Whats more important, religion or people?

[firedragon]

Sure there are but I'm not one of them, because I demonstrated a causal link between a religious belief and the action of murder.

No you never did. A causal link? Are you serious?

Tell me. How do you "demonstrate" a causal link? Please prove that if you don't mind.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Whats more important, religion or people?

If people are more important (which I personally assert that they are) then it is only logical that an empath should feel more empathy for the victims of religion (such as the LGBT community) than for the people who have their religions critiqued.

But if you feel that religions are important more than people are feel free to justify your position to do so (no I'm not forcing you to justify your position by asking you to).

In my opinion.

Well it's clear people's lives were not important in various cases.

 

[danieldemol]

No you never did. A causal link? Are you serious?

Tell me. How do you "demonstrate" a causal link? Please prove that if you don't mind.

I looked it up now;

"The use of a controlled study is the most effective way of establishing causality between variables. In a controlled study, the sample or population is split in two, with both groups being comparable in almost every way. The two groups then receive different treatments, and the outcomes of each group are assessed."

Source: Statistical Language - Correlation and Causation.

So you are correct that I didn't do that, because it would be unethical, but I still think there is no room for reasonable denial that indoctrinating a people with the view that God wants them to kill those who convert away will result in murder.

That it is a causal factor is simply obvious.

In my opinion.

 

[firedragon]

I looked it up now;

"The use of a controlled study is the most effective way of establishing causality between variables. In a controlled study, the sample or population is split in two, with both groups being comparable in almost every way. The two groups then receive different treatments, and the outcomes of each group are assessed."

Source: Statistical Language - Correlation and Causation.

So you are correct that I didn't do that, because it would be unethical, but I still think there is no room for reasonable denial that indoctrinating a people with the view that God wants them to kill those who convert away will result in murder.

That it is a causal factor is simply obvious.

In my opinion.

Making an assertion like "simply obvious" is not making any kind of case for causation. Indoctrination to murder in the name of God can be a tool, just like indoctrinating people murder for a Leninist cause built on an atheistic worldview as an example. It's statically invalid, as well as being qualitatively absurd. There is no proper case for that. You can preach it. It's your religious belief.

 

[danieldemol]

It's statically invalid, as well as being qualitatively absurd.

Do you understand the fancy words you're using?

If so please provide a definition of each then relate its meaning back to your original sentences.

In my opinion.

 

[firedragon]

Do you understand the fancy words you're using?

If so please provide a definition of each then relate its meaning back to your original sentences.

In my opinion.

You mean you got affected by statements like "Statistically"?

No problem. There is a well researched book written by two gentlemen called Charles & Alan. It is called the encyclopaedia of wars. According to that the number of religiously motivated wars are only 7% of all wars recorded in history at the time they wrote it.

Do you need more?

 

[danieldemol]

You mean you got affected by statements like "Statistically"?

No problem. There is a well researched book written by two gentlemen called Charles & Alan. It is called the encyclopaedia of wars. According to that the number of religiously motivated wars are only 7% of all wars recorded in history at the time they wrote it.

Do you need more?

So there was a typo in there, you said statically.

Talking about wars when we were talking about murders is shifting the goal posts.

In my opinion

 

[robocop (actually)]

Whats more important, religion or people?

If people are more important (which I personally assert that they are) then it is only logical that an empath should feel more empathy for the victims of religion (such as the LGBT community) than for the people who have their religions critiqued.

But if you feel that religions are important more than people are feel free to justify your position to do so (no I'm not forcing you to justify your position by asking you to).

In my opinion.

I'd say people are more important.

Jesus said man was not made for the Sabbath the Sabbath was made for man.

 

[firedragon]

So there was a typo in there, you said statically.

Ah. Thats what you meant? Apologies about that.

Jesus said man was not made for the Sabbath the Sabbath was made for man.

Can you prove Jesus said that?

 

[robocop (actually)]

Ah. Thats what you meant? Apologies about that.



Can you prove Jesus said that?

Well, it's in Matthew, Mark and Luke.

 

[firedragon]

Well, it's in Matthew, Mark and Luke.

Haha. I didn't; ask a Christian that question. I asked an anti religion preacher who claims religions cause murder. The Christian debate can be kept to another thread. Hope you understand.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Religion is all about people, Loving and serving each other.

IMHO, Many religions are more than that. They are about their particular brand of God, prophets, sons of God, messengers, manifestations and Mahdis.

There is no doubt about that ChristineM. A definite sign that change is required.

Surely, a change is required, and not a repetition, IMHO.

 

[PruePhillip]

Whats more important, religion or people?

If people are more important (which I personally assert that they are) then it is only logical that an empath should feel more empathy for the victims of religion (such as the LGBT community) than for the people who have their religions critiqued.

But if you feel that religions are important more than people are feel free to justify your position to do so (no I'm not forcing you to justify your position by asking you to).

In my opinion.

Been wondering - what's more important, mothers or people?
What a strange question. It comes across as a false dichotomy

 

[danieldemol]

Haha. I didn't; ask a Christian that question. I asked an anti religion preacher who claims religions cause murder. The Christian debate can be kept to another thread. Hope you understand.

You seem confused, I'm not an anti-religion in general preacher and I'm only saying some religions cause murder, which is obviously true.

In my opinion.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Been wondering - what's more important, mothers or people?
What a strange question. It comes across as a false dichotomy

As per Lord Rama, mother is more important.
"Janani, janmabhoomishcha swargadapi gariyasi"
(Mother and motherland are more important than heaven).
A major guiding principle in Hinduism. No mother denial.

 

[danieldemol]

Been wondering - what's more important, mothers or people?

That would be an apt analogy if religions were people, they are not.

What a strange question. It comes across as a false dichotomy

In the original context I was essentially meaning to raise the question whether we should direct our empathies towards protecting the religion from criticism over protecting the victims of religion where there is a conflict between the two, but I can see I should have made that clearer.

 

[firedragon]

You seem confused, I'm not an anti-religion in general preacher and I'm only saying some religions cause murder, which is obviously true.

In my opinion.

Forget "in general". Lets take about this particular thread only. You have been preaching that religions cause murder. You even claimed that you have proven there is a causal link between religion and murder. You so far have not given any proof of that but just your preaching. So far. That does not mean you have no proof, maybe you do. But you have not given any evidence.

You speak of evidence, science, and all kinds of things but that's not relevant to this thread where you are not being scientific or giving any evidence.

 

[danieldemol]

Forget "in general". Lets take about this particular thread only. You have been preaching that religions cause murder.

*sigh* I have been preaching that *some* religions cause murder. Does leaving out important qualifiers strike you as an honest productive conversation?

You even claimed that you have proven there is a causal link between religion and murder.

Sure, and then I acknowledged I hadn't after looking it up.

Does failure to acknowledge that I learnt from my mistake strike you as an honest productive conversation?

You speak of evidence, science, and all kinds of things but that's not relevant to this thread where you are not being scientific or giving any evidence.

To be scientific in this instance would be unethical since we would have to take two identical groups, indoctrinate one of the groups to murder its apostates then measure the comparative murder rate.

To be logical on the other hand is a much easier hurdle to cross ethically since it is only logical that if one is indoctrinated to believe it is God ordained morality to murder apostates it is more likely one will attempt to murder apostates were it is in their power to do so.

In my opinion.

 

[InChrist]

Whats more important, religion or people?

If people are more important (which I personally assert that they are) then it is only logical that an empath should feel more empathy for the victims of religion (such as the LGBT community) than for the people who have their religions critiqued.

But if you feel that religions are important more than people are feel free to justify your position to do so (no I'm not forcing you to justify your position by asking you to).

In my opinion.

I think people are certainly more important. Jesus came to save people from the bondage of sin and provide eternal life.

 

[PruePhillip]

That would be an apt analogy if religions were people, they are not.

We can also speak of the VICTIMS OF A POST RELIOUS SOCIETY as well.
In 1900 there was great optimism in Europe - the end of monarchy and religion, and the rise of a rational and enlightened world.
About quarter of a billion people died in secular wars, re-education camps, pogroms, final solutions, cultural revolutions and concentration camps.