China bans religion for it's 90 million party members

[Sovaal]

So...like what they've done since inception?

Pretty much. I doubt much will change.

Exactly. And colonization of ethnic minority lands by Han Chinese will continue. This is hardly the worst thing the PRC has done.

[Infected Mushroom]

because religion has a tendency to lead to oppression, irrationality, and fanaticism in society

This, coming from the man who thinks that dogs and suits should be banned.

'This coming from a nation called "United Muscovite Nations."'

...

Oh wait, that has just as much relevance as what you've just said

[United Muscovite Nations]

This, coming from the man who thinks that dogs and suits should be banned.

'This coming from a nation called "United Muscovite Nations."'

...

Oh wait, that has just as much relevance as what you've just said

No it has more. Someone who thinks that dogs should be banned has no business calling other people irrational or fanatical.

[Infected Mushroom]

'This coming from a nation called "United Muscovite Nations."'

...

Oh wait, that has just as much relevance as what you've just said

No it has more. Someone who thinks that dogs should be banned has no business calling other people irrational or fanatical.

That's just an irrelevant ad hominem, its not an argument

[United Muscovite Nations]

No it has more. Someone who thinks that dogs should be banned has no business calling other people irrational or fanatical.

That's just an irrelevant ad hominem, its not an argument

I'm saying that you're not fit to judge what is irrational. Attacking the ability of someone to make a claim is a valid argument. I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your judgement.

[Ethel mermania]

'This coming from a nation called "United Muscovite Nations."'

...

Oh wait, that has just as much relevance as what you've just said

No it has more. Someone who thinks that dogs should be banned has no business calling other people irrational or fanatical.

i dont think dogs should be put in suits. its cruel, and its hard to tie the tie so it looks good.

[Victores]

Wait. It wasn't already?! Wow, we're behind Hoaxha.

[Infected Mushroom]

That's just an irrelevant ad hominem, its not an argument

I'm saying that you're not fit to judge what is irrational. Attacking the ability of someone to make a claim is a valid argument. I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your judgement.

No it is not. Its ad hominem, its a logical fallacy. Attack the reasons and the logic, not the person or the person's personal judgement.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I'm saying that you're not fit to judge what is irrational. Attacking the ability of someone to make a claim is a valid argument. I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your judgement.

No it is not. Its ad hominem, its a logical fallacy. Attack the reasons and the logic, not the person or the person's personal judgement.

Fine, let's do it your way. Religion has been accepted by the vast majority of scholars for most of recorded history. We can therefore judge it as rational. Communists and those who want to ban religion are fanatical as well, so religion is not the only source of fanaticism; moreover, fanaticism isn't inherently bad depending on what it is fanaticism for.

Oppression, also isn't inherently bad.

[Arctica-Aleutia]

No it is not. Its ad hominem, its a logical fallacy. Attack the reasons and the logic, not the person or the person's personal judgement.

Fine, let's do it your way. Religion has been accepted by the vast majority of scholars for most of recorded history. We can therefore judge it as rational. Communists and those who want to ban religion are fanatical as well, so religion is not the only source of fanaticism; moreover, fanaticism isn't inherently bad depending on what it is fanaticism for.

Oppression, also isn't inherently bad.

Religion isn't necessary rational, but the majority of people who practice religion today are rational. Not all communists are fanatical.

[Sovaal]

No it has more. Someone who thinks that dogs should be banned has no business calling other people irrational or fanatical.

i dont think dogs should be put in suits. its cruel, and its hard to tie the tie so it looks good.

But how else are they supposed to play poker?

[Ethel mermania]

i dont think dogs should be put in suits. its cruel, and its hard to tie the tie so it looks good.

But how else are they supposed to play poker?

point taken, comment withdrawn. putting dogs in suits does not show irrationality. the debate on china may resume.

[Gauthier]

So what if your religion is the Chinese Communist Party?

[Sovaal]

So what if your religion is the Chinese Communist Party?

The universe implodes.

[Finswedeway]

Damn faithless commies...

[Benuty]

Fine, let's do it your way. Religion has been accepted by the vast majority of scholars for most of recorded history. We can therefore judge it as rational. Communists and those who want to ban religion are fanatical as well, so religion is not the only source of fanaticism; moreover, fanaticism isn't inherently bad depending on what it is fanaticism for.

Oppression, also isn't inherently bad.

Religion isn't necessary rational, but the majority of people who practice religion today are rational. Not all communists are fanatical.

They were more or so saying this to prove a point to IM in all honesty does have some....rather unique opinions.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Seems reasonable. Religious superstitions are meant for keeping the common rabble in line, but are unfit for people aspiring for a political office.

[Arctica-Aleutia]

Seems reasonable. Religious superstitions are meant for keeping the common rabble in line, but are unfit for people aspiring for a political office.

But why should they be banned like that? I can understand a part like the Chinese Communist Party wanting to stop its members from promoting religion publicly, but why should they ban them from having private beliefs if having them doesn't affect their performance?

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Seems reasonable. Religious superstitions are meant for keeping the common rabble in line, but are unfit for people aspiring for a political office.

But why should they be banned like that? I can understand a part like the Chinese Communist Party wanting to stop its members from promoting religion publicly, but why should they ban them from having private beliefs if having them doesn't affect their performance?

Someone in a position of authority cannot afford to have one's decisions swayed by superstition, and there is no way of determining whether and how much do one's private religious beliefs affect their political decisions. There is also the purely-secular aspect of religious groups having their affiliates among the authorities, enabling them to sway political decisions by exerting pressure on their members.

In other words, someone in a position of political authority, like a member of the Communist Party, ought to have no loyalties other than the state.

[Kubra]

So what if your religion is the Chinese Communist Party?

Funny story, after the cultural rev a lot of folks knew they weren't supposed to worship in the old ways but didn't have a heck of a lot of an idea what exactly atheism was or what they were supposed to do with it.
so there's this sort of cult of mao as a semi-religious icon in old household shrines that you make offerings to. Super weird stuff.

[Arctica-Aleutia]

But why should they be banned like that? I can understand a part like the Chinese Communist Party wanting to stop its members from promoting religion publicly, but why should they ban them from having private beliefs if having them doesn't affect their performance?

Someone in a position of authority cannot afford to have one's decisions swayed by superstition, and there is no way of determining whether and how much do one's private religious beliefs affect their political decisions. There is also the purely-secular aspect of religious groups having their affiliates among the authorities, enabling them to sway political decisions by exerting pressure on their members.

In other words, someone in a position of political authority, like a member of the Communist Party, ought to have no loyalties other than the state.

The people, not the state.

And it shouldn't be assumed that every religious person will be swayed politically by their beliefs. There's countless other factors involved in what someone supports.

[Sovaal]

Seems reasonable. Religious superstitions are meant for keeping the common rabble in line, but are unfit for people aspiring for a political office.

But why should they be banned like that? I can understand a part like the Chinese Communist Party wanting to stop its members from promoting religion publicly, but why should they ban them from having private beliefs if having them doesn't affect their performance?

Because the Chinese Communist Party wants absolute control and loyalty of it's members.

[Arctica-Aleutia]

But why should they be banned like that? I can understand a part like the Chinese Communist Party wanting to stop its members from promoting religion publicly, but why should they ban them from having private beliefs if having them doesn't affect their performance?

Because the Chinese Communist Party wants absolute control and loyalty of it's members.

Trying to coerce people into giving up their beliefs would just create resent toward the party for most. But they probably don't get that or care...

[Sovaal]

Because the Chinese Communist Party wants absolute control and loyalty of it's members.

Trying to coerce people into giving up their beliefs would just create resent toward the party for most. But they probably don't get that or care...

We're talking about a country that breaks demonstrations with tanks, I doubt they care.

[Arctica-Aleutia]

Trying to coerce people into giving up their beliefs would just create resent toward the party for most. But they probably don't get that or care...

We're talking about a country that breaks demonstrations with tanks, I doubt they care.

Yeah, I know... it's just... it's... never mind, I don't know what else to say anymore, the world just has problems...