Religion, will it have a role in Society and Politics in the future?

[cybercoma]

It was not a blasphemy. The scientific community of the time were the ones who were outraged about that, moreso than the church.

So what? That means nothing in regards to the Church stifling scientific progress throughout history.

[jefferiah]

If he's spending his existence as though we don't exist, then why are people even bothering killing one another to uphold their vision of what God wants?

Cybercoma why do you keep beating up little children and old ladies? Seriously, do you think that is what most people think God wants. When Church gets out on Sunday do you usually have to hide from the people who come out with machine guns and machetes to reak havoc on the non-believers?

[jefferiah]

So what? That means nothing in regards to the Church stifling scientific progress throughout history.

So what? What does that have to do with God? So has atheist communism impeded truth. And it has put to death its own moreso than Christianity. Do you judge all atheists by this?

[maxsyno]

"No, that's a good example. I understand what you mean. But what if the persons faith is one where they believe God is in control of everything all the time?"

Indeed! But then why would have have the innate ability to be able to work things out? Surely it would be pointless?

Why would be have bothered to harness say the 'magic' of electricity, to split the atom and more. Humanity has a natural gift of curiosity which is the help we need in fathoming out the universe. Some have argued it is the 'god' within each of us all. I would not argue with that id god was a term that substituted the word 'curiosity or reason . . .

"Or they could say that God planned the other persons day in such a way that their circumstances would have them drive down this road and this certain time and help the person with the broken down car."

Yes they could say all this. However, they could never fathom it out of reason. They only could 'apply' a 'convenient' explanation to 'cater' for their 'faith based beliefs' where reason and logic do not apply. We could 'rationally' argue faith and beleif to be a prime example of our 'wishing' to have the autonomy our minds and hearts are really all about.

"But then if that was the case, then God could have just allowed the car not to break down in the first place...unless the person believed their was a lesson to be learned."

As is often the case. This excuse allows faith to continue so that we can all qualify as blameless for the outcome of world/environmental events. That is "god must have a reason for allowing starvation and more to occur repeatedly through our existence.

"Like they were supposed to take better care of their car for a worse time...or maybe decide to get a cell phone, or learn some mechanical skills for that reason or another.

I would say those are reasonable situations.

Or the person can also believe that God does not have a direct hand in the outcome of the situation, and doesn't always work in every little problem, and this is something the person has to resolve and just consider an unfortunate set of circumstances. That makes sense, and you can still believe in God".

"I still think faith and reason can work".

I suppose so. I have faith that when a plug is put into a socket an electrical device will work otherwise it is a useless device. I have faith because I do not know how it is harnessed. I also do not know how the correct current is filtered and more, but yes I do know it will work (faith based . . .kind of).

People also have 'faith' in the law. But at least they have something concrete to argue or ammend. THe existence of god is fraught with problems. I wonder why any such creature would hide evidence? Why would such an entity not reveal itself clearly in order to at least stop the devastation that believing in it has caused.

One thing we can say is that the 'belief' is a real presence due to the consequences reaped 'over it'. It is thereby a social phenonema. Nature however is 'immune to what we think about it, our beliefs and so fourth. It is not immune to our actions as we can see. The only 'gods' we have on the planet are ourselves which are accountable.

[jefferiah]

[

One thing we can say is that the 'belief' is a real presence due to the consequences reaped 'over it'. It is thereby a social phenonema.

But I would bet that the vast majority of people who have this belief are not harming you in any way whatsoever.

[SVTman]

personally i think that the more we try and get rid of religion in politics the more we are going to put it in. No matter how hard we try and get away from it this nation was founded by a people that was religious. and i am not talking about the founding fathers i am talking about the people who came here from over seas. it wasn't the founding fathers that started public schools it was that little towns springing up all over and it was so that they could teach children how to read so that they could read, you guessed it, the bible. no matter how hard we try it will always be a part of this country.

[Higgly]

Religion is demagogic, not democratic.

When was the last time a religious leader asked you what you thought?

Piss on reiligion. Give me democracy.

[Posit]

Religion is demagogic, not democratic.

When was the last time a religious leader asked you what you thought?

Piss on reiligion. Give me democracy.

When was the last time a politician asked you what you thought? Even during election campaigns they are quick to tell you what THEY think.

[RedDaVinci]

Religion is demagogic, not democratic.

When was the last time a religious leader asked you what you thought?

Piss on reiligion. Give me democracy.

When was the last time a politician asked you what you thought? Even during election campaigns they are quick to tell you what THEY think.

I'm having trouble telling the difference from democracy and "demagogracy" these days. Have you seen the states? Practically a two-party system. It's really sad.

[Moxie]

I'm having trouble telling the difference from democracy and "demagogracy" these days. Have you seen the states? Practically a two-party system. It's really sad.

Off topic, please try to stay focused Dear, it's about Religion not a two party system. In Canada we could do very well without the Bloc and the NDP.

Higgly you are the only person to post a post that is offensive to those that are Religious, why must you be such a nasty pig? Higgly your remark was and is offensive, I started this debate to discuss the role of religion in our society not to offend people who are deeply religious. I have nothing but respect for religious people, dispite the scorn and ridicule hurled at them on "Forums" they stay true to their faith. I admire that trait, I also admire their morals, values and honour. I can't say the same thing about the far leftards like you.

Try and stay on topic and for ONCE post something constructive and not insultive to most of the members here. You can easily unite the moderate right and left, you are as bad as that nutbar Queen thing whatever.

[maxsyno]

Yes, that is true. Although I don't think it will ever die, but I think it will adapt. I think it has always been adapting since it's been around, with so many changes the world has been going through. Especially the past 100 years, Christianity has been changing a lot in North America as far as I know. But not the morals and faith itself, but the religion will adapt, and the way people might practice it.

Yes, I think that it always adapts. It seems to keep itself in allignment with politcal and ethical issues often brought about by media scandels, politicical representations/sales pitch, combined with such things as abortion rights, gay rights and more. I would guess that if we were to look at the most recent history of US and Canadian cultural trends we'd find that Western christianity would have got itself involved in the key elements of changing from cultural standpoint to another. For the very survival of christianity itself would surely depend upon it otherwise its power would diminish.

[cybercoma]

Cybercoma why do you keep beating up little children and old ladies? Seriously, do you think that is what most people think God wants. When Church gets out on Sunday do you usually have to hide from the people who come out with machine guns and machetes to reak havoc on the non-believers?

It depends on what country I'm in and in the US it depends on what state I'm in.

[cybercoma]

So what? What does that have to do with God? So has atheist communism impeded truth. And it has put to death its own moreso than Christianity. Do you judge all atheists by this?

Could you explain what atheism has to do with communism? I'm a little confused since one is a political school of thought and the other is an absence of belief in deities.

[cybercoma]

I have nothing but respect for religious people, dispite the scorn and ridicule hurled at them on "Forums" they stay true to their faith. I admire that trait, I also admire their morals, values and honour.

If by scorn and ridicule you mean people asking for reason and evidence regarding their beliefs, then I can't say that I agree with the respect part. Religious types sticking to their "faith" despite overwhelming lack of evidence for their chosen dogma is not something that should be respected, but frowned upon, like it is in every other aspect of life.

Imagine if your doctor chose a treatment for you because he has "faith" that it will work, rather than using reason and judgment, would that be at all acceptable? What if scientists refused to consider contradictory views in their research? What if politicians could use "faith" to defend their positions, rather than reason?

It's a terrible trait and I don't believe morals and values are intrinsic to religious thought. In fact, recent studies have shown that morals and values may be common between cultures and altruism may also be exhibited in the animal kingdom, as well.

Morals, values and honour have nothing to do with the religious trait of bullheaded stubbornness and unwillingness to consider ideas that contradict their perceptions of God. And, no, that trait is not an admirable trait that should be passed on from generation to generation because it is detrimental to society. It stifles open-mindedness and co-operation between peoples.

And before you even suggest that atheism is the same type of bullheaded stubbornness, do understand that it is a conclusions reached based on considering the existence of a deity (a consideration of the absolute opposing view -- something the religious fail to do -- to the atheist conclusion) and finding no reason to believe in it based on the complete lack of persuasive evidence.

(edited to make it easier to read, since I'm an uneducated oaf)

Edited November 11, 2007 by cybercoma

[RedDaVinci]

Could you explain what atheism has to do with communism? I'm a little confused since one is a political school of thought and the other is an absence of belief in deities.

I think he's referring to one of Marx' theories, that "Religion is the opiate of the masses" or something like that.

And in history, Communist Russia (I don't know about China) made atheism mandatory at some point... I don't know when, but I'm guessing it was right after Stalin.

[cybercoma]

The things Stalin did were hardly because of atheism. He didn't do the things he did because he was an atheist, meanwhile, the religious fanatics (with special reverence for their beliefs being demanded by the moderates) do the things they do because of their religions.

When a family in the middle east murders their daughter because the guy she's seeing is of a different religion, it's hard to blame that on anything else aside from religion. People in here seem to like to point the finger at "culture", but religion in those parts of the world are inseperable from their culture.

When homosexuals are made to feel like second rate citizens because their lifestyle is accused of being morally bankrupt by the religious (with no basis on fact or reason), not to mention when those of faith beat and murder homosexuals in the name of God, it's a little difficult to blame that on anything but religion.

Choosing not to ascribe to a religion as the reason for Stalin's atrocities is akin to blaming it on his mustache. Want evidence? Hitler had a mustache too. Let's blame it on that.

[jefferiah]

It depends on what country I'm in and in the US it depends on what state I'm in.

Oh puh-lease

[maxsyno]

"Morals, values and honour have nothing to do with the religious trait of bullheaded stubbornness and unwillingness to consider ideas that contradict their perceptions of God. And, no, that trait is not an admirable trait that should be passed on from generation to generation because it is detrimental to society. It stifles open-mindedness and co-operation between peoples".

This is akin to a breath of fresh air! Cool.

My cat was altruistic. She would deliver us mice and put them under the bed for us.