Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sy Borg]

each religious and non-religious individual decides for themselves what their moral code will be.

If every individual decides for him self what their moral code will be then one may decide that killing is good.
But you now may be thinking that majority disagree with that, but is it really up to majority to decide what's good and what's bad?

There is no need for westerners to follow Constantine and his hallucinations, which was the basis for the foundation of Roman Catholic Church.

Constantine adopted Christianity after hallucinating at a time when Rome was becoming ever more crazed and dysfunctional from long term use of lead piping.

How do you know he was hallucinating?
There is absolutely no way of knowing whether he was hallucinating or not.

Given the regular atrocities performed by those subscribing to Abrahamic religion, it's clear that anyone can decide killing is good, regardless of their "team". Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

What's to stop Christians from wanting to kill, justifying their murders by portraying others an enemies or evil? Yes, religion provides a brake on the behaviours of ex-junkie bikers and the like, who find discipline in the strictures of the scriptures. But, when taken as a group, Christians appear to be very much more violent than atheists. Most atheists and agnostics do not need to be held back from violence by a 2,000 year old book of myths.

They simply don't want to be violent. They find it strange that that someone might be so hateful and violent that they need religion to keep them from mass murder. Most of us just want a nice life. We don't want to kill, not even a roach. Can you understand a mindset that does not want to kill a roach?

[paradox]

Given the regular atrocities performed by those subscribing to Abrahamic religion, it's clear that anyone can decide killing is good, regardless of their "team". Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

What's to stop Christians from wanting to kill, justifying their murders by portraying others an enemies or evil? Yes, religion provides a brake on the behaviours of ex-junkie bikers and the like, who find discipline in the strictures of the scriptures. But, when taken as a group, Christians appear to be very much more violent than atheists. Most atheists and agnostics do not need to be held back from violence by a 2,000 year old book of myths.

They simply don't want to be violent. They find it strange that that someone might be so hateful and violent that they need religion to keep them from mass murder. Most of us just want a nice life. We don't want to kill, not even a roach. Can you understand a mindset that does not want to kill a roach?

mao tse-tung, stalin, hitler and the like were all atheists and killed way more millions than those religious you outlined, your comparison is aimed at labeling certain groups without taking all the facts into account, how is that fair?

Obviously atheists killed way more people than all religious groups together.

[Pattern-chaser]

This makes me wonder why you look at it that way? Why is a comparison of different spiritual beliefs a conflict, to be won or lost? Why not a serious and interesting contrast of two (or more) different ways of looking at spiritual things? I cannot believe that 'the atheists' are out to destroy Christianity, or any other religion. Atheists have their own way of looking at spiritual matters.

Concerning the morality part of religion, it certainly does get thrown out of the window when people abandon the religion of which it is part. Since atheism does not propose an alternative, the lack of self-discipline that discarding the morality leads to, often ends up being damaging to the newly atheist individual.

You misunderstand atheism, perhaps intentionally? It is a belief system - it describes what atheists believe, as regards God, and so forth - but it does not offer the same functionality as religion. [This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.] While many religions arrive with a moral code embedded in the bundle, atheism clearly does not. This does not mean atheism is in any way inferior, nor does it mean that atheists have no morals or moral code. It simply means that their moral code does not arise directly from their atheist views; it comes from elsewhere.

[Pattern-chaser]

Sy Borg presented some serious issues (here edited by me):

• Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.
• But, when taken as a group, Christians appear to be very much more violent than atheists.
• Most atheists and agnostics do not need to be held back from violence by a 2,000 year old book of myths. They simply don't want to be violent. They find it strange that that someone might be so hateful and violent that they need religion to keep them from mass murder.

Most of us just want a nice life. We don't want to kill, not even a roach. Can you understand a mindset that does not want to kill a roach?

And your response simply seems to repeat your diatribe against atheists, offering no justification, and no response to the issues placed before you:

mao tse-tung, stalin, hitler and the like were all atheists and killed way more millions than those religious you outlined, your comparison is aimed at labeling certain groups without taking all the facts into account, how is that fair?

Obviously atheists killed way more people than all religious groups together.

Your confused and emotional response indicates that you have no argument to present?

[Gee]

Warmly recommended video to see what it means to be "new atheist":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6MrktRKfJU

I would like to thank you for presenting this documentary. It is one of the best, if not the best, journalistic study of the issues between religion and atheism that I have ever seen. It brings up points on both sides that are not always known or considered and shows them in ways that try to be balanced and fair. I have watched it twice now and will be watching for more work from that journalist.

Again, thank you.

Gee

[Gee]

I cannot believe that 'the atheists' are out to destroy Christianity, or any other religion.

Believe it. Atheists deny the existence of "God" and try to prove that denial. Without a "God", religion ceases to exist. It is like saying, "I did not stop that horse from racing, I just tied up his legs."

Atheists have their own way of looking at spiritual matters.

No they don't. If you take away "God" and religion, people don't even know what "spiritual" means. They can not even describe it. Most of them will take ideas like "spiritual" and morality, then try to pretend that is the same as ethics. It is not.

Some are passive atheists, who really don't care about Christianity, or even God. They find the whole thing pointless, so they ignore it. These atheists are not what you describe. They don't care enough to come here and set you straight, because they are truly indifferent to religion and believers.

Do you mean like the Germans, who were indifferent to the Nazi slaughtering of Jews? Did they ignore it because it was pointless? Or because they were afraid? Or because they did not care? What about the Christians, who watched the slaughter of the American Indian? If I asked a Jew or an Indian what they thought the difference was between a person who slaughters and a person who watches and does not care, what do you think they would say?

Other atheists are more confrontational, like Richard Dawkins. They do set out to demean, debase, and destroy 'religion'. Such people are just as intolerant as religious extremists; all such extremists are worth avoiding and ignoring, IMO. YMMV.

I agree with you here. Did you watch the video that Paradox presented? In it Dawkins admitted that he became an atheist at about 16 years old after learning about and studying Darwinism -- probably in school. I guess that tells us there was no coincidence there.

Gee

[Sy Borg]

Given the regular atrocities performed by those subscribing to Abrahamic religion, it's clear that anyone can decide killing is good, regardless of their "team". Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

What's to stop Christians from wanting to kill, justifying their murders by portraying others an enemies or evil? Yes, religion provides a brake on the behaviours of ex-junkie bikers and the like, who find discipline in the strictures of the scriptures. But, when taken as a group, Christians appear to be very much more violent than atheists. Most atheists and agnostics do not need to be held back from violence by a 2,000 year old book of myths.

They simply don't want to be violent. They find it strange that that someone might be so hateful and violent that they need religion to keep them from mass murder. Most of us just want a nice life. We don't want to kill, not even a roach. Can you understand a mindset that does not want to kill a roach?

mao tse-tung, stalin, hitler and the like were all atheists and killed way more millions than those religious you outlined, your comparison is aimed at labeling certain groups without taking all the facts into account, how is that fair?

Obviously atheists killed way more people than all religious groups together.

Actually, those three were not atheists. They simply worshipped a different god - themselves. They were gods in their society to be worshipped by the people.

Atheists and agnostics tend to see that as a form of religion. Worship is worship, whether it is of an invisible man-spirit or an idiot leader.

[EricPH]

Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

You don't believe that God told Bush to invade Iraq,, and I don't believe it either. All the protests against the war amounted to nothing. It just shows that elected American dictators are no different from any other dictator, they do what they want.

Searching for invisible WMDs was the ploy of a bully. George had all the big ones in his own back yard, Iraq's were pretty insignificant by comparison.

George goes against a fundamental teaching of Jesus, to love and pray for your enemies. This was not a religious war,

[Sy Borg]

Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

You don't believe that God told Bush to invade Iraq,, and I don't believe it either. All the protests against the war amounted to nothing. It just shows that elected American dictators are no different from any other dictator, they do what they want.

Searching for invisible WMDs was the ploy of a bully. George had all the big ones in his own back yard, Iraq's were pretty insignificant by comparison.

George goes against a fundamental teaching of Jesus, to love and pray for your enemies. This was not a religious war,

True Eric, but GWB said publicly, "God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq". Maybe he mistook Dick Cheney for God?

Thing is, millions of God-fearing Republicans supported the invasion, and now they support the storming of the Capitol. Religion is supposed to temper people's more extreme behaviour but it too often inflames it.

[GE Morton]

Jews have a fully documented foundherentist moral theory in the Torah. Muslims have one in the Quran.

Any moral theory resting upon the alleged will or commandments of imagined supernatural entities can be dismissed prima facie, on logical grounds. It will be vacuous.

[GE Morton]

Given the regular atrocities performed by those subscribing to Abrahamic religion, it's clear that anyone can decide killing is good, regardless of their "team". Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

There was a deeper rationale for the ill-advised Iraq war --- a general interest in "democratizing" and Westernizing the Islamic Middle East, which was seen by various scholars and foreign policy wonks as an ongoing source of despotism offensive to western sensibilities (e.g., the subordination of women), and terrorism against the West. The same interests drove the war in Afghanistan. The "God's will" and WMD claims were largely for public consumption, seen as more tangible than the rather abstruse "nation-building" rationale.

[Sy Borg]

Given the regular atrocities performed by those subscribing to Abrahamic religion, it's clear that anyone can decide killing is good, regardless of their "team". Remember, God told George W Bush to invade Iraq, and that move probably killed a million or more.

There was a deeper rationale for the ill-advised Iraq war --- a general interest in "democratizing" and Westernizing the Islamic Middle East, which was seen by various scholars and foreign policy wonks as an ongoing source of despotism offensive to western sensibilities (e.g., the subordination of women), and terrorism against the West. The same interests drove the war in Afghanistan. The "God's will" and WMD claims were largely for public consumption, seen as more tangible than the rather abstruse "nation-building" rationale.

The quote was:

Whatever the agenda, be it oil or:

After all, this [Saddam] is the guy who tried to kill my dad.

Bush is on record as saying that:

God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq.

I think it's fair to say that most churches - certainly the most known ones - are more political than spiritual. Most religion today is deeply entwined with nationalism because, as we all know, God/Allah/Whatever always favours one's own country and compatriots and see one's enemies as evil.

WASHINGTON (RNS) -- When it comes to God and country, white evangelicals report the most intense patriotic feelings in a new poll, with more than two-thirds (68 percent) saying they are extremely proud to be an American.

That figure was markedly higher than for white mainline Protestants (56 percent), minority Christians (49 percent), Catholics (48 percent) and religiously unaffiliated Americans (39 percent), according to the study, conducted by the Washington-based Public Religion Research Institute in partnership with Religion News Service. [Note that the religiously unaffiliated score significantly lower than the lowest scoring religion, Catholicism].

White evangelicals are also more likely than any other religious group surveyed to believe that God has granted the U.S. a special role in history (84 percent) and to say they will likely attend a public July 4th celebration (62 percent).

On the other end of the spectrum, relatively few religiously unaffiliated Americans believe in a God-given American exceptionalism, (40 percent) or plan to attend a public Independence Day celebration (48 percent).

[EricPH]

True Eric, but GWB said publicly, "God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq".

Why would God tell anyone to break the greatest commandments to love all our neighbours? God said we should even love and pray for our enemies. Had George obeyed God's commands, the world would be a better place. At some point; George will have to stand before God, he will have to answer to the million victims who have a case against him. No human court had the moral courage to bring George to justice.

Thing is, millions of God-fearing Republicans supported the invasion,

If they feared God, they would not go against the greatest commandments. Their motives seemed more in line with human fear and greed

[EricPH]

I think it's fair to say that most churches - certainly the most known ones - are more political than spiritual.

Sadly, you are probably right.

Most religion today is deeply entwined with nationalism because, as we all 'Believe' God/Allah/Whatever always favours one's own country and compatriots and see one's enemies as evil.

I have changed your quote by replacing 'Know' with 'belief'. I think it makes more sense than saying we all 'Know'.

[Sy Borg]

True Eric, but GWB said publicly, "God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq".

Why would God tell anyone to break the greatest commandments to love all our neighbours? God said we should even love and pray for our enemies. Had George obeyed God's commands, the world would be a better place. At some point; George will have to stand before God, he will have to answer to the million victims who have a case against him. No human court had the moral courage to bring George to justice.

Thing is, millions of God-fearing Republicans supported the invasion,

If they feared God, they would not go against the greatest commandments. Their motives seemed more in line with human fear and greed

George W and the Republican hawks at the time would disagree. No doubt they would have all manner of rationalisations to explain why what they did was in keeping with Christianity. In today's "post-shame" world, the justifications don't even need to make sense, only to be delivered with gusto.