It's not a sad situation at all. It's nature, and it rocks. Lion kills and eats zebra. Lion's family survives, and maybe some day their descendents will develop very interesting philosophies. While it isn't that nice to see the zebra get killed, overall it's quite a beautiful picture.
Asguard: No more peacefull? You take that back or else! Admit that athiests are more peacfull or I will make you a knuckle sandwich! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Cris: I hate to quote Jesse Ventura, but, I agree with him that "Religion is a crutch for the weak" I've gotten over death as an athiest, I've resisted temptations and I've done all the things that are supposed to be impossible without religion. I think they would have been easier if I believed in a afterlife, which is why I agree with Ventura. Some are not strong enough to function without thier imaginary friend. And as long as they do not burn me, subvert my Constitution , attack my rights, or wake me up at 9 am on a saturday the religious are best left alone. The problem is that they do.
Actually when religons clash its because of politics NOT religon (i challenge ANYONE to prove me wrong about that). I belive its the scientific way that a hypothosis stands untill there is prof its wrong. Some people belive that god exists some don't. As it is impossable to find evidance either way both are equally valid. Adam: it is a sad situation, If the only way we (with our surposidly higher intelects) can live is as parisites on our world then it is VERY sad
Not to hyjack, but I am an athiest simply because it is more logical not to believe in God than to believe in God. Also, the idea of a loving, omnipotent God allowing suffering to exist offends my sensibilities. As for why religions clash, I don't think it is purely politics or purely theological bigotry. It is probably a bit of both, with different people having different reasons. For instance, the Catholics had no monetary reason to murder Giordano Bruno. But they did have a monetary reason to persecute the Hugenauts.
Oooh, sorry! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Giordano Bruno was a brilliant scientist and mystic and philosopher who was utterly hot and intelligent and....right. He was a Italian scientist who wrote a lot about mystical magical things, and was one of the first people to predict the existance of planets outside our solar system. The Catholic Church burned him alive at the Campo della Fiora in Italy on Febuary 17th, 1600. Nobody really knows why, either because he was a scientist who believed that the earth orbited the sun or because of his mysticsim. The Huguenauts were French Protestants. They were sporadically persecuted by the French Catholics, mainly because they had money that the Church wanted...if you kill heretics, you get thier money, see?
You are talking about the hight of the church's power. not only spiritual but then the church was a political power as well. As much as i would wish it wasn't the persiution of prodistants and scientests wasn't because it was wrong but becaused it weakend the churches power base.
Lets face it the whole purpose of religion is to prevent people from question the established truth. As a result it causes stagnation. We would be alot farther along technologicaly and socially without religion.
Greetings: I'm new to sciformus, but like what I've seen so far! It looks as if there are some intelligent people here. Anyway, I don't mean to come across too strong, but I have a different view on religion than most of what I've seen in this thread. The question "Is Religion REALLY so bad?" to me invokes an instant response of "Yes, it is!" Why? For many of the same reasons people have mentioned that it is good. For instance, "it gives people hope". Now, on first glance this may appear as a valuable asset, to give people hope, and we hear it again and again, so much so that it has become an accepted cliche. "You've got to have hope". Hope in what? Giving people hope in something that doesn't exsist causes great damage, it's like living in a fantasy world. People begin to live for some 'other-worldly' exsistence and all their values become misplaced. "Just believe and everything will be alright". Believe in what? Some fairly tale? Personally, I'd rather not. This kind of mentality generates an aloofness to this world, the one we *know* is real. It shifts the center of focus away from the here and now, the day to day struggles and realities of our lives. It may be pacifying to some, but the better option would be to take a good look at your life as it is. If there is alot wrong, and this causes you pain, take responsability and fix it. Don't get on your knees and pray, leaving the resolution of your problems in someone elses hands (God, the priest, imam, rabbi, etc). DO something about it! Be strong! We all have it within ourselves to overcome our problems. False hope blocks us from doing so. Just my two cents worth Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ~Noktvs
Ok for one minute i will forget that i think you are TOTALY wrong and say ok theres no higher power. Would you lie to a dieing person to ease their pain?
How very nice of you Asquard. Well I can appreciate the fact that we all have different opinions and that is one of the reasons I love discussion formuns, so I can gain an expanded awareness of other perspectives, if I agree with them or not. I see where your comming from with this question, but no I wouldn't. Don't get me wrong, I'm not some cold hearted machine. I do care about people, but I don't think lying to them to appease their quilt and fear is the right thing to do, even if they're facing death. In fact, it is *one* of my objections against most forms of organized religion. (the idea that you can live your life in total contradiction to it's principles, but then when your on your death bed you can all of a sudden have a change of heart and be "forgiven" for all your "sins"). Honesty is always best, especially in this type of situation. Yes, I would try to comfort them, but not by making up stories. Rather, I would remind them of the type of life they have led, the relationships they created and the joy they have brought into other peoples lives. I would let them know how much they mean to me, tell them I love them and that they will not be forgotten. I would ask them if there was anything in particular they have left unresolved that I could help them with. But to feed them lies to appease their pain just doesn't sit well with me.
noktvs ... Honesty is the last refuge of scoundrels! Take care, and welcome to Sciforums Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Just to show what im talking about I was watching a tv program where the mans fionce was dying. He knew she was dying but he was telling her how good the weding was going to be and stuff this is what im talking about
But if you read "What do You Care What other People Think" by Richard Feynman the doctors thought his fiance had about a year to live. Her family insisted on lying about it but Feynman eventually told her and she was relived because she had figured out that everyone was lyig to her but wasn't sure what the truth was. True story, was your TV program true? Note: She was actually misdiognosed and lived for five more years
Asguard, To me that's a sad approach to reality. Lying to others just to make them feel better? For instance, if I was at a party and my fly was open, I would MUCh rather have someone tell me, so I could fix it and not go walkling around all night with my fly open. and on the same note: Neutrino_Albatross, Man, if I was going to die and others knew it, I would want them to tell me. It would completely change the way I lived for my remaining time.
Greetings all: Another reason I feel that "religion is bad": I just came back from my nephew's Baptism into the Roman Catholic Church. He just had his 1 year birthday a few weeks ago. As I was sitting there in the pew, listening to the Priest explain to us all what this ritual means, I couldn't help but think that the whole thing was very coercive in nature. I mean here was ten kids, ranging in age from new-born to 2 years old, none of which had any idea of what was being done to them, no say in the matter and no way to disagree. The Priest went on with his explanation, telling us that once these children went through baptism, it was irreversible, that they would be born again into Christ and into the Church. He explained to the parents and godparents that it was their duty to raise these children up in Christ. He emphasized the fact to not wait until they were 5 or 6 when they begin to develop their own thoughts and question things. He said the parents and godparents must start now, to tell these children each night how to pray and so on. I happened to be sitting their with my son (who just turned 8 in March). He asked me if he was baptised, and I told him no he wasn't, and explained why. I said that me and his mother decided a long time ago that we were going to leave it up to him which spiritual path (or lack thereof) that he wanted to pursue. He seemed to understand and smiled real big at me. So I quess what I'm saying is that I object to the fact of "forcing" any child into a particular religion or denomination. We have laws protecting them from this type of under-handedness in other areas of life, but it seems when it comes to religon, people let their own prejudices overcome them and disregard the right to free-choice of our sons and daughters. I'm looking for comments on this issue.
First off i don't think it was real (and this person had no chance of life because they had no guts, they were squished) she had about 2 minutes to live and died in his arms Second do parents ask if there child wants to adoped the parents ethical code? (i know my parents and i STILL dissagree on matters of ethics and they will throw in that thats not how they raised me)
Asguard wrote: Ethics and Religion are two different things. This thread is about Religion, and if it's bad or good. But since some people's religion defines their ethical code, this is one of the reasons they force that particular religion on their children. Other reasons seem to be tradition, fear, guilt, and sometimes just general concern for the childs 'salvation' depending on the religion. BTW, I was lucky enough to be raised by parents who left it up to me to decide what spiritual path (or lack thereof) to take, and I am greatful for this, but it does not mean they didn't teach me how to be ethical or moral. It is a common misconception that atheists are a-moral or immoral. This is usualy based on the fact that religonists tend to harp on the 'sinfulness' of humanity and think that we cannot be moral without the aid of some god or other supernatural being. There are many people today who prove this a false doctrine by living a moral life, and not beleiving in god. My main point concerning the Baptism example is that I feel each individual should be allowed to come to their own understanding and form their own beliefs when it comes to spirituality. They should at least be of the age of reason, where they can decide for themselves and not be coerced into whatever tradition their family has followed. We don't own our children, they are not our property, but they are individuals. Teach them ethics/morals, yes, this is necessary for their own welfare and that of societies as a whole, but religion?? Let them make their own decison on that one. Just my opinion. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
All i was talking about was your camment saying if it was anything else that was forced on a child it would be wrong This is simply not true Ethics, morals and behavier are forced to start with School is forced (at least here it is) what a child can do as far as sports and stuff are not chosen by the child but the parents
