Is religion harmful to society?

[pamela]

okay....You have not upset me, however, you may have insulted many of the guests who view this forum looking for intelligent insight, and not derogatory insults.

The topic is about Religion, not just Christianity. I imagine some of the Mayan sacrificees may have had a problem with religion as well. Yes, some religions are against science and hopefully that will change.But not all are antisocial. The church across the street from my home, feeds the homeless every Saturday and Sunday, how is this antisocial? Many religious organizations help people and many twist and contort verses, values, science, etc to prey on weak minds. There has been harm and helping.

Yes, "it does not take God to make good people it just takes people" I agree. So why don't you start with yourself.Have a little respect with your words and a little sympathy/empathy in regards to people's reactions to your comments.

[charles brough]

AHMABELIEVER: "Christianity brough civilisation??? What???"

 

BROUGH: You spelled "brought" wrong?! LOL

 

No, really, I wrote that Christianity civilized the Goths, Vandals, etc. It led us up to the Age of Enlightenment. What did the Aztecs and Mayans have to do with it? Even though I am an atheist who cannot imagine that "spirits" of any kind exist, I am still realistic and willing to acknowledge that history is cause and effect and that Christianity, like all the other religions. has a cause, an evolutionary cause (social evolution). Hating the beliefs of perhaps 90% of the world's population seems to me to be over reacting---even though all of them are old and hence backward. Our Secular Humanism is more advanced, but it is still failing to replace the old faith in most of the world. So, it is not satisfactory either. I say we need something better.

[Moontanman]

okay....You have not upset me, however, you may have insulted many of the guests who view this forum looking for intelligent insight, and not derogatory insults.

The topic is about Religion, not just Christianity. I imagine some of the Mayan sacrificees may have had a problem with religion as well. Yes, some religions are against science and hopefully that will change.But not all are antisocial. The church across the street from my home, feeds the homeless every Saturday and Sunday, how is this antisocial? Many religious organizations help people and many twist and contort verses, values, science, etc to prey on weak minds. There has been harm and helping.

Yes, "it does not take God to make good people it just takes people" I agree. So why don't you start with yourself.Have a little respect with your words and a little sympathy/empathy in regards to people's reactions to your comments.

 

Obviously religion does both bad and good across time not just in our own small piece of it. Religion isn't bad in of it's self. many of the people involved are good people who only want to do good. Even in the time of the Mayans they really thought they were doing what was right. That is the scary part about religion. almost anything can be allowed if someone believes in it, from sex with little girls to stoning adults who don't conform to cutting children off from learning in particular to all of society in general when you take a broad cut of religion you can see all of these things. (and this is just Christianity) It's important that society refuses to allow religions to cut their members, especially under age members, off from the reality of the world. To do so creates a class of people who are ripe to be used and by people for their own purposes. The main problem with religion is that it only polices it's self, it answers to no one but the church leaders and of course they say what is and what is not right. It's easy to see a southern Baptist Church and think these people are hurting no one and for the most part you would be correct. At least in the short term but even these people need to answer to the government, and when you allow religion to answer only to it's self it can become a closed society where anything goes as long as th Church leaders can find a way to justify it with scripture. And anything can be justified by scripture. That is why I think religion is dangerous, with out answering to anyone and with as much money as religion has access to it would be against human nature to think it wouldn't be abused. At the very least any religious organization should be required to account for all money collected and pay taxes on that money. Children should not be allowed to be taught by churches , they should be required to be taught real world knowledge. If a church wants to teach their own values they can do it on their own time. To allow things like the polygamist cults out west to completely shelter their children away from the reality of the world is no less abuse than physical or even sexual abuse, holding people captive by ignorance is inexcusable.

[charles brough]

Religion, has been getting pass for theft since the very beginning. Anytime you get an organization that brings in huge amounts of money but doesn't have to pay taxes or even account for the money you are asking for corruption. At the very least religion should pay taxes and account for every dime brought in.

 

At one time religion may have been a positive but in

modern times it's just a parasite sucking the life's blood from society and doing little except promoting it's own existence. Yes religion helps people but the amount of money that goes toward helping vs the amount that goes toward estates for preachers or new Churches is an unknown and suspect for that reason. I see no reason that religion needs huge palatial buildings nor do i see that preachers need to have a live style that would qualify them for life styles of the rich and famous. If indeed Jesus was a real man and even half of the things written about him were true then he deserves much respect for going against the powers that be in his time, for helping the poor and sick, for devoting his life to helping others. But I do notice he didn't collect money for his help, live in a palace or spend huge sums of money on his personal possessions. I see no connection between the Jesus of the bible and the religion that calls it's self Christianity.

 

Strange it is that civilization has grown to be as culturally, technologically and scientifically as advanced as it has and we have so prospered on this planet in the last more than 100,000 years while always having religions! The Greeks-Romans had religion, the Egyptians, the Chinese, etc. and they all also had a scientific/technological age. Can't you imagine that religion might have played a major role in that, that the real problem is that each religion and its society asted too long---and hence, that it was later replaced with a newer, more advanced and hence better one, one which supported an even more advanced technology and a larger and more scientific society and civilization?

 

History is the cause and effect of what is happening in modern times. People need to get the broad picture. We cannot understand our world just by reading magazines, newspapers and watching TV news.

[Moontanman]

Strange it is that civilization has grown to be as culturally, technologically and scientifically as advanced as it has and we have so prospered on this planet in the last more than 100,000 years while always having religions! The Greeks-Romans had religion, the Egyptians, the Chinese, etc. and they all also had a scientific/technological age. Can't you imagine that religion might have played a major role in that, that the real problem is that each religion and its society asted too long---and hence, that it was later replaced with a newer, more advanced and hence better one, one which supported an even more advanced technology and a larger and more scientific society and civilization?

 

History is the cause and effect of what is happening in modern times. People need to get the broad picture. We cannot understand our world just by reading magazines, newspapers and watching TV news.

 

You are assuming that religion was a positive influence, I say it was not. Way before what we see as the industrial or even the mechanical revolution the ideas and even machines were already available. Unfortunately mechanical power was seldom used as anything but ways to create miracles to show the Gods of antiquity were real. mechanical principals were used to amaze and astound the population by making statues appear real and making things happen by automation. These principles were not used to make life easier to pump water or grind grain because slave power which was supported by religion was much cheaper and easier. so these mechanical principles were used in things like temples and oracles. nearly a thousand years would pass before these principles were rediscovered by people like Michaelangelo and others. some even say these people had access to ancient writings and their ideas weren't completely their own. i think religion and the idea of the supernatural being in control of the natural world actually delayed civilization not helped it.

[HydrogenBond]

What we call religion is a usually a composite of religion and secular. The priest or nun may have among the highest ratios of religion to secular. The more secular you add, then problems become more obvious since it becomes more ego-centric. Most of the things we worry about is when humans combine religion with secular interests.

 

For example, slaughtering the indians in america was not done by the missionaries or those with the highest R to S ratio. It was done by those with the highest S to R ratio. If you look at the slave trade, these people had very high S to R ratios. Martin Luther King had a very high R to S ratio and helped to spearhead the Civil Rights Movement. Church's the rip off people have people with high S to R ratios since their real motivation is money, power, etc.

 

We need to look at history in terms of this ratio to determine the relative impact of R and S. The two world wars, which were the worse in history, were motivated by a high S to R ratio. In the end, America, which made victory possible, had a higher R to S ratio.

 

English America began as a haven for religious freedom from big box religion with too much secular interest. It was also the dumping ground for the poor of Europe. The poor tend to be high in R to S sort of by default. This became the greatest country on earth. The status of this country has fallen in the world over the past several decades as the S to R ratio increased. America's major export to the world is media and hollywood not religion.

[Ahmabeliever]

Why on Earth would we need another religion to take over from the last. Another load of lies to build our truths upon?...

 

 

What is civilisation? Judgement? Courts? Fines? A method of determining 'the norm' and those who fall outside of it? "This is this seasons fashion" - "Purple is the new black" - "Tarantino is a genius" - civilisation - pah! War, atrocity, the wiggles - civilisation.

 

Mankind needs to grow up and stop relying on fairy tales for guidance.

 

Good points made about religious schools. Twisting a childs mind in the manner mine was should be considered criminally negligent. They got the (at the time) top English student in the country - and filled my head with absolute nonsense. Criminal!

 

Children believe what they are told. This is, for want of a better word, evil. I was taught all those methods of hatred and seperatism I spoke of earlier. And NEVER to question it...

 

Who you are hearing today is the sanest version of me there has ever been and I still see a shrink to determine fact from fantasy in this religion riddled head.

 

I'm really well known in my neighbourhood. Somewhat of a champion of the underdog. How and why I do the things I do is my own business.

 

Truth is difficult to bear for christians. it nearly saw me insane trying to balance out the fact that all I was taught and believed was a pack of lies. Institutions are filled with people who have religious persecution. Not to mention all the people God talks to - saw one recently - God told him to cut up his girlfriend with a machete. God told Bush... god told (insert warmongering old testament prophet here...)

 

I guess the easy way out is religion. don't have to think, or reason, or question, or make your own moral choices, just believe! Faith buddy! You are right everyone else is doomed to Hell!

 

The fact there are literally millions of brainwashed people walking around, waiting for Jesus to come and fix everything - this is dangerous to both the planet and humanity.

 

And that's just one mob.

 

Religion begets war and mental illness. Religion begets persecution and suffering.

 

Bread for the poor will never justify lies and taxation for the masses.

 

Religion should be smashed. Demolished, outlawed. :) Chanelling all that money into the perpetuation of myth and seperatism. An abomination.

[Pyrotex]

Why on Earth would we need another religion to take over from the last. ....

 

Why on Earth would we need a religion at all when you got Irish Whiskey?

:) :) :) :) :doh:

 

I have a "religion" of sorts. I'm a Unitarian. I'm also an atheist. I'm also an ex-fundementalist. I don't go to church to be brainwashed or lectured to. I go for the community. I go for the sense of communal purpose and partnership. I go because we (as a community) share commitments to our children, our families, and Humanity at large. I go for the solace and support.

 

All joking aside, try Irish Whiskey. You can't go wrong. :)

[questor]

Why don't we define what we mean when we say religion? Are we talking about a specific religion or all religions since mankind began? Are we talking about modern religious beliefs and teachings or is the beef with the concept of God and the angels? Why so angry about something a human has taught you rather than consider why and how man came to be? A lot of people have trouble with religious dogma, but there may be more to it than the argument about the existence of God or gods

in general. How did the universe come to be? Was created or did it just happen? Was there a big bang, or was there a supernatural event? The term supernatural or supranatural (Latin: super, supra "above" + natura "nature") pertains to entities, events or powers regarded as beyond nature, in that they lack a clear scientific explanation. Wikipedia: It seems to me that a supernatural event occurred which created the universe. Man ultimately evolved because the elements were present that allowed him to do so. Logic tells me that there was a creating agent, because all things I know of have a cause. If there was a creator, it was supernatural, at least it seems so, since creation never has had a repeat performance. I say all this to indicate we do not know whether or not we were supernaturally created or just happened by accident. The human mind continually searches to answer this question. This is why religions were invented. The fact that they have been subverted by ignorant or evil people does not change the fact that it is a legitimate quest. Instead of hating religion, why not adopt the better parts and reject the worst? The choice is yours.

[Moontanman]

Why don't we define what we mean when we say religion? Are we talking about a specific religion or all religions since mankind began? Are we talking about modern religious beliefs and teachings or is the beef with the concept of God and the angels? Why so angry about something a human has taught you rather than consider why and how man came to be? A lot of people have trouble with religious dogma, but there may be more to it than the argument about the existence of God or gods

in general. How did the universe come to be? Was created or did it just happen? Was there a big bang, or was there a supernatural event? The term supernatural or supranatural (Latin: super, supra "above" + natura "nature") pertains to entities, events or powers regarded as beyond nature, in that they lack a clear scientific explanation. Wikipedia: It seems to me that a supernatural event occurred which created the universe. Man ultimately evolved because the elements were present that allowed him to do so. Logic tells me that there was a creating agent, because all things I know of have a cause. If there was a creator, it was supernatural, at least it seems so, since creation never has had a repeat performance. I say all this to indicate we do not know whether or not we were supernaturally created or just happened by accident. The human mind continually searches to answer this question. This is why religions were invented. The fact that they have been subverted by ignorant or evil people does not change the fact that it is a legitimate quest. Instead of hating religion, why not adopt the better parts and reject the worst? The choice is yours.

 

Questor, as long as religion is a group of people with quaint beliefs that have no influence on what is taught as reality religion is harmless but that's not that case as this thread has pointed out many times.

 

Religion is big money, large numbers of people depend on receiving this money for nothing, no taxes are paid on this money, no accounting for this money is required at all. Religion has to have influence to make sure this easy money keeps coming in, most of this money comes from people who really cannot afford it so they have to coerced into giving by being told that god will burn them in hell if they don't believe, behave a certain way and give till it hurts.

 

This is a burden on society we really do not need. Religion gives back very little of what it receives, most of what it receives go to huge Cathedrals or Churches or to Huge houses and Fancy cars for it's pastors, preachers, and evangelists. To insure this income religion has to fight anyone who would undermine it's wisdom. Because of this religion feels the need to dictate reality.

 

Science does not give kudos to religion so science must be proved wrong so the people will continue to believe and give and support this huge parasite on our society. It's really that simple, if religion hadn't been shown to be wrong about almost everything they say about the natural world we would all still be in the dark ages being boiled in oil for eating meat on Friday. Religion must not be allowed to dictate reality. Religion is the biggest welfare fraud in history.

[questor]

For many people religion is a source of hope and comfort. It is a source of morality and rules to live by. Churches frequently are sources of social activity, guidance and charity. Do you think all of this should be eliminated because you don't like it?

[HydrogenBond]

Let me give an example of religion plus secular, to create a composite, that is lumped as religious. The Christmas season had a religious beginning that tries to induce the spirit of giving. Secular has turned this into a shopping mega-season. This shopping season is often pivotal to the health of many retail businesses. So there is a secular push to buy (give). What many people don't like about this holiday are not the sentiments, family and good will, but the secular material requirement which can run up credit card debt and still not be satisfactory to secular expectation.

 

The first approximation method used, often creates misleading data since the composite affect is not separated into two piles. If we changed the secular meaning of christmas to give only from what you already have around the house, the religious sentiment would not change, but it would impact the secular. It would be a poor retail season.

 

The secular marketing will overlay the religious sentiment to recruit those feelings and then broaden this basic requirement, leading to secular goals, such as the economy. I am not saying this is wrong or evil, but I am only showing the composite affect.

 

Maybe the atheist goal is to remove this tool so secular interests can't use it as a weapon, since the religious aspect can become a strong motivation tool. Retail can not generate the same compulsion to buy the same volume with secular marketing alone. This is why this season is so important. It needs the sentiment to help amplify the secular goal. Again, I am not making a value judgement just showing the composite affect. This particular one is not harmful but one can think up harmful examples of composite effects. Religion can become the tool that the secular arm swings.

[Moontanman]

For many people religion is a source of hope and comfort. It is a source of morality and rules to live by. Churches frequently are sources of social activity, guidance and charity. Do you think all of this should be eliminated because you don't like it?

 

Welfare is a source of hope and comfort to many people and it's much more efficient in getting money the people. Religion brings in huge amounts of money, money that is not accounted for in any way, it is not taxed and can be used for anything the religion wants to use it for. As has been shown in many posts on religion there is no reason to say religion is a source of morality, that is simply a lie and nothing but religious propaganda. On the other hand I do not think it should eliminated but it should be accountable for the money they bring in and pay taxes on that money just like any other enterprise in our society. Religion's influence in things like schools and government should be severely limited. Religion should be confined to the houses of worship where people go to hear it, not supported by society at large or the government. None of us or the governemnt should be used to spread relgion or make it seem more than it is, mythology.

[charles brough]

You are assuming that religion was a positive influence, I say it was not. Way before what we see as the industrial or even the mechanical revolution the ideas and even machines were already available. Unfortunately mechanical power was seldom used as anything but ways to create miracles to show the Gods of antiquity were real. mechanical principals were used to amaze and astound the population by making statues appear real and making things happen by automation. These principles were not used to make life easier to pump water or grind grain because slave power which was supported by religion was much cheaper and easier. so these mechanical principles were used in things like temples and oracles. nearly a thousand years would pass before these principles were rediscovered by people like Michaelangelo and others. some even say these people had access to ancient writings and their ideas weren't completely their own. i think religion and the idea of the supernatural being in control of the natural world actually delayed civilization not helped it.

 

Seems to me the example you give may be common in civilization but of minor importance. What I see is most important is that only a common belief system can unite people (its believers) and bind them into a brotherhood, community, or "society" that can create a new civilization. This is not idle speculation. You as well as I know that we evolved through millions of years as SMALL group primates. We have emotional ties to the small group and can function in tens of millions of people size groups only by a common belief system uniting us. The reason this is so diffIcult to accept is that our present society---because of its advanced age---is so divided and complex as to obscure its very existence. That also explains why there are so many social problems, so much stress, so much corruption, and why our civilization is having so many and growing international problems (meaning that it is no longer able to adapt and solve them).

 

Every old civilization went through this process and was eventual replaced by a new civiliztion based upon a more advanced belief system or religion than the last one.

[Moontanman]

Seems to me the example you give may be common in civilization but of minor importance. What I see is most important is that only a common belief system can unite people (its believers) and bind them into a brotherhood, community, or "society" that can create a new civilization. This is not idle speculation. You as well as I know that we evolved through millions of years as SMALL group primates. We have emotional ties to the small group and can function in tens of millions of people size groups only by a common belief system uniting us. The reason this is so diffIcult to accept is that our present society---because of its advanced age---is so divided and complex as to obscure its very existence. That also explains why there are so many social problems, so much stress, so much corruption, and why our civilization is having so many and growing international problems (meaning that it is no longer able to adapt and solve them).

 

Every old civilization went through this process and was eventual replaced by a new civiliztion based upon a more advanced belief system or religion than the last one.

 

Religion was mans first attempt to explain the natural world, in rational world religion would have given way to science in an orderly and logical fashion but it was hijacked by people who craved power and control of others. religion was used to maintain control of the population and to this religion could not allow any other world view. I think religion has slowed down progress more than it has advanced it, In modern times the tendency to disrupt society has become far more powerful than any tendency to bind society together.

 

Religion is harming us and will do more and more harm as different religions clash more and more. In a nuclear world we cannot afford a religious war on a comparable scale to the religious wars of the past. during the cold wars we were held hostage by ideologies with nuclear weapons, religions with nuclear weapons is a nightmare orders of magnitude worse. when people actually believe they are doing gods work by waging war and that god will take care of them if they die doing this all bets are off and we go back to being animals.

[pamela]

according to Wikipedia

"A religion is a set of conducts resulted from tenets about the ultimate power. It is generally expressed as prayers, rituals, or other practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality which may yeild a set of religious laws. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology as well as persoanl faith and religious experience."

I think it important that we look at religion for what it is, not just some Christian churches out there making a buck or two off people. Yes, there are unscrupulous types out there, that use their churches for themselves and not the congregations. But we are talking about Religions. There are many out there that do help people and use guidelines for morality.

[modest]

Why don't we define what we mean when we say religion? Are we talking about a specific religion or all religions since mankind began? Are we talking about modern religious beliefs and teachings or is the beef with the concept of God and the angels?

 

The topic is about Religion, not just Christianity... Many religious organizations help people and many twist and contort verses, values, science, etc to prey on weak minds. There has been harm and helping.

 

I think these are both excellent points. Of all things, "religion" is not some monolithic entity. While referring to it as such is not usually problematic, trying to give religion attributes such as good, bad, harmful, and helpful does seem problematic. The problem is not merely that some "religions" might be helpful or harmful and we have to distinguish in that regard, or even that some "aspects of religion" might be helpful or harmful and need specified. But, what is it to even be a religion?

 

Some people would define religion more as a set of beliefs, or a particular kind of belief system. Others would define it more like an institution—what Christians would call "the church". Still others might think of religion as a tradition or a set of rituals. These differences in meaning are not superficial.

 

Before eating a meal, a Christian might pray, thanking God (an omnipotent being) for the food he lets us eat. A Shintoist will say "itadakimasu" (I humbly partake) before eating a meal and "gochisosama" (thank you for the food) after eating the meal. The Shintoist isn't talking to God, but the person who prepared the food. While this might seem like nothing more than good table manners to a Christian, it is a religious ritual to the Shinto practitioner. But, what makes it religious? Who decides it is or is not religious? If we decide "religion" is greedy, harmful or dangerous—does that mean teaching kids in Japan to say "itadakimasu" is greedy, harmful or dangerous?

 

Some people might say a gravestone is religious while others would not. Some books might be religious in nature or not depending on a person's idea of religion. I am agnostic and atheist. Yet, I've read the tao te ching and found it enlightening and even applied it to my personal life. Does this make me religious? Does it make me harmful to society?

 

I hope not.

 

~modest