| Author |
Message
|
| Sciler |
 Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 1:27 am Post subject: religion? |
 |
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 10 May 2008
Posts: 41
Location: UK
|
I think religion is the ulitmate form of personal freedom.
It dosnt matter how much proof one way or the other, people will still belive what they belive  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Hanuka |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Masters Degree
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 535
Location: The 10th Kingdom xD
|
On the contrary, if you speak of orgenised religion it is all BUT personal freedom.
I think that u've misteaken atheism for theism...
Name ONE thing at orgenised religion that you do without any realation the the main stream??
_________________
Good Brother
~~~~~~~~~~
If I were a rich man - Yubby dibby dibby dibby dibby dibby dibby dum...
All day long I'd biddy biddy bum.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mitchellmckain |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 1848
Location: Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
|
| Hanuka wrote: |
On the contrary, if you speak of orgenised religion it is all BUT personal freedom.
I think that u've misteaken atheism for theism...
Name ONE thing at orgenised religion that you do without any realation the the main stream?? |
On the contrary I think you have both mistaken religion and atheism for an internet forum - that is absolute freedom transcending everything including rationality and consistency where people can pretend that their opinions are science even if it contradicts itself. It is like living in a dream world.
_________________
See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cosmo |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 6:09 am Post subject: Re: religion? |
|
|
Forum Masters Degree
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 509
|
| Sciler wrote: |
I think religion is the ulitmate form of personal freedom.
It dosnt matter how much proof one way or the other, people will still belive what they belive |
Religion does NOT promote freedom. On the contrary, it suppresses freedom.
The 1st 3 commandments in the Old Testament says that.
Only Nature grants total freedom. It has no laws governing 'biological' freedom.
See my article on this 'Religion' page below entitled 'Nature as GOD'.
Cosmo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 1124
|
| mitchellmckain wrote: |
| On the contrary I think you have both mistaken religion and atheism for an internet forum |
LOL. Your wit gives pleasure at every turn.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| daytonturner |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 950
Location: Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
|
Cosmo said:
| Quote: |
Religion does NOT promote freedom. On the contrary, it suppresses freedom.
The 1st 3 commandments in the Old Testament says that.
Only Nature grants total freedom. It has no laws governing 'biological' freedom.
See my article on this 'Religion' page below entitled 'Nature as GOD'. |
I'm sorry Cosmo, but can you name any human institution which does not in some way restrict or make demands on your conduct?
My experience with people who object to the restrictive or compelling code of conduct expressed in the Bible is that they really only object to two things -- a. those things relating to sexual conduct; b. those things which may relate to mind altering materials.
And this is in spite of civil, non-religious, codes of conduct which regulate those same topics.
Nature is, in a sense, totally free in that animals can go out and have sex in front of God and everybody. I am unaware of an civilized group which finds this conduct acceptable. In nature, other animals just stop wherever they are and take care of eliminating body fluids and solids. Surely, Cosmo does not think this is acceptable behavior for humans. If so, he will never be a guest at my house!
I have no idea how the first three commandments (I assume he is referencing the 10 Commandments) have anything with supressing human activity. What they say is that 1. we should recognize God as the only God; 2. We should not attempt to make images of Him to worship instead of Him. 3. We should not disrespect God by vainly invoking His name in our own behalf.
Since Cosmo is, apparently, an atheist, I cannot imagine how these three things could, in anyway, impose on Cosmo. What can Cosmo possibly be doing that these commands restrict? The only way they could impose is if Cosmo agrees that these are good ideas, but insists on defying them anyway and realizes that doing so subject him (Cosmo) to God's wrath.
In nature, other animals are free to kill or be killed as they will. Surely, Cosmo does not feel this is a good idea for civilized humans -- especially if he were the intended victim of someone wishing to exercise his natural freedom to kill.
Maybe Cosmo needs to put a little more thought into this.
_________________
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein
If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:46 am Post subject: Re: religion? |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1355
|
| Sciler wrote: |
I think religion is the ulitmate form of personal freedom.
It dosnt matter how much proof one way or the other, people will still belive what they belive |
Of course, people are indoctrinated into cults from early childhood. It isn't personal freedom by any means, it is intellectual slavery and abuse at the very least.
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| daytonturner |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 950
Location: Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
|
There you go again, (Q), showing your ignorance about religion.
Christian churches (in the U.S.) have, for the last 25 years or so, complained about how upwards of 75 to 90 percent of young people leave the church once they leave home.
This does not sound like effective indoctrination to me. At the same time, they are also being indoctrinated by a secular school system.
The next statistic is that overall church attendance has not substantially decreased in that same period of time.
These two ideas would seem to be contradictory. How can such a high percentage of people leave the church without substantially affecting attendance?
The suspected answer is that once these young people have been out in the world and found how shallow and meaningless the secular world is, they return to that which has meaning and purpose on an eternal scale.
Your claim that the religious (at least in Western Culture) are the products of indoctrination is unfounded and ignorant.
_________________
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein
If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| 425 Chaotic Requisition |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:43 am Post subject: Re: religion? |
|
|
The Doctor
Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 3147
Location: Now
|
| Sciler wrote: |
I think religion is the ulitmate form of personal freedom.
It dosnt matter how much proof one way or the other, people will still belive what they belive |
It can be, but it can be a lifelong imprisonment, and it is for many people forced into it against their will.
_________________
An apple a day... Oh never mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Robbie |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Masters Degree
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 584
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
The right to religion I would agree is the ultimate freedom to think as you please. However religion itself, I feel sets out to restrict not to free, so I dont know about that.
A more existential philosophy is more free by definition!
_________________
There is not enough love & kindness in the world to permit us give it away to imaginary beings.
Nietzsche |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| daytonturner |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 950
Location: Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
|
Chaotic said:
| Quote: |
| It can be, but it can be a lifelong imprisonment, and it is for many people forced into it against their will. |
and Robbie said:
| Quote: |
However religion itself, I feel sets out to restrict not to free, so I dont know about that. |
Where are you guys getting this silly crap?
Where in western civilization are people systematically being forced into religion and being coerced to stay there? The idea may be true in Islamic and Hundu societies, but it is hardly a problem here in the West especially as it relates to Christianity which is usually the main object of derision by posters here.
There may be some fringe sects claiming Christianity which may use coercion to attract and retain members, but they are not the rule. It is unfair, if not illogical, to judge the majority by practices of the few. If you wish to make such outlandish generalized claims, it would behoove you to point out specifically which religions you are referring to.
And -- what restrictions does Christianity have? I know of no church which has the legal authority to send members to prison or to fine them for violations of Bible concepts. Christians are probably guilty of everything non-Christians are guilty of. They haven't been "restricted" at all.
If one chooses to belong to a group, one also chooses to follow the rules of that group. If you join a basketball league, you agree to follow the rules of basketball. Are you "restricted" because you don't get points when you freely shoot the ball and miss the hoop?
Do you belong to any organizations? Do they require dues? Do they have by-laws. To they hold meetings which you are expected to attend? Why do you put up with such restrictions?
If you wish to belong to that group, you do as that group does, not because you feel you are being restricted or coerced, but because you are willing to do (or refrain from doing) the things required to remain a part of that group.
Honestly, what human institution can you be involved with that does not include some degree of behavioral expectations. The only place you can be totally free to do whatever you want, whenever you want and however you want is in an isolated vacuum. That is the life you seek?
Christians do not feel "restricted" or coerced by the behavioral expectations of God. They, to the extent they follow, do so out of willingness to do so and desire to please God.
If you don't want any restrictions, find some uninhabited island and populate it.
_________________
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein
If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| verzen |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 203
|
Day, it's called "Indoctrination"...
The majority of parents who are of a certain religion bring up kids to be part of that religion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1355
|
| daytonturner wrote: |
| There you go again, (Q), showing your ignorance about religion. |
For you to say that is quite funny considering the numerous times I've corrected you on your own religion. But, we digress...
| Quote: |
Christian churches (in the U.S.) have, for the last 25 years or so, complained about how upwards of 75 to 90 percent of young people leave the church once they leave home.
This does not sound like effective indoctrination to me. |
It doesn't sound like an effective argument to me. Did they become atheists when they left home? Probably not. Indoctrination is effective.
| Quote: |
| At the same time, they are also being indoctrinated by a secular school system. |
Spoken straight from the pulpit. Didn't like school much, Dayton?
| Quote: |
The next statistic is that overall church attendance has not substantially decreased in that same period of time.
These two ideas would seem to be contradictory. How can such a high percentage of people leave the church without substantially affecting attendance? |
Simple. They were indoctrinated. They were unable to relinquish their religious beliefs as a result.
| Quote: |
The suspected answer is that once these young people have been out in the world and found how shallow and meaningless the secular world is, they return to that which has meaning and purpose on an eternal scale.
Your claim that the religious (at least in Western Culture) are the products of indoctrination is unfounded and ignorant. |
The obvious answer is that they never gave up their beliefs after all only to continue that which they never really left in the first place.
Besides, if the vast population are theists, and theists have ruled for centuries, invoking their religious beliefs in almost every aspect of society, where are these young people finding these so called shallow and meaningless secular worlds?
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| (Q) |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 1355
|
| daytonturner wrote: |
Where are you guys getting this silly crap?
Where in western civilization are people systematically being forced into religion and being coerced to stay there? |
At home, from the cradle.
_________________
I may have no understanding of the current theory of evolution. But that's because science keeps changing it. A few weeks ago I read in the newspaper that it had once again been adjusted & just the other day I discovered a new book called "The New Theory of Evolution" ~~Steven Titchenell : W.V.B.I.G. President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| daytonturner |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 950
Location: Beautiful Pacific Northwest, USA
|
verzen says:
| Quote: |
Day, it's called "Indoctrination"...
The majority of parents who are of a certain religion bring up kids to be part of that religion. |
My observation is that when people are being taught that with which we agree, it is instruction. When they are being taught that with which we do not agree, it is indoctrination.
I do not disagree that Christian parents would introduce their children to Christianity. Some such children become Christians, some don't. Same from secular families. Some of those children grow up to remain secular and others find religion. Children brought up on Republican homes tend to turn out to be Republicans while those brought up in Democrat homes tend to remain Democrats. (Tories and Labor to you Brits?) Those brought up in liberal homes tend to end up liberal while those growing up in conservative homes usually remain conservative. Does it occur to you that when parents are professional people, their children usually end up as professionals, too. For centuries, sons were brought up to follow in their fathers' footsteps.
So why is it that it is only when children emulate their parents in deciding to follow Jesus, that they are the products of indoctrination? One can only wonder in what ways people complaining about indoctrination have emulated their parents.
(Q) asked:
| Quote: |
| where are these young people finding these so called shallow and meaningless secular worlds? |
How about those in close proximatey to you? You seem to personify those qualities.
_________________
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein
If God DID do all of this, is He not the greatest scientist of all? -- dt, 2005 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
