Why NOT Religion

[Kenny]

Stalin, Mao, and other "atheists" did not do what they did because of atheism. They did what they did because of another ideology called "Communism." Their lack of belief in God was absolutely beside the point. Torquemada did what he did entirely because of his religious belief.

Two can play that game.

The Catholic Inquisition didn't do it because of religious beliefs, they did it because of their political and power ideology and the lust thereof. They used religion as the tool for their ideology.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Two can play that game.

The Catholic Inquisition didn't do it because of religious beliefs, they did it because of their political and power ideology and the lust thereof. They used religion as the tool for their ideology.

In the context of this thread, you might come to regret that admission....

 

[Kenny]

In the context of this thread, you might come to regret that admission....

What? Admitting that, like atheists, religious people kill?

That's a given and historical.

But not to forget or omit, as you have so conveniently done to your detriment, that "Yes Religion" has also saved millions more!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What? Admitting that, like atheists, religious people kill?

That's a given and historical.

But not to forget or omit, as you have so conveniently done to your detriment, that "Yes Religion" has also saved millions more!

So has Medecins Sans Frontiers, and they explicitly precludes political, economic, or religious factors.

But why don't we make a game of it, Ken. Let's try to list all the lives that, as you say "religion has saved," and compare that to all the lives that religion has killed. Then let's list all the lives that atheism has saved and killed, so long as we can show that it was the atheism that was the impetus for the good or bad deed. And, of course, so long as we can show that "religion" was the impetus, as well. Got to be fair.

But on that note of how "religion has saved millions more," another of my dislikes (returning to the context of this thread) is the supposed good works of Mother Teresa, who liked to prolong the agony of terminal patients and denying them pain relief, so she could "offer their suffering as a gift" to her god. She, by the way, wasn't in the least interested in healing or cures, only in suffering.

 

[Kenny]

But on that note of how "religion has saved millions more," another of my dislikes (returning to the context of this thread) is the supposed good works of Mother Teresa, who liked to prolong the agony of terminal patients and denying them pain relief, so she could "offer their suffering as a gift" to her god. She, by the way, wasn't in the least interested in healing or cures, only in suffering.

You mean like atheist Biologist and Professor who took sadistic pleasure out of his research,.

After all " " if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?”.

 

[Kenny]

But why don't we make a game of it, Ken. Let's try to list all the lives that, as you say "religion has saved," and compare that to all the lives that religion has killed. Then let's list all the lives that atheism has saved and killed, so long as we can show that it was the atheism that was the impetus for the good or bad deed. And, of course, so long as we can show that "religion" was the impetus, as well. Got to be fair.

You really haven't convinced me that atheism wasn't the impetus for the murdering of millions.

Let me ask you a question... would they have done exactly the same had they believed in a God?

 

[Augustus]

Let's try to list all the lives that, as you say "religion has saved," and compare that to all the lives that religion has killed.

Religion of some generic kind was likely necessary to create larger scale societies, and larger scale societies were necessary for technological and economic development, and technological and economic development was necessary for improvements in living standards, etc...

Then again large scale societies and technological development led to large scale wars, etc.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You mean like atheist Biologist and Professor who took sadistic pleasure out of his research,.

After all " " if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?”.

Then I ask you again, very directly. Answer your own question: if you ever come to doubt the existence of god, will you stop modifying your behaviour and run off and rape and kill? Why or why not?

And please answer this question, while you are at it. Why do I, an avowed atheist, try to harm no one, and why does Bill Gates, also an atheist, donate literally billions of dollars to helping his fellow man? Or Andrew Carnegie, also an atheist and one of the greatest philanthropists in history, or....

Oh, never mind. You are never going to accept that people who lack your religious beliefs can be good, and people who share your religious beliefs can be bad, but that in the end, it is ideologies (including religious beliefs) which have done the most harm to humanity throughout history. Ideologies that do not stand up to reason, but insist on their doctrinaire correctness anyway.

But I still would really like answers to the questions I asked, and not your usual glib evasions.

if you ever come to doubt the existence of god, will you stop modifying your behaviour and run off and rape and kill? Why or why not?

And why do atheists donate billions of dollars to humanitarian causes, rather than using their money and power to hurt everybody they can?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You really haven't convinced me that atheism wasn't the impetus for the murdering of millions.

Let me ask you a question... would they have done exactly the same had they believed in a God?

Why not? Torquemada did. Louis XIV did. Mary Tudor and her father, Henry VIII did, and they all very seriously believed in God.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

After all, I'm a critical thinker.

You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[InChrist]

Since the question "why religion" has been asked, I think it not inappropriate to begin a thread of my own, suggesting some (perhaps many, who knows how long I'll continue) some of the reasons that I sincerely do not like religion, and give others the chance to say why they do not.

Please feel free to tell me when you think I'm dead wrong, but ONLY if you are prepared to back up your criticism with a fact-based argument.

So, here are a few of my arguments, just to get things going:

• The discouragement of rational, critical thought. Christianity in particular discourages critical thinking. In essence, it makes people less intelligent by telling them that faith is just as good, or better, than arriving at a conclusion through deductive reasoning and evidence
  
• Nearly all religions treat homosexuality, a natural variation in orientation, as sinful and anathema, resulting in discrimination, parents disowning their children, murder, and suicide … I can give evidence of all of these
• People dying because they believe their faith makes them immune to snake venom, or other lethal aspects of reality, and also dying – and letting their children die – because their religion forbids accepting medical help. Other deaths have been caused by people being choked, starved, poisoned, or beaten to death during exorcisms.
• Genital mutilation of babies or (worse) youths (male and female) for nothing but religious reasons
• Genuine psychological conditions not being properly treated, because they're blamed on "demons," resulting in avoidance of proper medical care
• Otherwise good people disowning their own families, or disfellowshipping or shunning members of their own communities over differences in religious opinion.
• Insistence on “Abstinence-only” sex education, which cause far more STDs and unwed pregnancies than necessary...and often resulting in soul-destroying shot-gun marriages
• Forcing women into life-threatening abortions by refusing to allow therapeutic abortions when they are genuinely appropriate, and the best solution in the circumstances
• Women treated like second-class citizens based on religious teachings
• The destruction of great works of art considered to be pornographic/blasphemous, e.g. Bamiyan Buddha's
  
• Children traumatized by vivid stories of eternal burning and torture to ensure that they’ll be too frightened to even question religion
  
• Natural disasters and other tragedies being used to claim God is displeased with something or other, thus encouraging people to seek out that "something or other" and whack it (see Pat Robertson on Hurricane Katrina)

That will do to be going on with. I've lots and lots more, but I'll bet others can contribute to the list.

I believe religions(s) have been inspired by satan as a diversionary tactic, an allurement to human pride, and a divisive distraction from a loving relationship between humanity and the Creator God and with one another.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Why not? Torquemada did. Louis XIV did. Mary Tudor and her father, Henry VIII did, and they all very seriously believed in God.

The implication is always that atheism includes a lack of morals. The reality is that most US prisons are filled with generally conservative prisoners that believe in God.

There is no evidence that atheists have no morals or reject morals. In fact, some of the most moral people I know is a group that includes a large number of atheists.

I think that fundamentalism of any sort is the real killer and even the parent religion is a victim. Fundamentalism is rife with a lack of critical thinking. Critical thinking is discouraged and is replaced by such lovely ideas as the prosperity doctrine.

 

[Kenny]

Then I ask you again, very directly. Answer your own question: if you ever come to doubt the existence of god, will you stop modifying your behaviour and run off and rape and kill? Why or why not?

I would go back to abortion on demand.

And please answer this question, while you are at it. Why do I, an avowed atheist, try to harm no one, and why does Bill Gates, also an atheist, donate literally billions of dollars to helping his fellow man? Or Andrew Carnegie, also an atheist and one of the greatest philanthropists in history, or....

I never said all atheists kill or don't give. Yet you have a problem with admitting how many religious people save lives and only put down those things that PEOPLE do wrong.. Isn't that a hypocritical position?

And if Bill Gates gives, great. So did R.G. LeTourneau. I think he gave 90% and lived off of 10%.

So, is this suppose to be, "My faith is bigger that your faith", comparison?

Sheesh!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Religion of some generic kind was likely necessary to create larger scale societies, and larger scale societies were necessary for technological and economic development, and technological and economic development was necessary for improvements in living standards, etc...

Then again large scale societies and technological development led to large scale wars, etc.

Good insights. You really ought to read Yuval Noah Harari (Sapiens, Homo Deus, etc.). Also amazing insights.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Maybe it was for the reasons you stated that Mao Zedong, Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, et al did what they did.

It reminds me of another atheist, serial killerJeffrey Dahmer sentenced to 900 years in prison, who said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?”.

So in your considered opinion as a psychiatrist, the root cause of Dahmer's serial homocidal behavior was his atheism and not his radical sociopathy that appears to be the result of damaged mind?

Or could it be that surface appearances are more useful in painting the picture you want and not the actual facts that would tell a different story?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

@Ken, as much as you really enjoy derailing any topic to get it back into territory that you feel comfortable in, would you please get back to the points I made in the OP. There are a dozen of them, and I added another for a baker's dozen just a few minutes ago. Please try, in spite of your natural proclivities for subterfuge, try to stay on point for just a little bit.

 

[Kenny]

@Ken, as much as you really enjoy derailing any topic to get it back into territory that you feel comfortable in, would you please get back to the points I made in the OP. There are a dozen of them, and I added another for a baker's dozen just a few minutes ago. Please try, in spite of your natural proclivities for subterfuge, try to stay on point for just a little bit.

I just thought your OP was VERY one-sided and biased. (not that it didn't have some valid points, mind you).

but I did:

#14

Besides, I have critically thought and discussed with you up until now.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

The implication is always that atheism includes a lack of morals. The reality is that most US prisons are filled with generally conservative prisoners that believe in God.

There is no evidence that atheists have no morals or reject morals. In fact, some of the most moral people I know is a group that includes a large number of atheists.

I think that fundamentalism of any sort is the real killer and even the parent religion is a victim. Fundamentalism is rife with a lack of critical thinking. Critical thinking is discouraged and is replaced by such lovely ideas as the prosperity doctrine.

I think I have a new favorite bunny.

Bugs doesn't have too many cartoons anymore, anyhow.

 

[Enoch07]

The points of the OP were not properly refuted.

The points of the OP are opinion.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

What was good for the goose is good for the gander.

I could go on about atheists Napoleon Bonaparte and Alfred Kinsey too. Why don't you mention those?

Don't know who Alfred Kinsey is. Napoleon was a Christian, not an atheist, and is famous for his quote stating that Jesus was more than a man and Christianity is infinitely better than all other religions. Also don't forget Hitler who proudly declared Jesus to be his "lord and savior." Of course, his heinous actions certainly were close to opposite the behavior of Jesus but he was a professing Christian nonetheless.