is religon trying to take over government?

[DarkAngel_]

does religon want the world?

is atheism a religon and is it trying as well?

is atheism the neutral ground between all faiths?

should their be a neutral ground between faiths?

is religon being the government (or controling it in any way), right?

i know it's contraversal but i see that; as no color, does that make it a color? and i qeustion it because i am sided by radicalistest that seem to want to have their religon on top.

[bradco]

1. the main religions want the world. Always have, always will. They might not even think that they do but their actions speak louder than their words. However, I shouldnt generalize to much. There are religous people who recognize the value of freedom and tolerance.

2. Religion as defined by wikipedia is "Religion is a system of social coherence based on a common group of beliefs or attitudes concerning an object, person, unseen being, or system of thought considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine or highest truth, and the moral codes, practices, values, institutions, and rituals associated with such belief or system of thought." Atheism does not fit this definition since an atheist would reject the "object,person,unforseen being,or system of thought considered to be supernatural". Atheism is more of a philosphy than a religion I guess. Maybe Im just splitting hairs...dunno. Of course aethiests try to exert their will on others. However I would argue that an aethiest is more prone to accepting religious beliefs than a religious person is to accepting aetheism. Aetheists will usually recognize that it is still a human that holds religious beliefs and accept their rights to do so.

3. No because aethiesm disputes the very existance of the gods that religions depend upon. The only neutral ground can be a recognition of each faiths right to exist. As far as public policy goes religion should not be considered and the inherent value in each person (regardless of race, language, religion, sexual preference etc) should be what determines freedoms.

4. Well what is the other option? No neutral ground means the inevitable clash of civilizations that has already begun. Am I talking too much like Samuel Huntington?

5. Lets look at all the religious governments currently existing today. Are any of them "right"? Ill let you answer that yourselves. Religous governments will never be able to provide true freedom because they will always be prone to forcing others to follow their religious way. Now some conservative folk are bound to respond that religous people are forced into being secular in our society. So I will preemptively call such comments rubbish. Freedom of religion is in the charter and is widely respected so dont play the poor oppressed religous card.

[jbg]

Even democratic governments are never free of religion. I would hope that the US does not take "G-d" off the currency or out of the "Pledge of Allegiance" (to the flag). While I am not Christian, Christianity forms an acceptable moral basis to the government.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

In my view true faith removes the need for government. Having said that there are far too few people of true faith to make that possibility a reality. Therefore society is fronted by government instead of religion.

[Figleaf]

Faith is a dead-end alley of the human mind, and clergy are the pipe-wielding thugs who inhabit it.

[kimmy]

does religon want the world?

Yes.

is atheism a religon and is it trying as well?

The belief that there's no god is as much taken on faith as the belief that there is one.

is atheism the neutral ground between all faiths?

No. Agnosticism-- the recognition that we don't know if there's a god, and that there's no way to know which of the religions, if any, hold the truth-- is the middle ground.

The agnostic looks at the Christian, and the Jew, and the Muslim, and the Buddhist, and the atheist, all equally, and says "I don't know if any of you are right."

should their be a neutral ground between faiths?

Yes. How can our society function if there isn't one?

is religon being the government (or controling it in any way), right?

No.

-k

[Leafless]

Most countries are built on religion and supported by their governments.

Canada is the only country in the WORLD that has an official multicultural policy in which the federal government no longer supports it's majority religion Christianity because of this policy.

When the government of a land purposely destroys it's majority religion because of it's inability to create meaningful investment and has to rely on pickpocketing ethnic small businessmen, you can be assured the country is in for serious problems.

[Figleaf]

[quot.

Edited July 18, 2007 by Figleaf

[DarkAngel_]

Most countries are built on religion and supported by their governments.

What exactly do you mean 'built on'? Most countries have a heritage that is permeated by the religious superstitions people within them historically held, so I suppose in that sense such societies as we find them today are colored by those religions. But most states in the world do no rely upon religious authority as a premise for the authority of the state.

the origin of government is obvios, and of religon, qeustionable, but if we had been ruled by the faiths would more be dead? or is it that heritics should be dead, i am one of many outcast in my community, but they at least accept it, but we still feel, unwelcome. what of religon do we beleive? that those of finding have found much to be proven, in evolution, in the origns of the universe and the science of existance. my qeustion is then, what in reality do you want guiding you, men or gods?

[Figleaf]

does religon want the world?

I don't understand that question.

is atheism a religon ... ?

No. It is an opinion ABOUT religion.

is atheism the neutral ground between all faiths?

No. There is no neutral ground between faiths.

should their be a neutral ground between faiths?

"Should" is irrelevant.

is religon being the government (or controling it in any way), right?

Certainly not. Religion is inherently unreasonable, and thus a bad way to make decisions.

[Figleaf]

my qeustion is then, what in reality do you want guiding you, men or gods?

The real choice your question amounts to is between men or men claiming gods' authority. Since the latter must be liars, I'd choose the former.

[DarkAngel_]

my qeustion is then, what in reality do you want guiding you, men or gods?

The real choice your question amounts to is between men or men claiming gods' authority. Since the latter must be liars, I'd choose the former.

my 1st qeustion is to the true power behind a church or religous orginization, the people, so is the faiths trying to get EVERYONE into their church, and is 1 of their tactics to take a small amount (or large) of control in our government.

[Figleaf]

my qeustion is then, what in reality do you want guiding you, men or gods?

The real choice your question amounts to is between men or men claiming gods' authority. Since the latter must be liars, I'd choose the former.

my 1st qeustion is to the true power behind a church or religous orginization, the people, so is the faiths trying to get EVERYONE into their church, and is 1 of their tactics to take a small amount (or large) of control in our government.

Some religions clearly want to have all people adhere to them, and some of them would like to use government control for their purposes. Some religions, however, don't have those drives.

[jefferiah]

my qeustion is then, what in reality do you want guiding you, men or gods?

The real choice your question amounts to is between men or men claiming gods' authority. Since the latter must be liars, I'd choose the former.

my 1st qeustion is to the true power behind a church or religous orginization, the people, so is the faiths trying to get EVERYONE into their church, and is 1 of their tactics to take a small amount (or large) of control in our government.

I think the question is too broad to be answered. I consider myself a Christian. I know alot of Christians are not political period. But some Christians are political. And some have Christian Politcal agendas. Some may have agendas simply to protect what they see as religious rights. Some may be all out for control. I dont know. But is religion trying to take over the government. You make "religion" sound like an actual living person. People believe in the seperation of church and state. But does this mean that people who are religious should be barred from politics. I dont know. Is there some conspiratorial effort among Christians to take over the government? They never told me about it anyway. I think Canada is pretty fair overall. I think there may be some political Christians who encourage other Christians to vote and to vote their conscience on certain issues. I dont see anything so wrong with that. Christians have a vote, and people and groups have the right to encourage them to vote a certain way for whatever reason they want. Do the Conservatives not have ads promoting their parties and promoting their stance on certain issues? And dont the Liberals have the same? Idealogy is not limited to religion. Socialism, classical liberalism, etc etc. All these are idealogies. All people to some degree want their own idealogies to succeed in the political world. But I dont think all people are trying to control everything or every aspect. I think for most Christians being politically active is like anyone else being politically active. They want representation. They want to maintain freedom of belief. JBG pointed out in another thread that a CBC forum banned the word Jew. You know, I am afraid of a world where freedom of belief will be passively opposed by Political Correctness. I strongly believe in the Church's freedom to not perform a gay marriage since it is against its own beliefs. You know it may sound ridiculous. But given the trends in thinking, I dont think it is unreasonable to assume that one day the refusal of the church to perform this may considered discrimination.

[jefferiah]

Faith is a dead-end alley of the human mind, and clergy are the pipe-wielding thugs who inhabit it.

Without faith you would not have a life. Science touts the scientific process. But some degree of faith is usally present in most scientific endeavours. Someone makes a theory. And then he tests to see if he is right. To take any possible scientific direction you most often have a reason for choosing it. You believe in some result. Its not eeny-meeny-miney-mo is it? Without faith everything could be a lie. All the people around you could be in a massive conspiracy to fool you. They could have made up all the history of the world. Everything could be an elaborate joke on you. Without faith nothing is worth a shot.

[Figleaf]

Faith is a dead-end alley of the human mind, and clergy are the pipe-wielding thugs who inhabit it.

Without faith you would not have a life.

That's ludicrous.

Science touts the scientific process. But some degree of faith is usally present in most scientific endeavours.

Not 'faith' of a religious kind. Scientists believe their methods will give correct information because science provides a method of generalizing from numerous specific cases and thereby determining probabilities. Science 'believes' it is probably right about things and is willing to be corrected. Religions believe they are right and are incapable of accepting correction. This is a fundamental qualitative difference.

[jefferiah]

Faith is a dead-end alley of the human mind, and clergy are the pipe-wielding thugs who inhabit it.

Without faith you would not have a life.

That's ludicrous.

Science touts the scientific process. But some degree of faith is usally present in most scientific endeavours.

Not 'faith' of a religious kind. Scientists believe their methods will give correct information because science provides a method of generalizing from numerous specific cases and thereby determining probabilities. Science 'believes' it is probably right about things and is willing to be corrected. Religions believe they are right and are incapable of accepting correction. This is a fundamental qualitative difference.

Hmmm....I think you probably dont realize how many things you yourself accept on faith without any real evidence.

[Figleaf]

Hmmm....I think you probably dont realize how many things you yourself accept on faith without any real evidence.

I think I do realize that, to an unusual extent. And I've knowingly and deliberately trained myself to recognize and avoid it.

[DarkAngel_]

my qeustion is then, what in reality do you want guiding you, men or gods?

The real choice your question amounts to is between men or men claiming gods' authority. Since the latter must be liars, I'd choose the former.

my 1st qeustion is to the true power behind a church or religous orginization, the people, so is the faiths trying to get EVERYONE into their church, and is 1 of their tactics to take a small amount (or large) of control in our government.

I think the question is too broad to be answered. I consider myself a Christian. I know alot of Christians are not political period. But some Christians are political. And some have Christian Politcal agendas. Some may have agendas simply to protect what they see as religious rights. Some may be all out for control. I dont know. But is religion trying to take over the government. You make "religion" sound like an actual living person. People believe in the seperation of church and state. But does this mean that people who are religious should be barred from politics. I dont know. Is there some conspiratorial effort among Christians to take over the government? They never told me about it anyway. I think Canada is pretty fair overall. I think there may be some political Christians who encourage other Christians to vote and to vote their conscience on certain issues. I dont see anything so wrong with that. Christians have a vote, and people and groups have the right to encourage them to vote a certain way for whatever reason they want. Do the Conservatives not have ads promoting their parties and promoting their stance on certain issues? And dont the Liberals have the same? Idealogy is not limited to religion. Socialism, classical liberalism, etc etc. All these are idealogies. All people to some degree want their own idealogies to succeed in the political world. But I dont think all people are trying to control everything or every aspect. I think for most Christians being politically active is like anyone else being politically active. They want representation. They want to maintain freedom of belief. JBG pointed out in another thread that a CBC forum banned the word Jew. You know, I am afraid of a world where freedom of belief will be passively opposed by Political Correctness. I strongly believe in the Church's freedom to not perform a gay marriage since it is against its own beliefs. You know it may sound ridiculous. But given the trends in thinking, I dont think it is unreasonable to assume that one day the refusal of the church to perform this may considered discrimination.

isn't religon alive? i do agree we all have such freedoms, to beleive or not in these highest of hopes, that things are as we wish them to be. i am not saying the worshipers are currupt, but as in politics,

the leaders may be currupt, and that they may be trying to get their faithful to beleive in them a bit longer with magic tricks and scientific artifice, i have seen event after event unfold where the church is 'regretful' of actions uncovered in there own backyard. the qeustion then is, how long shall it live? to me it is culture, pride in one's own heritage, but has this heratige grown? if so then what are the intensions of this old cat, that has so much pity it will no longer strike!

to live longer? or to change anew not built on the past that even today we screech at and condemn as bad choices. in science we ask 'is fire alive?' and as with all single minded creatures we could not decide if it was, but it still died. so are we to follow men then? who in science was made before these gods? or are we to follow gods, who in faith we listened to men and was told we were created by these gods. the debate is not which is true, but what do men want with the world if we chose to follow gods?

[DarkAngel_]

Faith is a dead-end alley of the human mind, and clergy are the pipe-wielding thugs who inhabit it.

Without faith you would not have a life. Science touts the scientific process. But some degree of faith is usally present in most scientific endeavours. Someone makes a theory. And then he tests to see if he is right. To take any possible scientific direction you most often have a reason for choosing it. You believe in some result. Its not eeny-meeny-miney-mo is it? Without faith everything could be a lie. All the people around you could be in a massive conspiracy to fool you. They could have made up all the history of the world. Everything could be an elaborate joke on you. Without faith nothing is worth a shot.

Though not remarking to me, i must reply. That we have been seeing these fools creating conspiracy, but does that mean you and them and us? no, we all conspire to a point and that you are questioning truth, or was it honesty... is so strange to me. How has man progressed? by child or adult? by child i see dreams of flying, so we found flight! we had hope in flying by this child, not by faith, faith is a risk and hope gets you their, one worries and the other cheers your way-going. is science based on something? well we always say a dream or ambition, what has the humble priest gotten us with faith? well i see hope that is given, that of any person can exept, but do i want everyone elses faith?, but my life was not prophesized, and my name not taken with faith so that i live, i am alive and by that i had no life before me, in that i am me and no one else. so i hade no faith i would live, but hope maybe. and my reasoning is based on this child, 'what if' he asks every day, and then i see if it is so, to temp reality, to see the bounds of it so that i may learn why i am so! i have only 1 goal, and it is to not have a goal, but to improve past my goal to who it is in these heights i must be to see my existence as it truly is, and have my final answer. but first i need a final question.

[DarkAngel_]

Hmmm....I think you probably dont realize how many things you yourself accept on faith without any real evidence.

I think I do realize that, to an unusual extent. And I've knowingly and deliberately trained myself to recognize and avoid it.

I laughed so hard at this! this is the best intellectual joke all summer! Wait, its fall...ok all year! You have gotten the "this is a funny joke" award! laminate it.

and i am the same way, i take almost nothing on faith especially if it can't be proven.

[jefferiah]

Hmmm....I think you probably dont realize how many things you yourself accept on faith without any real evidence.

I think I do realize that, to an unusual extent. And I've knowingly and deliberately trained myself to recognize and avoid it.

I laughed so hard at this! this is the best intellectual joke all summer! Wait, its fall...ok all year! You have gotten the "this is a funny joke" award! laminate it.

and i am the same way, i take almost nothing on faith especially if it can't be proven.

Why did people discourage Columbus from trying to sail westward to India?

[DarkAngel_]

Why did people discourage Columbus from trying to sail westward to India?

well, where you their? i think it may have been more situational then universal, i think some people, not the people, discouraged him. i may have to do study on this, but if you are refering this to faith, then why did he go and do it? did he say that he does this for his faith? i agree science has a faith that is open to being disproven, and religon is not as welcoming to disproof.

but i still have not had my answer from the other side, who is to lead you, men, or gods? i never questioned your faith, i questioned your reason, and from that i am asking for your logic, i do not need to be proven that science is a faith, i know that sometimes it is so. if you are to jump a gap, you may need a filler to get you to the other side, that can be faith, but for me, it is curiosity, i do not want any one outcome, i just want to see a result, whatever it might be. is that what compaires us to your philosiphy? are you curios of your god, do you question him? or as i learned in my youth not to, but to only have faith, i found that very hollow.

so new question, are you hollow?

[jefferiah]

Why did people discourage Columbus from trying to sail westward to India?

well, where you their? i think it may have been more situational then universal, i think some people, not the people, discouraged him. i may have to do study on this, but if you are refering this to faith, then why did he go and do it? did he say that he does this for his faith? i agree science has a faith that is open to being disproven, and religon is not as welcoming to disproof.

but i still have not had my answer from the other side, who is to lead you, men, or gods? i never questioned your faith, i questioned your reason, and from that i am asking for your logic, i do not need to be proven that science is a faith, i know that sometimes it is so. if you are to jump a gap, you may need a filler to get you to the other side, that can be faith, but for me, it is curiosity, i do not want any one outcome, i just want to see a result, whatever it might be. is that what compaires us to your philosiphy? are you curios of your god, do you question him? or as i learned in my youth not to, but to only have faith, i found that very hollow.

so new question, are you hollow?

Although I said I believe faith is a necessity in life, I never once said doubt was unnecessary.

[jefferiah]

Why did people discourage Columbus from trying to sail westward to India?

well, where you their? i think it may have been more situational then universal, i think some people, not the people, discouraged him. i may have to do study on this, but if you are refering this to faith, then why did he go and do it? did he say that he does this for his faith? i agree science has a faith that is open to being disproven, and religon is not as welcoming to disproof.

but i still have not had my answer from the other side, who is to lead you, men, or gods? i never questioned your faith, i questioned your reason, and from that i am asking for your logic, i do not need to be proven that science is a faith, i know that sometimes it is so. if you are to jump a gap, you may need a filler to get you to the other side, that can be faith, but for me, it is curiosity, i do not want any one outcome, i just want to see a result, whatever it might be. is that what compaires us to your philosiphy? are you curios of your god, do you question him? or as i learned in my youth not to, but to only have faith, i found that very hollow.

so new question, are you hollow?

Although I said I believe faith is a necessity in life, I never once said doubt was unnecessary.

Anyways, the Columbus thing was about something interesting I had read not so long ago in a book on historical myths. I remember being taught and reading that Columbus was discouraged from crossing the ocean because he would fall off the edge of the world. Apparently this was not true at all, as scholars had already decided long before that the earth was round. The real argument was that Columbus underestimated the distance across the ocean. And they were right! Pretty interesting huh!