Why I think religion is inherently bad. [POLL ADDED]

[Ordya]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

[Valkmar]

Whilst religion is bad, i will give it the fact that it sets down a basic code of morals.

Including that it's OK to keep slaves, rape a woman (providing that you're willing to pay her father and take her as your wife), sell people as property, etc.?

I was going more along the lines of current christian morals. Not insane Islamic shit.

EDIT: Out of all religion which i hate, Christianity is the best of the worst, i don't like it because it controls people, (and convinces them a naked bearded man in the sky who watches everything you do and apparently for the Catholic branch needs a Pope because i guess he isn't powerful enough to communicate directly to us) but the people who follow it in general (I'm basing this on the people i have met, I'm sure there are bad Christian people) tend to be good people.

[Mavorpen]

Including that it's OK to keep slaves, rape a woman (providing that you're willing to pay her father and take her as your wife), sell people as property, etc.?

I was going more along the lines of current christian morals. Not insane Islamic shit.

You do realize that he actually described Christian morality as outlined in the bible, right?

[Ostroeuropa]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

Is there a mind or isn't there.

If there isn't, in what sense can I possibly be me other than my mind, isn't the idea of identity pretty much bound up in consciousness etc.

So assuming there is mind, either it's being artificially doped up, which strikes me as as much detestable fate, or it's sovereign and entertained by external things that do not directly alter it. In what sense do you propose people wouldn't get bored of the latter, if they wouldn't get bored, then surely there is only the need for one external thing that provides happiness at all times.

Incidentally, happy, ALL THE TIME? What the hell man. I need my sorrow and sadness thank you, they inform me and make me as much of who i am as any other emotion.

[Sentinel XV]

I was going more along the lines of current christian morals. Not insane Islamic shit.

You do realize that he actually described Christian morality as outlined in the bible, right?

To be fair, those two religions do share much the same moral/ethical code.

[Ordya]

I was going more along the lines of current christian morals. Not insane Islamic shit.

You do realize that he actually described Christian morality as outlined in the bible, right?

Where?

[Xeng He]

Such an idea is harmful to society, so not sure where you're getting this from.

It is by far less harmful than the idea of limits. The idea of limits suggests that something cannot be made better when, in many cases, it can.

Ultimately there will be people who buck this attitude either way, true, but it's that exception that drives progress.

Humans have a natural desire to seek knowledge about their surroundings, and by extension, learn. This has nothing to do with religion.

A desire to know the world is only part of innovation. There must also be a desire to change it.

What's the point of changing the world when all the incredible things are unachievable?

[The New World Oceania]

Mormons win.
Godhood, bitchess!

And after they've been a god for 1e^1000000 years?

To be fair, I do see your point very well. Eternity really is one hell of a long time, and it's hard to say exactly what's going to be up when the time has passed exceeding what we could even possibly imagine. That's where, presumably, love comes in. To quote a favorite hymn of mine-"There is no end to glory, there is no end to love, there is no end to being; there is no death above." Love, from any theoretical, faithful standpoint, must be viewed as eternal, or the whole system collapses. It's why the idea of hell is absurd. Where's the love in eternal damnation? All in all, the purpose of heaven has nothing to do remotely with existence, glory, or exaltation, but rather, eternal love.

And if you disagree I hate you and you're going to Hell.

[Mavorpen]

It is by far less harmful than the idea of limits. The idea of limits suggests that something cannot be made better when, in many cases, it can.

False, that's not what knowing and acknowledging limits is.

A desire to know the world is only part of innovation. There must also be a desire to change it.

Which also is natural to humans as well as elephants, crows, chimps, etc.

What's the point of changing the world when all the incredible things are unachievable?

What does this have to do with anything?

[The USOT]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

Whilst I dont tend to toot the whole "Immoratality will suck" horn, the idea of not getting negative emotions concerns me. One of the things I dont like about the idea of a heaven is this idea of me being changed beyond my normal emotional spectrum seems quite sad to me. Life without pathos for instance is a very terrible life indeed.

[Ordya]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

Is there a mind or isn't there.

If there isn't, in what sense can I possibly be me other than my mind, isn't the idea of identity pretty much bound up in consciousness etc.

So assuming there is mind, either it's being artificially doped up, which strikes me as as much detestable fate, or it's sovereign and entertained by external things that do not directly alter it. In what sense do you propose people wouldn't get bored of the latter.

If you could be Superman for eternity, would you give it up just because you were bored? Plus, you're allowed to watch over loved ones, and I'm pretty sure there's nothing saying you can't ask to be reincarnated.

[Mavorpen]

You do realize that he actually described Christian morality as outlined in the bible, right?

Where?

If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

“If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives” (Deuteronomy 22:28–29)

[Valkmar]

I was going more along the lines of current christian morals. Not insane Islamic shit.

You do realize that he actually described Christian morality as outlined in the bible, right?

There tends to be a reason i said current

[Tlaceceyaya]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

So, basically, I am no longer myself. I am nothing but a constantly stimulated pleasure centre.

[Ostroeuropa]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

Whilst I dont tend to toot the whole "Immoratality will suck" horn, the idea of not getting negative emotions concerns me. One of the things I dont like about the idea of a heaven is this idea of me being changed beyond my normal emotional spectrum seems quite sad to me. Life without pathos for instance is a very terrible life indeed.

This too. It smacks of unthought out implications.
Really? No Sadness?
But some of the most inspiring and potent moments of my life have been from me being sad AND THEN GETTING OVER IT...
In fact, in some ways I prefer the progression from sad to happy far more than I do stability at happiness. Probably an evolutionary reason for it.

[The New World Oceania]

Namely because none if these have been caused by religion. On a list of wines, there will not be a liquor. On a list of deaths caused by religion, there will not be scientific illiteracy, which is a purely absurd idea in a number of developed areas, where science is shoved down people's throats- the internet is one of these places.



Your sarcasm-meter is incredibly out of date.



The concept of a heaven bases on the idea that it is a perfect place, not where people get sore hands from playing golf with Jesus and Buddha.

Ah, so you realized your previous attempts were such complete fail you've decided to go through the thread picking out all the bits you think you have a long-shot at beating me on, WITHOUT replying to the post where I handed you your ass.
Well, more power to you.
Let's go through your post.

1.
WW1 was caused by western imperialism, which is very heavily based in Christianity as a justification.
WW2 was caused by WW1.
Colonialism -> Christianity as justification.
Scientific Illiteracy -> Dark ages. we're about 700 years behind tech wise thanks to christianity.
(http://www.jstor.org/stable/25105052)

2.
No YOUR mother!

3.
Either the mind atrophies, which seems like a fairly horrific fate, or it doesn't. People will get bored of perfection too, given enough time. (And by definition, we do have enough time.)

You "handed me my ass."

I'm not sure if you're trying to convince me God exists, or prove middle-school argument strategies legitimate, but I'm going to have to drop out of this talk if your best response is "Your mother."

[Mavorpen]

You do realize that he actually described Christian morality as outlined in the bible, right?

There tends to be a reason i said current

The ones where gays are going to hell, they don't deserve to marry, women are worth less than a bunch of cells, etc?

No thanks.

[The New World Oceania]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

So, basically, I am no longer myself. I am nothing but a constantly stimulated pleasure centre.

Eternal orgasm?

[Ordya]

1) I get it.
2) There is no bordome in Heaven.

So, basically, I am no longer myself. I am nothing but a constantly stimulated pleasure centre.

Yes.

@Mavorpan The OT is not christian.

[Mavorpen]

@Mavorpan The OT is not christian.

Yes it is.

[Ostroeuropa]

Ah, so you realized your previous attempts were such complete fail you've decided to go through the thread picking out all the bits you think you have a long-shot at beating me on, WITHOUT replying to the post where I handed you your ass.
Well, more power to you.
Let's go through your post.

1.
WW1 was caused by western imperialism, which is very heavily based in Christianity as a justification.
WW2 was caused by WW1.
Colonialism -> Christianity as justification.
Scientific Illiteracy -> Dark ages. we're about 700 years behind tech wise thanks to christianity.
(http://www.jstor.org/stable/25105052)

2.
No YOUR mother!

3.
Either the mind atrophies, which seems like a fairly horrific fate, or it doesn't. People will get bored of perfection too, given enough time. (And by definition, we do have enough time.)

You "handed me my ass."

I'm not sure if you're trying to convince me God exists, or prove middle-school argument strategies legitimate, but I'm going to have to drop out of this talk if your best response is "Your mother."

So ignoring the two parts where I respond to you, and focusing on where I use your mother in response to you using an equally vapid and pointless remark.
How intellectually honest of you.
So we see a pattern emerge where you don't like to acknowledge where you've been shown up.
That's two for two, by the way.

[The USOT]

Whilst I dont tend to toot the whole "Immoratality will suck" horn, the idea of not getting negative emotions concerns me. One of the things I dont like about the idea of a heaven is this idea of me being changed beyond my normal emotional spectrum seems quite sad to me. Life without pathos for instance is a very terrible life indeed.

This too. It smacks of unthought out implications.
Really? No Sadness?
But some of the most inspiring and potent moments of my life have been from me being sad AND THEN GETTING OVER IT...
In fact, in some ways I prefer the progression from sad to happy far more than I do stability at happiness. Probably an evolutionary reason for it.

I think in many ways this is an idea as old as man. Whilst in modern terms philosopher Slavoj Žižek puts it best (imo) its not a hard concept to understand. Even the ancient greeks knew from homeric tradition the sense of the hard earned victory that came through sweat blood and tears being infinitely more satisfying.

[Xeng He]

False, that's not what knowing and acknowledging limits is.

...yes it is. If there is a limit to something, you cannot go past it. Or, in other words, past X amount of natural resources on the Earth, past X standard of living, below X casualties.

Which also is natural to humans as well as elephants, crows, chimps, etc.

But the degree to which it's expressed and the form it takes are influenced by the environment.

What does this have to do with anything?

For another example, the speed of light. If exceeding it is impossible, what's the point of attempting that?

[Obamacult]

The OP's 809 million number is wrong. No way did the wars that he listed add up to this number. His own primary source lists these blood-lettings as the worst things that man has done to each other:

Death Toll Cause Centuries
66 million Second World War 20C

40 million Mao Zedong (mostly famine) 20C

40 million Genghis Khan 13C

27 million British India (mostly famine) 19C

25 million Fall of the Ming Dynasty 17C

20 million Taiping Rebellion 19C

20 million Joseph Stalin 20C

18½ million Mideast Slave Trade 7C-19C

17 million Timur Lenk 14C-15C

16 million Atlantic Slave Trade 15C-19C

15 million First World War 20C

15 million Conquest of the Americas 15C-19C

13 million An Lushan Revolt 8C

10 million Xin Dynasty 1C

10 million Congo Free State 19C-20C

9 million Russian Civil War 20C

7½ million Thirty Years War 17C

7½ million Fall of the Yuan Dynasty 14C

7 million Fall of Rome 5C

7 million Chinese Civil Wars 20C

http://necrometrics.com/pre1700a.htm#20worst

Seriously, it would be a leap of faith to believe that religion was the primary cause of most of these (no pun intended). And really, if these are the worst twenty things that have happened to mankind, how in the hell is the OP going to find 809 million in a list of religious deaths? I asked some posters to give me their numbers, and I haven't seen anything close to even 100 million. And the lists I do see include wars and conflicts in which religious people are really victims or religion is not the major cause of the war or conflict.

I mean were attacking religious people because they believe in what we consider fantasy, and this 809 million number is the biggest fantasy of all.

Just saying.

[New Nassrau]

Its not religion thats in the wrong, its the people that are the figureheads of the religion