The Flaw of Monotheism (1 Viewer)

[Durga]

Again .. there is a difference between historical background and justifications for making laws. Don't confuse them. The constitution is strictly secular. If you don't know that, you don't know anything.

Examples are poor, they're ethical issues not religious. Many secularists are pro-life, doesn't make them religious. And ID isn't science, it's pseudo-science. Bush didn't condone ID, he just said "to teach the controversies."

I know that the constitution was secular... I'm also a big fan of Hitchens, so I know where "If you don't know that, you don't know anything" originally came from.

My point was that the ethical issues are often clouded by religious authorities, and in countries where Christianity (in particular Catholicism) and Islam, as well as other religions, are widespread, ethical issues are not looked at very well, more like "My sky man says this, so this is what it is." It's really not beneficial to society to look at ethical issues from a slightly modernised Bronze Age view, especially if we want to progress.

I also never said that ID is science, in fact it's a blatant insult to science. My point was that it's ridiculous there is even a discussion about this. And in response to George Bush's remark, there is no controversy in evolution, just widespread ignorance. This would be aided by proper education, but unfortunately some people are so pitted in 'teaching the [non-existent] controversy' that the masses are never going to stray from the 'I'm not a monkey!' type thinking.

 

[0bs3n3]

Um, you do realise that India has a multitude of slums right?

Sarcasm.

 

[mirakon]

This whole thread really belongs in 'Does God exist?'

 

[Scorch]

My point was that the ethical issues are often clouded by religious authorities, and in countries where Christianity (in particular Catholicism) and Islam, as well as other religions, are widespread, ethical issues are not looked at very well, more like "My sky man says this, so this is what it is." It's really not beneficial to society to look at ethical issues from a slightly modernised Bronze Age view, especially if we want to progress.

Very much so. Homosexual marriage, for instance, is prevented and held back by an almost exclusively religious discourse.

I also never said that ID is science, in fact it's a blatant insult to science. My point was that it's ridiculous there is even a discussion about this. And in response to George Bush's remark, there is no controversy in evolution, just widespread ignorance. This would be aided by proper education, but unfortunately some people are so pitted in 'teaching the [non-existent] controversy' that the masses are never going to stray from the 'I'm not a monkey!' type thinking.

You are right again. There is no controversy. It's like demanding that a teacher of Ancient History teach the controversy between those that believe the Romans exist and those that believe they were an 18th century conspiracy and the evidence for their existence was planted.

This whole thread really belongs in 'Does God exist?'

Not really. It's decidedly far more political and specific in nature.

Religion has no control on most Western governments - executive or legislative. Particularly America, where Christianity is tied up greatly with their history, but their constitution is strictly secular.

In theory. You point to America's secular constitution but they still have a pledge that says "One Nation Under God", have "In God We Trust" emblazoned in Court rooms and Congress says a prayer to the Christian God before convening (as does our parliament). In fact the preamble to our constitution says that we are, as a nation, 'humbly relying on the blessings of Almighty God.'

Issues of homosexual rights and stem cell research are held back by religious discourses that cloud the secularity of the decision-making process of our nation's government.

So again I say: in theory.

 

[Lentern]

Not really. It's decidedly far more political and specific in nature.



.

Have you ever been in the "does god exist thread"? Its plenty political.

 

[Scorch]

Have you ever been in the "does god exist thread"? Its plenty political.

It is, but I thought its purpose was more to discuss ideas and 'evidence' of God's existence, rather than discussing why religion has such an influence on a secular society.

 

[Lentern]

It is, but I thought its purpose was more to discuss ideas and 'evidence' of God's existence, rather than discussing why religion has such an influence on a secular society.

No its really just there for people like you to whine about how us catholics are trying to eat your children.

 

[ilikebeeef]

no its really just there for people like you to whine about how us catholics are trying to eat your children.

-1.

 

[Scorch]

No its really just there for people like you to whine about how us catholics are trying to eat your children.

Playing the victim when I clearly neither said that nor singled out your particular religious nonsense at all is a really stupid thing to do.

 

[Lentern]

Playing the victim when I clearly neither said that nor singled out your particular religious nonsense at all is a really stupid thing to do.

Are you for real?

 

[Scorch]

Are you for real?

I'm not sure. Are you not religious? I sort of assumed with that reaction.

 

[Lentern]

I'm not sure. Are you not religious? I sort of assumed with that reaction.

Yes I am religious congratulations you've said something correct in the thread now. Did you seriously not realise that bit of hyperbole was a shot at you reciting some old rhetoric buried in a thousand places on NCAP which is little more than a thinly veiled swipe at Christianity?

 

[Scorch]

Yes I am religious congratulations you've said something correct in the thread now.

Feel free to correct any historical or scientific assertions I have made and back up your revisionism with evidence.

Did you seriously not realise that bit of hyperbole was a shot at you reciting some old rhetoric buried in a thousand places on NCAP which is little more than a thinly veiled swipe at Christianity?

Well it's not a swipe, it's pointing out one of many severe logical flaws in an ideology that prevents the progress of equality in our secular nation, and I would fairly say that if you thought it was 'veiled' at all, you've completely missed the point anyway.

 

[Titburger]

Yes I am religious congratulations you've said something correct in the thread now. Did you seriously not realise that bit of hyperbole was a shot at you reciting some old rhetoric buried in a thousand places on NCAP which is little more than a thinly veiled swipe at Christianity?

Well has the point been refuted? Or merely ignored?

 

[Lentern]

Feel free to correct any historical or scientific assertions I have made and back up your revisionism with evidence.



Well it's not a swipe, it's pointing out one of many severe logical flaws in an ideology that prevents the progress of equality in our secular nation, and I would fairly say that if you thought it was 'veiled' at all, you've completely missed the point anyway.

I have, its buried somewhere in the Does God exist thread. Iron did it about a dozen times.

 

[Scorch]

I have, its buried somewhere in the Does God exist thread. Iron did it about a dozen times.

Forgive my skepticism when I say that I highly, highly doubt it. What assertion have you corrected? The idea of evolution? The age of modern humans? The date of the first instances of religion?

Once all the facts are arranged, the logical implications fall into place.

 

[Lentern]

Well has the point been refuted? Or merely ignored?

It wouldn't be possible to refute it for people like you, belief is not something that can be chosen like a flavour of chips. But excellent answers have been put forward many times.

 

[Lentern]

Forgive my skepticism when I say that I highly, highly doubt it. What assertion have you corrected? The idea of evolution? The age of modern humans? The date of the first instances of religion?

Once all the facts are arranged, the logical implications fall into place.

Once the convenient facts are chosen yes.

 

[Scorch]

Once the convenient facts are chosen yes.

Convenient? I don't think it is any way convenient at all, as I am not coming to interpret these facts with a pre-conceived notion or claim of supreme knowledge as to how things definitely are that operates within religion.

You said I hadn't said anything correct in this thread and that such facts had been refuted and I am asking you right now, if you'd please stop dodging the question, what historical or scientific assertion did I make in the OP that was untrue?

 

[Lentern]

Convenient? I don't think it is any way convenient at all, as I am not coming to interpret these facts with a pre-conceived notion or claim of supreme knowledge as to how things definitely are that operates within religion.

You said I hadn't said anything correct in this thread and that such facts had been refuted and I am asking you right now, if you'd please stop dodging the question, what historical or scientific assertion did I make in the OP that was untrue?

Well for starters you implied God doesn't exist.