-December-20, 17:42, said:

the events at Jonestown and maybe Waco show that some extreme forms of religious belief do seem to lead directly to murder and mass enforced suicide.

At Jonestown, members of a religious sect blindly followed their leader's bidding and committed suicide. At Waco, members of a religious sect were assaulted by the federal government, the assault started a fire, (there were tanks knocking down the walls while some idiot on a bullhorn kept repeating "this is not an assault") and 76 people died in that fire. Apples and oranges.

[nigel_k]

I don't think Jonestown had much to do with religion either.

[mikeh]

blackshoe, on 2012-December-20, 22:29, said:

At Jonestown, members of a religious sect blindly followed their leader's bidding and committed suicide. At Waco, members of a religious sect were assaulted by the federal government, the assault started a fire, (there were tanks knocking down the walls while some idiot on a bullhorn kept repeating "this is not an assault") and 76 people died in that fire. Apples and oranges.

I think it only fair to point out that the siege began after the members of the branch davidian sect (a religious cult) shot and killed several law enforcement people who were merely trying to serve warrants. Only after this murder did the government call for the surrender of the killers, who, instead of surrendering, sealed themselves and the other cult members, including children, in an armed compound.

So it was really an armed insurrection motivated by a bizarre but definitely religious belief system.

[mikeh]

nigel_k, on 2012-December-21, 00:38, said:

I don't think Jonestown had much to do with religion either.

maybe you should look it up, then. never hurts to fact check.

of course, you might be one of those who claim that it isn't religious unless it's your type of religion, but a religious cult is a religious cult whether you approve of it's beliefs or not. The name of the cult was the People's Temple. Few non-religious groups adopt the name 'temple' btw.

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2012-December-20, 22:21, said:

But I reallly meant that, when I was researching the existence of god years ago, some paths that impliead non existance of god led to logically kill myself or kill others; its a long story.

You really need a better line of research. I can assure you that I know of NO source of atheist ideas that leads to any desire to kill myself. When you are of the view that we have only one life, the logical consequence, it seems to me, is to cherish it.

Indeed, historically and even today, the promise of an afterlife actually drives people to suicide.

People in despair think they are 'going to a better place'. Islamic suicide bombers are promised entry into paradise. And so on.

Frankly the notion that you thought that the non-existence of god was a reason to kill yourself strikes me as strange, but the notion that it was a reason to kill others makes me very concerned indeed, if you really mean it. Wtf were you reading?

[Cyberyeti]

Fluffy, on 2012-December-20, 17:14, said:

I didn't mean to insult anyone really, was just pointing out that religion works into not letting people become mass murders, it works for me at least.

Religion is as Marx said "the opiate of the masses".

It is often a means of the hierarchy controlling the religion's followers, and this can be for good or evil.

It doesn't work very well in keeping the Taliban from becoming mass murderers.

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on 2012-December-21, 01:41, said:

Frankly the notion that you thought that the non-existence of god was a reason to kill yourself strikes me as strange, but the notion that it was a reason to kill others makes me very concerned indeed, if you really mean it. Wtf were you reading?

Nothing at all, I made all the journey by myself, no bible, no philosopher's books, all alone with my newtonian concept of physics. In retrospect I wish I had read more of physics because I reached some funny physic theories from nearly nothing, had I studied a bit more, maybe I would had come with something brilliant.

Your 'cherish live' seems to be the main atheist stream, I never understood it (not that I think you don't have a point, I just didn't ever try), no god meant fun, emotions, pain, etc were all just meaningless chemical reactions, as an unhappy teenager I was pretty sure that there was a lot more bad moments in life than good ones. This made me think of ending my life, and maybe other's ones as an act of mercy. Living life just for living it means to me the same as playing tic tac toe against a computer who makes a bad move early and lets you win over an over.


But that was the old me, if I became an atheist now I wouldnt be a mass murder, I would probably be much worse , instead of kiling people I would try to make humans last for as long as possible in the universe in the hope that there is a way to jump from this universe to another before it collapses. When humankind-survival is the main objective things are not really as cherish as you might think, science and survival are the goals, and to maximice them first you get rid of overpopulation in earth by getting rid of 80-95% of humans, next reenact slavery to feed scientists, mmm I might sound like making Hitler look like an innocent girl.

[Trinidad]

Fluffy, on 2012-December-21, 05:51, said:

no god meant fun, emotions, pain, etc were all just meaningless chemical reactions

Well, one of the things they are is (not entirely meaningless) chemical reactions.

But apart from this unimportant scientific detail, fun is foremost well .. err ... fun and pain is foremost pain. Aren't these chemical reactions wonderful?

And right now, my muscles are contracting, steered through chemical means by my brain, pressing buttons an a keyboard. The neurons in my brain are firing and firing, just anticipating how your chemicals will be reacting as you are reading the product of my chemical reactions. Isn't this combination of chemical and physical signals fantastic?

Rik

[Fluffy]

I also remember that I didn't like the idea of my chemical reactions being predictable, putting my brain configuration into a big enough computer and simulate my thinking or predict it made me feel pretty bad, don't remember exactly why, but something related to not being special at all. Being not much better than a rock afer all.

[blackshoe]

mikeh, on 2012-December-21, 01:31, said:

I think it only fair to point out that the siege began after the members of the branch davidian sect (a religious cult) shot and killed several law enforcement people who were merely trying to serve warrants. Only after this murder did the government call for the surrender of the killers, who, instead of surrendering, sealed themselves and the other cult members, including children, in an armed compound.

So it was really an armed insurrection motivated by a bizarre but definitely religious belief system.

I'm not sure it's clear, or was ever clear, who started the initial gun battle. I do know that six branch davidians and four ATF agents were killed. As for the ATF "merely" attempting to serve warrants, the ATF has, and had at the time, a reputation for "cowboy" tactics. Arrogance on the part of law enforcement should not be borne. Note: I am not saying the branch davidians were blameless, I'm saying the ATF, and later the FBI, are due at least some of the blame for what happened. And I think it's wrong in this discussion to dismiss the branch davidians by calling them a "cult", even if they were, because the word is so emotionally charged.