Less and Less religious

by **Vortropolis** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:31 am

Typhlochactas wrote:
The Ottoman Imperial Union wrote:I, honestly, am pretty happy.

In my opinion, having a religion is like having a gun; it's ok to have one, and it's ok to be proud of it. But don't take it out in public and wave it about, and please don't shove it down children's throats.

We shouldn't always tolerate people's religions.

Not necessarily as long as we all get along and coexist we'll be fine

by **Typhlochactas** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:32 am

Vortropolis wrote:
Typhlochactas wrote:
We shouldn't always tolerate people's religions.

Not necessarily as long as we all get along and coexist we'll be fine

There's people with religious views that make co-existence with other religions (or people) impossible, so we shouldn't tolerate them.

by **Catan** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:32 am

Divair wrote:
Catan wrote:
I do not actively pursue any specific god, no.

Then you are an atheist.

Because you do not claim to be sure as to whether or not a god exists, you are agnostic.

And thus, welcome to this club:
Agnostic atheism.

As I do not make the claim that god does not exist, I cannot be an atheist. I agree with you that I am not a theist, but I do not lean one way or the other on the existence of god, because such a thing is unknowable.

by **Southern Patriots** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:32 am

I'm plenty happy with my good ole fashioned faith

by **Divair** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:33 am

Catan wrote:
Divair wrote:Then you are an atheist.

Because you do not claim to be sure as to whether or not a god exists, you are agnostic.

And thus, welcome to this club:
Agnostic atheism.

As I do not make the claim that god does not exist, I cannot be an atheist. I agree with you that I am not a theist, but I do not lean one way or the other on the existence of god, because such a thing is unknowable.

Agnostic atheists do not make a claim that gods do not exist. That is gnostic atheism.

Agnostic atheism simply says "we do not believe in any gods".

by **Vortropolis** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:33 am

Typhlochactas wrote:
Vortropolis wrote:
Not necessarily as long as we all get along and coexist we'll be fine

There's people with religious views that make co-existence with other religions (or people) impossible, so we shouldn't tolerate them.

Ya there are idiots that try to force their religion on other people and hate them just because of their religious views.

by **Alassus** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:34 am

by **Ovisterra** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:34 am

Typhlochactas wrote:
The Ottoman Imperial Union wrote:I, honestly, am pretty happy.

In my opinion, having a religion is like having a gun; it's ok to have one, and it's ok to be proud of it. But don't take it out in public and wave it about, and please don't shove it down children's throats.

We shouldn't always tolerate people's religions.

We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

by **The Joseon Dynasty** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:34 am

I've always been quite apathetic. I guess I assumed it was true until I realised it probably wasn't.

by **SD_Film Artists** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:35 am

Divair wrote:
Catan wrote: As an agnostic

Agnostic atheist or agnostic theist?

Just 1 comment into the thread and there's already a semi-thread-jack about Agnosticism? NSG is getting more cynical by the week....

by **Typhlochactas** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:37 am

Ovisterra wrote:
Typhlochactas wrote:
We shouldn't always tolerate people's religions.

We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

If somebody has a worldview that lets them kill other people, then the best way to stop those actions is to get rid of the belief that allows it. If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win.

by **Catan** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:37 am

Alassus wrote:(Image)

I like this!

by **Ovisterra** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:37 am

Typhlochactas wrote:
Ovisterra wrote:
We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

If somebody has a worldview that lets them kill other people, then the best way to stop those actions is to get rid of the belief that allows it. If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win.

Meh. If you like Orwellian stuff like that, I can't exactly stop you.

by **Vortropolis** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:37 am

Alassus wrote:(Image)

Little bit too much don't you think?

by **Friendly Monsters** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:38 am

The Ottoman Imperial Union wrote:I, honestly, am pretty happy.

In my opinion, having a religion is like having a gun; it's ok to have one, and it's ok to be proud of it. But don't take it out in public and wave it about, and please don't shove it down children's throats.

I'm just laughing at this.

by **Blazedtown** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:38 am

Ovisterra wrote:
Typhlochactas wrote:
We shouldn't always tolerate people's religions.

We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

Why? Why do have to tolerate religions? Why is tolerance such a value?

by **Catan** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:38 am

Typhlochactas wrote:
Ovisterra wrote:
We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

If somebody has a worldview that lets them kill other people, then the best way to stop those actions is to get rid of the belief that allows it. If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win.

Could you give me an example of a religion like that, where all adherents want to kill someone?

by **Typhlochactas** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:38 am

Ovisterra wrote:
Typhlochactas wrote:
If somebody has a worldview that lets them kill other people, then the best way to stop those actions is to get rid of the belief that allows it. If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win.

Meh. If you like Orwellian stuff like that, I can't exactly stop you.

I didn't suggest we should punish the thought. Those are your words, not mine.

by **The Armed Republic of Carcenia** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:39 am

I dont understand whats so wrong with religion. Even if it isnt true it gives people a moral compass and makes them want to do the right thing. True some people have misused it over time,but still whats so wrong with it?

by **Ovisterra** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:39 am

Blazedtown wrote:
Ovisterra wrote:
We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

Why? Why do have to tolerate religions? Why is tolerance such a value?

Because I believe in the good old "Live and let live (Terms & Conditions apply)" mantra. I'm not going to pretend that it's inherently good, I just believe it to be.

by **Blazedtown** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:39 am

Catan wrote:
Typhlochactas wrote:
If somebody has a worldview that lets them kill other people, then the best way to stop those actions is to get rid of the belief that allows it. If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win.

Could you give me an example of a religion like that, where all adherents want to kill someone?

Khornate worship.

by **Vortropolis** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:39 am

Blazedtown wrote:
Ovisterra wrote:
We should always tolerate religions. We shouldn't always tolerate the actions of their followers.

Why? Why do have to tolerate religions? Why is tolerance such a value?

So we can all get along

by **Ovisterra** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:40 am

Typhlochactas wrote:
Ovisterra wrote:
Meh. If you like Orwellian stuff like that, I can't exactly stop you.

I didn't suggest we should punish the thought. Those are your words, not mine.

"If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win."

Pray tell how we "stop thoughts".

by **Northwest Slobovia** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:40 am

Ifreann wrote:
Northwest Slobovia wrote:I'm simply fascinated by this statement. Really, I am.

There's a box on my desk. (Take that as given.) Is there any paper in the box? It's a simple yes or no question. Some people may have a bias one way or the other -- "Well, it's on a desk, so I think it's reasonable for it to contain papers." -- but many people will say "I have absolutely no clue.". That, right there, is "pure" agnosticism: the state of lack of knowledge.

I don't see what's so hard about this concept: there are plenty of things I have no clue about -- what's the biggest city in Malawi, who won the 1958 World Series, who was King of England in 1481 -- and I'll happily say so. I feel the same way about deities: none, one, many... who knows? The first three questions I can find answers to; the latter I don't think we know the answer to, and I'm not convinced we currently can know the answer to.

"Is there any paper in the box" isn't the same as "Do you believe there is any paper in the box?".

Only as a linguistic quibble. If it makes you happy, I'll phrase my statement as, "I believe the same way about deities: none, one, many... who knows?". I'm very certain of my lack of knowledge; I'm a scientist.

For example, the mathematician David Hilbert once proposed a list of math questions that he didn't know the answer to. Some have been answered. Some are still open questions. If asked whether I believe any one of those is true or false, I'll say (I believe) I have no clue. I don't even understand some of them, so how could I know if they're true or false?

Those are just math problems, if I don't whether even something as simple is that is true or false, how could I know if there are supernatural beings? (That's a rhetorical question; don't answer it.)

Look, when I wonder about the nature of the divine, I read Rumi's poetry and Zen koans. Perhaps they'll enlighten me one day, but nothing so far.

To drag this discussion kicking and screaming back to the actual topic, I tend to think the reduction of superstition is good. Theists have spent a lot of time making trouble for other people. To mash up Jonathan Swift and Tom Lehrer, "Oh, the big-endians hate the little-endians, and the little-endians hate the big-endians, and everbody hates the Jews. But during National Brotherhood Week..."

by **Typhlochactas** » Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:40 am

Catan wrote:
Typhlochactas wrote:
If somebody has a worldview that lets them kill other people, then the best way to stop those actions is to get rid of the belief that allows it. If you just stop the action and not the thought behind it, then you're never going to win.

Could you give me an example of a religion like that, where all adherents want to kill someone?

The worldview of Osama Bin Laden.

Less and Less religious

Who is online