Login or register
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
#15 - buddydms
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(08/23/2013) [-]
I don't understand why people get their panties in a bunch over religion. Even If you don't believe it, nothing is harmed by learning about it. NOBODY should try and force their beliefs on anybody else. We should all have the right and ability to gather information and come to our own conclusion on what to believe. Whether it's Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hindu, Buddhism, Ancient Alien Theory, Pastafarian, or even atheism. No belief is better or worse than another. The truth is all religion is basically a theory and nothing is proven. But most religions teach love and acceptance, which is more important than any arguments that keep us from understanding each other as humans. When we lose the ability to accept each other as we are, it leads to mistakes and wars such as the crusades, or even currently with radical islam. So in short find a religion that makes you happy and don't judge others because things can always go a different way.
#22 to #15 - anon id: c402d14e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(08/23/2013) [-]
So it's cool if you never think critically and devote your life to a folly, yeah.
If there's a Muslim and a Christian, either one or both is wrong
User avatar #51 to #22 - bongobongo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(08/24/2013) [-]
That's not true. Both could be partially right or neither could be right. Until proven to not exist, God simultaneously is in a state of existing and not existing, similar to Schrodinger's cat. Whether or not He exists, though, both a Christian and a Muslim can believe in Him if they choose Don't call other people's beliefs a folly. I hate atheists who persecute religion. If the purpose of religion is to give its believers a moral code to follow and consequences for breaking it, you are only demonstrating the need the world has for it by being rude.
User avatar #61 to #51 - thereoncewasaman
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(08/24/2013) [-]
Why do you think atheists don't like religion? It's because most of those religions tell us that we are wrong, amoral, disgusting, perverse, and that we will burn in hell for not believing what they believe. While not all members of those religions agree with or preach those things they are still present in the religions doctrine, and that's something you can't ignore or change.

Moving on, you can't really definitively prove something doesn't exist, and because of that the best and most logical position to default to is disbelief, until evidence is provided to prove it. Saying that because something hasn't been disproven it is logical to believe in it is absurd and silly.

Schrodingers cat was a thought experiment he used to display how bizarre and absurd he found quantum mechanics. The cat in the box either is dead or isn't, and us observing it only changes its state in our own minds, because in a more absolute sense the observation changes nothing, reality is what it is beyond our perception.

Religion is not required to give people a moral code, we as humans do have an innate sense of right and wrong as a result of our high levels of intelligence and our ability to feel empathy. We can also be taught what is right and wrong without needing to invoke the threat of divine wrath. Even though religion does provide people with peace of mind and can give some (often flawed) morals it also indirectly discourages critical thinking and promotes accepting things to be true without any good evidence for them.

Having a moral code does not stop people from being rude; look at the countless people who promote awful things, call people awful names, tell them awful things will happen to them or deserve to happen to them, and all entirely because of the moral code they got from their religion. The world would be a less rude place if religion did not exist. It is not rude to point out the evils that are being caused by religion, its rude to take offense to the criticism.
User avatar #86 to #61 - bongobongo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(08/24/2013) [-]
The Bible and other religion's doctrines were written a long time ago, in a different time. It is instinctual to discriminate based on differences, and that is something we can't ignore or change. But by choosing to ignore the part of the Bible that says we should stone non-Christians, we step above the baser instincts, and that which was written back when tribal connections actually mattered, no longer applies.

It is indeed logical to believe in something that hasn't been disproven, in fact that is the only thing you can believe in logically. Until it is proven false, it is not silly to believe in, rather it is exactly the same as any other fact you hold to be true. If tomorrow gravity was proven to not exist, it would still be logical to believe in it today.

I know what Schrodinger's cat was. Why couldn't the reality of my religious beliefs be what is beyond my perception, and until I actually observe God or whatever there is above us, in my mind it is in a state of existence?

Obviously religion isn't required to have a moral code. It just gives extra incentive to have one, which some people desperately need. Religion doesn't discourage critical thinking, in fact it fosters it. Some of the greatest philosophy was on the existence of God. Descartes' reasoning for the existence of God is extremely analytical and thought-provoking. To truly believe in a higher power takes examining what that higher power means to you, and why you would believe in it.

I think the world would be incredibly ruder without religion, because we would have a background of lawlessness from back when religion actually kept people in check.

It's not rude to point out the evils that are being caused by religion, it's rude to call someone else's beliefs a folly.

For the record, I'm a Quaker.
User avatar #89 to #86 - thereoncewasaman
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(08/24/2013) [-]
The problem with ignoring parts of the bible that are now rightly seen as barbaric is that it discredits the rest of the book; why believe any of it when so much has been shown to be wrong or evil.

I'm not even gonna argue on that one, if you actually think the only things you should believe in are things that haven't been completely disproven then you are lost.

In the case of Schrodingers cat though the reality that exists independently of us is a physical, tangible reality. I can't say you are wrong because you can't prove a negative, but it sounds a bit absurd.

Morality held in fear of divine wrath is a poor and unstable morality. Better to teach people empathy than to scare them into being good. Religion certainly discourages critical thinking, people don't have to question or discover things they are presented with an answer and they accept it without analyzing it. I haven't read Descartes' reasoning for god's existence, but I will say that we have no evidence to say god exists at all, so any line of reasoning built upon a shaky premise is inherently shaky, no matter how solid the logic within it is.

I actually believe religion was helpful in getting us to where we are today. There was a time were the threat of divine punishment was a useful deterrent, and without that fearful morality it might have been difficult for our race to survive. But we have advanced beyond the need for religion as a means of explanation or morality, and it does more harm than good. It's time for humankind to stop believing in fairy tales, we have outgrown them at this point in our maturation as a species.

It may be rude to say someone's beliefs are folly but it is far less rude than those beliefs themselves, which claim all who don't accept them are evil and will suffer for it.
#20 to #15 - abstract
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(08/23/2013) [-]
#121 to #20 - buddydms
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(08/24/2013) [-]
i agree that's really all I was trying to say.
User avatar #124 to #121 - abstract
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(08/25/2013) [-]
Yeah I thought you would like the pic