Is religion harmful to society?

[Buffy]

So you would prefer that people make up their own definitions, regardless of whether they are right or wrong? It isn't just a "scientific definition" I'm alluding to....

I haven't said I "prefer" anything! I'm saying that you're applying rationality to an act of faith, which by definition its not!

 

Believing a book is "authoritative" in the religious sense is to have faith in its provenance and ability to guide. It is always open to interpretation, and even those who proclaim that their book is the Infallible Word of God, spend hours "interpreting" it and even changing the interpretations.

Right, and that's what's in dispute over here.

Well, its what you appear to *want* the dispute to be about, because you want to make it an exercise in rationality, when it is not:

And as far as I'm concerned, the burden of proof is on the guy making the claim that it IS authoritative, or correct, or the source of morals, or all of those wonderful things that people with deeply religious faith claim it to be.

Faith is not about proof!

 

What part of that don't you get?

In my experience, I've come to realize that flinging around terms like "interpretation" is really nothing more than rhetoric or just plain irrelevent.

In hard sciences, most assuredly so, although get into the social ones and you're going to be in for some fun! Archeology and Anthropology are full of "interpretation!" Constantly revised too!

After all, if our ideas, theories, hypothesis, explanations, etc. about anything (such as in science) are shown to be wrong or inadequate (or unnecessary...), you discard them or don't include them, not interpret them in a different way. Why shouldn't we expect the same of religious texts or ideas too?

Because they're not about proof.

The bible doesn't make any literal sense to begin with.

So what? And note, *that's your interpretation*! ;)

Ah, so it's just simply better to ignore or trivialize parts that are inconvenient to the establishment.

Well that's a pretty biased way to restate it: lumping it all into "inconvenient" completely belittles the complex array of reasons why various points of "religious interpretation" may require a changing conventional wisdom. "Eye for an eye" is something that most folks don't agree with for example.

 

And, you are going to have to provide some stats on this particular claim, because I'm pretty sure that there are a few more hundreds of millions of people who do believe in the literal word of their religious texts (and the prejudices thereof). If you go down to Latin America or in large parts of Africa, for example, you'll find quite a lot of that.

You'll find that in both those continents, that Catholicism and other more "liberal" versions of Christianity outnumber the Fundamentalist Evangelicals even though the latter are rapidly growing. Of course if you wish to use an extremely broad meaning of "literal interpretation" you could argue that you're right, but that would be....open to interpretation! :)

Also, I used to be religious too, and I'll tell you this from experience; some of these "institutions" can be likened to a global mafia....

Sure, but if you'd read this thread in its entirety, you'd see that the question relevant to religious texts here is not tied to having an organizational authority. To wit:

You'll also note that none of the people arguing against this issue have ever actually promoted the use of the word "authoritative"...

Really? As far as I was aware I was just responding to [southtown]

...which is amusing because Southtown doesn't believe any religious authorities are legitimate!

 

Really behooves you to read the whole thread! Indeed, prolly go back and look at a bunch of other threads here in the Theology forum!

Also been called ... and, well, any other label they could slap at me in order to avoid actually discussing the issues at hand.

I apologize for calling you a name, even if it was intended in jest (and to make a point!)...Quite happy to discuss the issues! :)

 

So, do you follow now what I'm saying about "faith" versus "proof"? Do you understand why your demand for "proof" is just as irrelevant to Faith as a Creationist claiming there is no "proof" of Evolution is to Science?

 

Maybe think about it a bit more....don't want to "avoid" this last issue: its actually the crux of our debate....

 

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof, :D

Buffy

[Thunderbird]

Oh, and Southtown, when we say progress, it is usually meant to mean moving away from superstition, bigotry, ignorance, etc. I am not sure if you are one of those people as well, but, well, religion for almost as long as it had existed has been strongly supportive of those.

 

I don't think people realize the real power of religion is in mythological aspect, not the church, or even history. Its the legend, the story, We project ourselves and create our future reality individually, and as a culture with our beliefs systems, that are constantly being fed by the mass media. You do not need to be religious to participate in this.

Matter of fact you can hardly escape it. Books of fiction, Fantasy movies, the stories we are told as children, the Saturday morning cartoons, the Friday night slasher flick. They all profoundly shape our fears, desires, and beliefs that reestablish the same shared pattern deep in our subconscious. They cycle outward again and again in the form of what we believe is our independent world veiw.

The same fears and desire to be saved from oblivion, the same hopes for order and Justus to prevail from the apparent chaos that surrounds us. Everyone finds there own way to deal with it, and know one is above it.

 

You may think your more evolved than the superstitions fanatics or the uneducated masses, the truth is we all find this same themes to participate in over and over no matter how sophisticated we think we are. The painting on the wall, the centerfold in the locker, the cross around your neck, the horse shoe over the door the book your reading the moves you watch, whether its Pans labyrinth, Lord of the rings, Vampire movies or a comic book. No matter where you turn the same underlying forces prevail to shape, and create our shared future.

I've come to believe that these stories, myths, or memes, are natures way of handing over the keys of the evolutionary process. We are no longer subject to the natural environment like our animal ancestors. We have,.. in a fundamental way, graduated from that plane of existence to another of our own making. A chaotic landscape of our own collective ethos.

[Southtown]

Oh, and Southtown, when we say progress, it is usually meant to mean moving away from superstition, bigotry, ignorance, etc. I am not sure if you are one of those people as well, but, well, religion for almost as long as it had existed has been strongly supportive of those.

Thank you for your answer. I was only trying to explain that change does not always equal progress. Progress is change in a certain direction, toward a certain goal. Ughaibu characterized 'scriptural religions' as inhibitive of progress because they are inhibitive of change. But they are actually only endpoints or goals toward which people can choose to change and also how they measure the amount of progress toward the goal that each change provides. The validity/authority of any 'scriptural religion' can be argued, as I said, of course.

 

Next comes authority. Moral authorities, how we decide what is right and what is wrong, are subjective. People submit themselves to particular ways of thinking for whatever reason, and by those ways of thinking they measure the amount of progress toward their moral goal that each of their actions achieve. Note, my morality is not applicable to your actions.

 

If a book is authoritative, it is by the choice of an individual. Believers in a book can't force you to submit your morality to that book. You still decide what you feel is right and wrong. For the sake of argument, can you describe why you characterize superstition, bigotry, and ignorance as bad?

 

Incremental changes in random directions will tend to cancel each other over time.

No, it does not. And it's contradictory to your earlier statement.

FYI: Central limit theorem...

[InfiniteNow]

IT'S A GODDAMNED CRACKER!

 

 

Reproduced from: Pharyngula: IT'S A GODDAMNED CRACKER!

 

 

There are days when it is agony to read the news, because people are so goddamned stupid. Petty and stupid. Hateful and stupid. Just plain stupid. And nothing makes them stupider than religion.

 

Here's a

story that will destroy your hopes for a reasonable humanity.

 

Webster Cook says he smuggled a Eucharist, a small bread wafer that to Catholics symbolic of the Body of Christ after a priest blesses it, out of mass, didn't eat it as he was supposed to do, but instead walked with it.

 

This isn't the stupid part yet. He walked off with a cracker that was put in his mouth, and

people in the church fought with him to get it back

. It is just a cracker!

 

Catholics worldwide became furious.

 

Would you believe this isn't hyperbole? People around the world are actually extremely angry about this — Webster Cook has been sent

death threats

over his cracker. Those are just kooks, you might say, but here is the considered, measured response of the local diocese:

 

"We don't know 100% what Mr. Cooks motivation was," said Susan Fani a spokesperson with the local Catholic diocese. "However, if anything were to qualify as a hate crime, to us this seems like this might be it."

 

We just expect the University to take this seriously," she added "To send a message to not just Mr. Cook but the whole community that this kind of really complete sacrilege will not be tolerated."

 

Wait, what? Holding a

cracker

hostage is now a hate crime? The murder of Matthew Shephard was a

hate crime

. The murder of James Byrd Jr. was a hate crime. This is a goddamned cracker. Can you possibly diminish the abuse of real human beings any further?

 

Well, you could have a

priest compare this event to a kidnapping

.

 

"It is hurtful," said Father Migeul Gonzalez with the Diocese. "Imagine if they kidnapped somebody and you make a plea for that individual to please return that loved one to the family."

 

Gonzalez said the Diocese is willing to meet with Cook and help him understand the importance of the Eucharist in hopes of him returning it. The Diocese is dispatching a nun to UCF's campus to oversee the next mass, protect the Eucharist and in hopes Cook will return it.

 

I like the idea of sending a scary nun to guard the ceremony at the next mass. But even better…let's send Webster Cook to hell!

 

Gonzalez said intentionally abusing the Eucharist is classified as a mortal sin in the Catholic church, the most severe possible. If it's not returned, the community of faith will have to ask for forgiveness.

 

"We have to make acts of reparation," Gonzalez said. "The whole community is going to turn to prayer. We'll ask the Lord for pardon, forgiveness, peace, not only for the whole community affected by it, but also for [Cook], we offer prayers for him as well."

 

Get some perspective, man. IT'S A CRACKER.

 

And of course,

Bill Donohue is outraged

(I know, Donohue is going to die of apoplexy someday when a gnat violates his oatmeal, so this isn't saying much).

 

For a student to disrupt Mass by taking the Body of Christ hostage--regardless of the alleged nature of his grievance--is beyond hate speech. That is why the UCF administration needs to act swiftly and decisively in seeing that justice is done. All options should be on the table, including expulsion.

 

Oh,

beyond

hate speech. Where does this fit on the Shoah scale, Bill? It shouldn't even register, but here is Wild-Eyed Bill the Offended calling for the expulsion of a student…for not swallowing a cracker.

 

Would you believe that the mealy-mouthed president of the university, John Hitt, is avoiding defending his student is instead

playing up the importance of the Catholic church to the university

? Of course you would. That's what university presidents do. Bugger the students, keep the donors and the state reps happy.

 

Unfortunately, Webster Cook has now returned the cracker. Why?

 

Webster just wants all of this to go away. Especially now that he feels his life is in danger.

 

That's right. Crazy Christian fanatics right here in our own country have been threatening to kill a young man over a cracker. This is insane. These people are

demented ****wits

. And Cook is not out of the fire yet — that

Fox News story ends with an open incitement to cause him further misery

.

 

University officials said, that as for right now, Webster Cook is not in trouble. If anyone or any group wants to file a formal complaint with the University through the student judicial system, they can. If that happens, Webster will go through a hearing either in front of an administrative panel or a panel of his peers.

 

Got that? If you don't like what Webster Cook did, all you have to do is complain to the university, and they will do the dirty work for you of making his college experience miserable. And don't assume the university would support Cook; the

college is now having armed university police officers standing guard during mass

.

 

I find this all utterly unbelievable. It's like Dark Age superstition and malice, all thriving with the endorsement of secular institutions here in 21st century America. It is a culture of deluded lunatics calling the shots and making human beings dance to their mythical bunkum.

 

So, what to do. I have an idea. Can anyone out there score

me

some consecrated communion wafers? There's no way I can personally get them — my local churches have stakes prepared for me, I'm sure — but if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare. I won't be tempted to hold it hostage (no, not even if I have a choice between returning the Eucharist and watching Bill Donohue kick the pope in the balls, which would apparently be a more humane act than desecrating a goddamned cracker), but will instead treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web. I shall do so joyfully and with laughter in my heart. If you can smuggle some out from under the armed guards and grim nuns hovering over your local communion ceremony, just write to me and I'll send you my home address.

 

Just wait. Now there'll be a team of Jesuits assigned to rifle through my mail every day.

 

 

 

 

The above just seemed a relevant contribution to this thread.

[InfiniteNow]

This video seems to offer another relevant contribution. Watch, and enjoy. :)

 

 

Baracknophobia - James Dobson | The Daily Show | Comedy Central

[Moontanman]

Gagging at gnats and swallowing camels is what religion is all about. I'll see if I can score some crackers for you, with Episcopalian crackers do or do they have to be Catholic?

[InfiniteNow]

Atheist soldier sues Army for 'unconstitutional' discrimination - CNN.com

 

Story Highlights

• Army Spc. Jeremy Hall was raised Baptist but is now an atheist
   
  
• His sudden lack of faith cost him his military career and put his life at risk, he says
   
  
• Hall sued the Defense Department; claims military is a Christian organization
   
  
• Pentagon official: Complaints about evangelizing are "relatively rare"
  

 

 

 

Army Spc. Jeremy Hall, who was raised Baptist but is now an atheist, says the military violated his religious freedom.

 

Like many Christians, he said grace before dinner and read the Bible before bed. Four years ago when he was deployed to Iraq, he packed his Bible so he would feel closer to God.

 

He served two tours of duty in Iraq and has a near perfect record. But somewhere between the tours, something changed. Hall, now 23, said he no longer believes in God, fate, luck or anything supernatural.

 

Hall said he met some atheists who suggested he read the Bible again. After doing so, he said he had so many unanswered questions that he decided to become an atheist.

 

His sudden lack of faith, he said, cost him his military career and put his life at risk. Hall said his life was threatened by other troops and the military assigned a full-time bodyguard to protect him out of fear for his safety. <more at the link>

[Pyrotex]

IT'S A GODDAMNED CRACKER!

 

...So, what to do. I have an idea. Can anyone out there score me some consecrated communion wafers? There's no way I can personally get them — my local churches have stakes prepared for me, I'm sure — but if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare. ....

WAY TO GO, INFINITENOW!!!!!

 

My spine is just atingle with anticipation. :thumbs_up

 

Now, you KNOW that a consecrated communion wafer (Catholic) is LITERALLY & PHYSICALLY the actual..

 

Flesh of Jesus Christ. Right? :D

 

So, watcha gonna do wif that wafer, hunh? Ya gonna pee on it and video the whole thing? Or you could lay the wafer on a fold-out of Miss July and gently massage the wafer with AstroGlide. B)

 

The very idea!! Spiritual Abuse of a Cracker!! B) You Go, Boy!

[InfiniteNow]

I'm seeing that it may not be 100% clear, but I didn't write that. It came from Pharyngula. :thumbs_up

 

 

(but, I completely agree... rock on!)

[REASON]

I'm seeing that it may not be 100% clear, but I didn't write that. It came from Pharyngula. :hyper:

 

 

(but, I completely agree... rock on!)

 

I think everyone decided that they want to see videos of you violating some crackers (wafers, in case someone misinterprets my meaning).

 

I know I do. :eek:

[InfiniteNow]

I may be able to arrange that. :cheer::hyper: :eek:

[InfiniteNow]

IT'S A GODDAMNED CRACKER!

 

 

Reproduced from: Pharyngula: IT'S A GODDAMNED CRACKER!

 

 

Well, it just seems to get better. Check out the response:

 

 

Pharyngula: Now I've got Bill Donohue's attention

 

The Catholic League is preparing a stake for me. They're going to go straight for the jugular and threaten my job...

 

<...>

 

That last paragraph is marvelously blind. Hey, Bill! I can think of something more vile! How about intentionally desecrating the bodies of young altar boys who respect the position of trust held by Catholic priests? I think that is a lot more vile than mistreating a cracker. In fact, I can think of innumerable vile acts going on all around the world right now, and not all of them even involve Catholicism. It takes the moral vacuum of a purblind ideological bigot like Bill Donohue to think that goring his sacred cow is the worst thing in the world.

 

 

 

Pharyngula: Fight back against Bill Donohue!

So far today, I have received 39 pieces of personal hate mail of varying degrees of literacy, all because I was rude to a cracker. Four of them have included death threats, a personal one day record. Thirty-four of them have demanded that I be fired. Twenty-five of them have told me to desecrate a copy of the Koran, instead, or in some similar way offend Muslims, because — in a multiplicity of ironic cluelessness — apparently only some religious icons must be protected, and I would only offend Catholics because they are all so nice that none of them would wish me harm. I even have one email that says I should be fired, that the author would like to kill me, and that I only criticize because Catholics are so gentle and kind.

 

Oh, and of course, the university president's office has also received lots of mail demanding my immediate ouster (keep in mind, though…Catholics are no threat to anyone at all.)

 

<...>

 

So no poll-crashing today. Instead, I would appreciate it if you would write a short note to President Robert Bruininks in support (he's going to hate me for this)

 

 

 

Be sure to click the links and read the full page. I sent a letter to the university president in support. This is downright ridiculous how frenzied these sheeple religiots god-loving and peaceful people have become over a stupid cracker.

 

 

 

Back to the thread topic... You're goddamned right religion is harmful to society.

[Overdog]

Back to the thread topic... You're goddamned right religion is harmful to society.

 

I second that. With the technology for WMD becoming more and more prevalant, how long will it be before some zealot nukes a city, or releases some devastating biological or killer nano agent on all of us?

[Moontanman]

I second that. With the technology for WMD becoming more and more prevalant, how long will it be before some zealot nukes a city, or releases some devastating biological or killer nano agent on all of us?

 

As any religious person is bound to tell you, it's not their religion that is causing the problem, my religion is a religion of peace and love, it's those other guys who hate other religions that are causing the problem. if my religion had control we would eliminate all those bad guys and the world would be in peace and harmony. what we really need to to arm my religion and destroy all those other violent hateful religions that worship the god in the wrong way. Only my religion has the real answers and we have the right to protect ourselves from those guys so we need all the weapons we can get to destroy them burn their cites, kill their children, and then maybe they will see the light and come over the side of love and peace:shrug:

[InfiniteNow]

BBC NEWS | UK | England | London | Registrar wins same-sex tribunal

 

Until December 2007 registrars in Islington effectively worked on a freelance basis and could swap with each other to avoid same-sex ceremonies.

 

But since then they have been under direct control of the local authority which, it is claimed, has led to far less flexibility about the registrars' responsibilities.

 

Miss Ladele said she was being effectively forced to choose between her religion and her £31,000-a-year job as a result.

 

She said she was picked on, shunned and accused of being homophobic for refusing to carry out civil partnerships.

 

Miss Ladele said: "I am delighted at this decision.

 

"It is a victory for religious liberty, not just for myself but for others in a similar position to mine.

 

"Gay rights should not be used as an excuse to bully and harass people over their religious beliefs," she said.

 

<...>

 

"Lillian Ladele claims she has won a victory for religious liberty. No, she has not. She has won a victory for the right to discriminate," he said.

 

"Public servants like registrars have a duty to serve all members of the public without fear or favour. Once society lets some people opt out of upholding the law, where will it end?"

[Overdog]

As any religious person is bound to tell you, it's not their religion that is causing the problem...

 

Your post reminded me of this...

 

Dr. Schambaugh, of the University of Oklahoma School of Chemical Engineering, Final Exam question for May of 1997. Dr. Schambaugh is known for asking questions such as, "why do airplanes fly?" on his final exams. His one and only final exam question in May 1997 for his Momentum, Heat and Mass Transfer II class was: "Is hell exothermic or endothermic? Support your answer with proof."

 

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:

 

"First, We postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass. If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave.

 

Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for souls entering hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, then you will go to hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and souls go to hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially.

 

Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant. Two options exist:

 

If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.

If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.

So which is it? If we accept the quote given to me by Theresa Manyan during Freshman year, "that it will be a cold night in hell before I sleep with you" and take into account the fact that I still have NOT succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then Option 2 cannot be true...Thus, hell is exothermic."

 

The student, Tim Graham, got the only A.

 

 

 

:D

[Southtown]

That was forwarded to me also. lol

 

Does all that exists have mass? :D