


Views: 2432

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Joan, was your last post in reply to my question as to what conclusion you don't like to come to ? I should have specified that I was asking you, but it never crossed my mind. And again, you may re-post what I said to your facebook if you like.."revealed religion, is filled even today with violence, brainwashing, genocide, ethnocide, homophobia, misogyny, child abuse, hatred of reason and science, and xenophobia among other things. All three (so-called) great montheisms, particularly Christianity, are bloody religions full of blood and gore."

Removing religion won't stop wars altogether.  The current situation in the Korean peninsula is ample evidence of that, or at least the threat of that.  Losing religion WILL cut down on war and considerably so, IMHO.

War, geopolitics, power etc can do quite well outside a religious paradigm I think. Chimpanzees stage war. I don't think they have much religion.

But religion certainly is a useful tool for getting supporters into the right frame of mind for a fight. (reference Jean D'Arc, OBL, Islam, crusades etc)..

I don't think the end of religion will be the end of war, in fact that is a very naiive idea I think.

Bullman is right about the property thing too. That is always good for a fight. By this I mean, if you are not prepared to defend your property etc you should expect that someone will try to take it away.. (e.g. China in the Spratleys, and China again in the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands, no war now but could be.). I don't think what North Korea is doing (which cold potentially lead to war) is motivated by religion either. 

Because I mentioned North Korea I think that I need to qualify my statement regarding the PRNK here.

North Korea, although notionally atheist (communist) in many ways resembles a religious cult with an almost deified cult leader. So any war it starts might be considered within the religious wars construct.

And when religion is suggested in Star Trek in one instance, as a possible result of a first-contact incident, Captain Picard's immediate reaction is revulsion and disgust, never mind a complete rejection of that possibility as in any way desirable.  As I recall, he was in fact able to prevent the redevelopment of religion in that instance.

Religion has no place in a thinking, reasoning culture, other perhaps than as an impotent curiosity.

A "world president" - now THAT is a very scary prospect. I don't think the world was very enlightened or anything close to a utopia in the Star Wars era - but you are probably kidding there.

Power, the strong urge to want to impose your worldview and to control others is a strong motivator for wars, somewhat related to property but also somewhat different. Megalomania has historically been one of the most frequent causes for war.

Sorry Bullman - you did say Star Trek, not Star Wars. I just watched the Family Guy version of Star Wars, and that was on my brain :)

I think being patient, or polite, or acquiescent is not the answer to present political, economic and religious events. 

If victims of religious hypnosis can be made to accept irrational belief such as the Earth is 6,000 years old, dinosaurs and Homo sapiens co-existed, males have dominion over all that swims, crawls and flies, and over women, The Grand Canyon was carved during six days of creation, Noah and the flood saved all living life on that boat, that a super force answers prayers, that challenges we face now with global warming, and that extinctions of sea, land and air, then all these present signs of bringing on Armageddon. 

If a belief that Christ will save those who confess his name, then we are either wrong in our judgment, or we are correct that no evidence exists of a god, no evidence of a super-power, no evidence of a savior, and no evidence of a resurrection exists.  

Homo sapiens exist susceptible to willingness to obey authority and perform acts that conflict with their personal conscience as posed by the "Milgram Experiment" and “Zimbardo Prison Experiment”. These studies reveal very dangerous forms of authority; submission to imperatives can have murderous and genocidal consequences. 

Tragically, victim of religious mind control can be made to do the most evil forms of things. Even if they believe they are doing "good" and are saving the world. 

Many religious leaders hold a belief that they know what others don’t know. With the use of fear and hope, both Christianity and Islam teach obedience, submission, self-sacrifice.

The Milgram Experiment (Full Video)

The Stanford Prison Experiment

I'd like religion to die a natural death. Logic and reason will help, but many other factors will have to be involved too. People need secure stable lives, enough to eat, justice, and free access to information. Logic and reason are luxuries in a sense, built upon certain cultural accomplishments. Rural isolated poor folk will not spontaneously shed the maladaptive religions from their histories spontaneously.

"Rural isolated poor folk". You forgot to add - "who cling to their GUNS and religion". You know you have to include guns into the mix to be truly in sync with the movement.

1) Religion is always being birthed and dying, in some places more than in others.

2) I doubt that logic or reason will cause religion to die.

I say the above because I think:

1) The distribution of intelligence follows the Normal Curve (bell-shaped curve, or whatever else people call it)

2) The distribution of religiosity follows a skewed Normal Curve, with high religiosity correlated to low intelligence.

These two curves overlap.

Tom says "Religion is always being birthed and dying" and that "logic and reason will probably not cause religion to die" with both these statements I agee.

I am not so sure about a strong intelligence correlation. I think it varies by age. During earlier years in life there may be a correlation. If you use college education as a proxy for intelligence this may be more true, although I believe college education is way over rated as a proxy for intelligence. College aged and educated tend to be less religious may be an accurate statement, but I observed this changes over time. There is a lot of flux that I am not sure the polls capture. It is an interesting subject. The terms "religious", "theist", "atheist", "agnostic" do not really categorize people very well. When you have in depth discussions with them, you learn there is a lot more complexity and diversity of thought. I am just offering my experience, having spent a career and life time time dealing with "intelligent" people. 


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon





Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service