Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Religion is, in large part, responsible for our current political division and animosity.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
 
Atticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:45 PM
Original message
Religion is, in large part, responsible for our current political division and animosity.
Religion validates the exalting of mere belief over factual evidence. It is not appropriate, we are taught from birth, to question a person's religious beliefs. And so, if one says that they are doing God's will; that God has told them to do thus and so; we are all conditioned to politely nod, maybe smile just a bit, and NEVER EVER say "That's ridiculous!" or anything of the sort even when it is obvious that what the person has said is TOTALLY ridiculous.

For years, this "sanctuary" for all manner of small, mean-spirited and shameful acts and opinions was used primarily by charlatans who used it to make lots of money for themselves. This was sad, but had very little effect on most of us.

Then, a couple of decades ago, politicians discovered the sanctuary. If they could talk Bible and be "agin" the approved list of no-nos, they could do just about anything they wanted and be praised as a "fine Christian".

Invade a small country without provocation? "I was called by God to invade!"

Use the Constitution for toilet paper? "I was doing God's will!"

Mere belief, unsupported by any facts, was used to set national policy.

Mere belief sent us to war.

So, why shouldn't mere belief trump all this scientific stuff about global climate change?

Why shouldn't mere belief be the last word about homosexuality being a chosen and sinful lifestyle?

Why shouldn't mere belief that the health care bill statute will enable the "socialist government" to euthanize grandma be more authoritative than the actual language of the law which contains no such thing?

Why shouldn't mere belief that Sarah Palin is even marginally competent be far more important than all the evidence to the contrary?

By opening the door to a new class of charlatans, religion has set the fool equal to the wisest; the kind and good-hearted equal to the greedy and power-hungry; the truth equal to the latest politically expedient lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ZeitgeistObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Religion and ideology.
One feeds the other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. This might get fun.
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
3. My sig.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Yes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. Religion corrupts government and policymaking. knr nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleyAppendage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. While I tend to agree, religion does serve some useful purposes...
...it's a great self-defense mechanism to protect the psyche from the vicissitudes of life. And, it gave us a shitload of great art. :)

J
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZeitgeistObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. We'd have had the art anyway.
It just wouldn't have been censored religious art.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
38. No, No, No, You’re completely out of touch with the board Zeitgeist
One must never ever recognize >any< good arising from religion even and especially if you are yourself non religious.

No consideration of any religious contribution to humanity is valid.

Not in the realms of Art, or Architecture.

Nor Literature and Music.

Not in Science or Medicine.

Not in Social Development, Social Services, Charity, Aid or Social Justice.

These realms of consideration are verboten.

“Religion is worse then meth. Or LSD.”

Not worthy of even considering possible positive aspects.

Oh…..with the exception that a couple of years back a non religious person did let slip that they kinda liked Christmas Carols.

;-)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #38
69. I think you've got it backwards.
Religion co-opted and was the beneficiary of those disciplines. For instance, could you list those religious contributions to medicine and science? :shrug: I didn't think so.

--imm


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
49. So you're saying religion is a tool?
I can agree with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
7. No it isn't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
15. Yes, it is.
Yes it is, yes it is.

It really is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
32. Such insight!
I'm speechless! :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
obxhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
8. The dangers of religion outweigh the benefits
by a wide margin. It should just be banned outright as a danger to humanity.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Especially now that they have thrown out that bastard, "Liberal Jesus" and gone with "God wants the
rich to be rich because the poor suck and don't deserve any better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humblebum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
36. Nothing has ever had a more disastrous effect on humanity than
organized atheism and atheist dictators. Nothing even comes close.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 04:24 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. "Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humblebum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. And...
“The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion”
(Karl Marx)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. Which leads of course to the question of "why"?
Do you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. LOL……………you………………asking me a question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Will you answer it?
You can always continue your standard obfuscatory practice, but until and unless you're willing to answer the question of WHY Lenin felt the need to include atheism as part of the Communist program, then all you're doing is participating in standard anti-atheist rhetoric and bullshit.

So do you feel like answering the question of WHY, or would you like another link to FSTDT?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #44
72. Still waiting...
Have you nothing to say?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #36
63. Religion is the opiate of the masses.
It pacifies the down trodden that their hell on earth will be rewarded with eternal bliss and that the evil bastards who are responsible for their deprivation will be punished for eternity. What is really strange is that millions of supposedly intelligent beings actually believe this fairy tale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #63
71. It can be put more bluntly.
Religion posits goals at odds with those of Marxism, and undermines Marxist agitprop; religion produces group cohesion and usually contains its own hierarchy. Therefore it's competition and must be destroyed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
9. Any time that religion divides a country
that is "supposed" to have a separation between the church and the government, there is a great danger that the country will fall. I really don't see an end to this problem. Sometimes I think we would be better off if we divided up the country. A small part for the conservatives and a larger part for the progressives -- because I believe there are fewer religious zealots than intelligent and reasonable people in our country. But, since that will never happen, we will continue to have our country held back by people who believe in fairy tales over the truth and reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bert Donating Member (445 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Unfortunately I disagree wiht you
It seems to me that people who think are the exception while even intellignet people can be afflicted with religion. It seems to me to be a way to help cure the disease of free thought and gives you moral certainty where there is none. It seems to be a type of self perpetuating disease to me. Just be happy you are alive and death will take care of itself, hell is on earth and if you dont believe me go to a slaughterhouse or industrial chicken farm sometime. As for religious zealots I am tempted to say they are everywhere right now but it could just be one of our 60 year revivals we have in this country. The problem with trying to compromise with religious zealots is they will always want more and will see any concession as a sign of weakness. Religion is basically might makes right and all other considerations are secondary to the good of the religion, case in point the catholic church.

What gets me is why people are outraged or surprised that the church is full of pedophiles. the churches inherent mysogeny is on display for all to see and I cant see how anyone other than a brainwashed woman or self hating woman would take part in it. The crimes they have historically commited are even worse so in my opinion what would you expect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Morbius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
10. With or without religion, you're bound to have some folks who...
...prefer to make up their minds about the world prior to actually experiencing it, and who choose to ignore any evidence that fails to support their a priori convictions. All religions do are collect these morons together every Sunday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. I think you're right, but that only a small percentage of people would naturally develop that
character trait if they weren't brought up seeing it all around them and accepting it as normal and desirable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. So you don't think that the ritualized confirmation of those
convictions has any results? The authority figures telling them they are right to be hate filled and intolerant? Not all religions meet on Sunday, and not one of them just 'collect them together' they meet and the leaders tell the morons that they are not just correct, but chosen, blessed, and righteous, they sing songs about it, stories are told to work them up.
The bigotries of the rank and file are codified, ritualized, organized and empowered by the groups called churches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 12:37 AM
Response to Original message
11. sometimes i don't feel you can say religion is "responsible". it's just a cloak (ab)used by the evil
to appear righteous and legitimate. if it weren't for religion, they'd just use something else to appear legit and moral and otherwise disguise their evil intentions.

not to say that this is all that religion is about, of course plenty of adherents are completely moral -- that's precisely why it serves as a useful cloak for the fewer ones with evil intentions.

similarly, you wouldn't say that a closely shaved face or a sharp suit or a folksy accent is "responsible" for evil actions. they're just some things that some people (ab)use for nefarious purposes. you can't expect the evil-doers to wear hitler mustaches and so on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
d_r Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:15 AM
Response to Original message
13. have you read Jeff Sharlot's book "The Family?"
It walks through the history of American evangelism and politics
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
14. There are charlatans in the religious sphere but they've been there a
long time and they're in other spheres as well.

But also there are self-directed thinkers who keep a skeptical flame in the day-to-day world.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
17. At about the ripe young age of 14 I quit
listening to anything a preacher had to say and I must admit I am a much happier person for it today. I'm an old man with one foot in the grave and the other following close behind and I am not about to pick up where I left off and go back to being a, 'saved' religious person. I am a very happy non religious person who has none of the hang ups that so many of my brothers and sisters who are religious do. In fact the people who I've known throughout my years who considered themselves a religious person all have some serious issues, can't do that and must do this when this and that is neither the proper thing to do. fuc'itall

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
20. Whereas it's based on ignorance and fear, I agree
Edited on Sun May-02-10 08:08 AM by HughMoran
The community aspects of it can be beneficial in some cases, but for the most part throwing logic out the window and believing something fabricated by some man (often with ulterior motives) is the first requirement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
21. Broad brush baloney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. Hardly.
Look at all the worlds' hot spots and you can usually find religious zealots (all stripes) fanning the flames beneath them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
divvy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
23. I think you are correct if you limit the scope to the Fundamentalists.
The religious consistantly believe and perpetuate the most outrageous untruths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProdigalJunkMail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
24. i tend to believe that it is not religion
but religious hypocrisy under the veil of, "God told me too." Using religion as a shield has been very popular down through the centuries. There are a lot of people out there who just suck...for whatever reason. And using their religion as an excuse to commit evil reserves them a special place in Hell...assuming there is one...

sP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #24
70. Clear up my confusion...
Isn't all religion about things god tells you to do? for instance, what did god tell you to do?

--imm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spoony Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
25. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Yawn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
26. EXTREME religion
Those of us of faith think that these people are fucking NUTS and DANGEROUS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
27. BTW, not all bigots are religious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
28. I would use the term organized religion.
Those fanatics that believe that their God wants it their way is the problem from day one of our history. I will not say religion in general because I believe all people are entitled to their own beliefs, whatever they may be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MellowDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
29. Your post makes no sense...
Most of the examples you mention and their opposition had little to do with religion and a lot to do with very secular ideologies.

I think you are wanting one simple explanation for things you disagree with, but unfortunately the world isn't that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Not so fast.
Little to do with religion, you say? Then why did Bush Jr. call his middle-eastern policy a "crusade"? Why has the religious right been stirred up into a frenzy by the prior president, their senators, and their pastors in order to support the war, condemn global warming as evil science, and ban gay marriage wherever they can?

If religion hadn't been used as a tool, or a wedge, since before 2000, do you think we'd be in the same state we are today? I certainly don't...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #29
46. Perhaps I did not make myself clear. Yes, most of what I said had only one thing in common
with religion: in each case, people disregard facts and reason and embrace blind faith or unsubstantitated belief.

People became comfortable with acting based on unsupported beliefs because the practice was expanded outside the traditonal realm of religion by politically motivated opportunists. George W. Bush, John Ashcroft and Sarah Palin are three such whores who come to mind.

In too many cases these extremists took control of mainstream religions, my former religion being one, and gradually made it clear that "true Christians" were Republicans, supported George W. Bush, hated homosexuals, opposed all abortions and thought that God had ordained males to run their families and their world.

I left several years ago and try to distribute my "tithe" directly to people, and candidates, that I believe need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EvolveOrConvolve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
30. Why do you hate baby Jesus?
:)

For the most part I agree with you, but I think that religion is merely the mechanism used by certain people in their quest for authoritarianism. The problem is authoritarian groups, not their means of attaining control. Bob Altemeyer's book on the subject is fascinating, and is available for free: http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf (it's a 261 page PDF document, so give it some time to load).

On a micro level, I think that religion is illogical and not useful for my life. That doesn't mean that it isn't a necessary part of other people's lives, and I don't begrudge them the comfort they receive from their faith. I just wish more of the faithful would see that they're the pawns for the authoritarians (exhibit A, the Catholic Church, LLC) and could begin the move towards a more personal spiritualism and away from the dogmatic religiosity so prevalent in American society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
31. "The crime has been baptized" -Miguel D'escoto
Rascals can profit handsomely by donning robes against religious enemies (enemies chosen for just this quality) and any criminal activities in the fight can be overlooked or even rewarded.

Just need a big percentage of the population that can be emotionally swayed to overcome critical thinking and conscience. War and business propaganda for jobs and treasure and security make it almost too easy on pleasure-seeking and fearful brains to defer to higher authorities.

War is a cunning racket, and it is outlawed in most cases.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
34. Absolutely.
Edited on Sun May-02-10 04:00 PM by DeSwiss

"Nothing happens unexpectedly, everything has an indication, we just have to observe the connections."




K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
35. 1933: Were Americans more religious? Yes. It's not religion, it's fascism using religion
If religion wasn't around to cloak fascism, they'd use patriotism/nationalism, race, gender, or any organizing principle to hide their agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adsos Letter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #35
59. seems like all of those are currently used as organizing principles
just depends upon the flavor of the bigotry pandered to by demagogues, I suppose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
40. Ignorance is, for the most part, responsible for hate and animosity
Edited on Mon May-03-10 09:46 AM by Sal316
Of course, that goes for anytime something is blamed on a convenient scapegoat (blacks, gays, Hispanics, the phase of the moon)...doesn't matter who or what that is.

This sort of "us vs. them" mentality is just sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. "Us vs. them" mentality.
You mean as in Us vs. Other Christians, or Us vs. Atheists (also here and here and here)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #42
50. If these are 'us v them',...
Hiya Trots! I've missed your intelligent banter about anything religious...how the heck have ya been?

Let's see if these are "Us vs. Them" posts..

#1 - The Bible Clearly Says….or Does It? Nope, that one talks about how even the OT prophets contextualized scripture and how debating things is good.

#2 - What do scientists have to say about God? Provides proof that disproves the notion that faith and reason are incompatible, using Nobel Laureate scientists as examples.

#3 - Atheism, Fundamentalism, and The Enlightenment. Again nope, not "Us vs. Them", in fact a theory that atheism and fundamentalism were born of the same event chain in history, starting with the invention of the printing press.

#4 and #5 - Asking atheists what evidence they would accept as proof of God's existence, capturing the answers I got here on DU. So, again, not an "Us vs. Them".

Dang, now I remember how easy this was.

You see, both you and I believe what we believe. Yet I can admit that, hey, I might be wrong.

Can you?

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

PS - Thanks for the traffic...anytime you want to cherrypick something I wrote, and link to it thinking it proves your point...feel free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #50
52. I remember that one well
From link #4
“Back in July, I wrote a post asking “What kind of evidence of God’s existence would Atheists accept?”

Yes indeed……….enlightening….. was it not? ;-)

My favorite was-
“To wake up tomorrow morning and find that every single human being (believers of all religions and non-believers) had perfect knowledge of what god is and how it should be worshiped/followed/etc. No more religious wars, disagreements, etc.”

Reminded me of ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’…a complete and utter violation of choice, free will, self determination, growth and evolution…an total imposition/invasion upon the psyche, like it or not, while your asleep…a bizarre form of divine date rape on a global scale.
The obvious and automatic consequence of which would be you would not/could not be the individual who lay their head down nor choose to be/return to anything like it…”perfect knowledge of what god is and how it should be worshiped/followed” has been imposed upon you and >you< cease to be who you were.

Nooooooooooooooooo……Don’t go to sleep!


“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell”

Ahhh, Mr Russell is just being more fluent with my objection to “The arrogance of certainty” ;-)

“Thanks for the traffic...anytime you want to cherrypick something I wrote, and link to it thinking it proves your point...feel free.”

LOL.
50# was concise, succinct, crushing in its rational rebuttal and a pleasure to read.

But please don’t ever ask them What kind of evidence of God’s existence would Atheists accept? again……….I’m still having trouble sleeping.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #50
54. They sure are!
#1) You're telling other Christians that they're wrong, you're right. Much like Pat Robertson and Fred Phelps do. Oh your messages are different, but your approach identical.

#2) "Proof"? :rofl: You're just doing what you do best - demonizing atheists. Us vs. them.

#3) Yup. Again, the sensible intelligent perfect Christians like yourself vs. those mean old atheists & fundies who are exactly the same thing, those nasty horrible THEM.

I know it doesn't feel very comfortable to have one's hypocrisy pointed out. I love your quote, by the way. The irony is delicious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #42
51. Oh, I did notice one thing...
...that you didn't call out a single instance where I took the AFA, Pat Roberston, fundie whackos, dominionists, and other assorted far right religious nutjobs to task.

You know...doing that thing that you say more Christians should do...speaking out?

I wonder why...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. Why that's just more of the "us vs. them" mentality, Sal old pal.
Congratulations, with your massive and incredible intellect, which absolutely dwarfs that of everyone else who disagrees with you, for completely and utterly missing the point. You are just as guilty of the "us vs. them" as those you criticize, yet somehow you thrive on pointing out splinters and ignoring logs, or something like that. There is nothing wrong with speaking out. There IS something wrong with being a hypocrite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LAGC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #40
57. You're absolutely right!
Considering that religion IS ignorance -- ignorance of science -- you may have hit on something there...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. So those Nobel Laureates...
...and Fathers of modern science are ignorant?

Is that what you're saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #58
61. But it’s such a short and insignificant list Sal
;-)

- Rene Descarte 1596-1650 mathematician and philosopher
René Descartes one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution in
the Western World. honoured by having the Cartesian coordinate system
used in plane geometry and algebra named after him. He did important
work on invariants and geometry. His Meditations on First Philosophy
partially concerns theology and he was devoted to reconciling his ideas
with the dogmas of Catholic Faith to which he was loyal.
I see everywhere the inevitable expression of the infinite in the world
- Louis Pasteur 1822-95
As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner
by which the All-Wise God perceives and understands all things.
- Sir Isaac Newton 1642-1727
The scientific picture of the real world around me is very
deficient...Science cannot tell us why music delights us, of why and how
an old song can move us to tears.... Science is reticent too when it is
a question of the great Unity... of which we all somehow form a part, to
which we belong. The most popular name for it in our time is God.
- Erwin Schroedinger 1933 Nobel prize in Physics
"My view of the World" 1918
There can never be any real opposition between religion and science.
Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the
religious elements in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if
all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance
and harmony.
- Max Planck winner of the 1918 Nobel prize in Physics
"Where is Science Going" 1918
"Something unknown is doing we don't know what"
-Sir Arthur Eddington
Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can
soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not
possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the
wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of
superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone
he would make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of
materialism. - 'Abdu'l - Baha "Paris Talks" 1911
Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of
the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as
well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces
worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the
facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question." (2)
George Ellis (British astrophysicist): "Amazing fine tuning occurs in
the laws that make this possible. Realization of the
complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use
the word 'miraculous' without taking a stand as to the ontological
status of the word." (3)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it
quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be
some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the
explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something
instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards,
a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the
Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could
never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances
indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the
thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather,
Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without
intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence
of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially
crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or
Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present
state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique
event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very
delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to
permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say
'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe
has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)
Tony Rothman (physicist): "When confronted with the order and beauty
of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it's very
tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am
sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it." (12)
Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by
our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the
divine." (13)
Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): "For the scientist who has
lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad
dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to
conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he
is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for
centuries." (14)
Stephen Hawking (British astrophysicist): "Then we shall… be able to
take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and
the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the
ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of
God." (15)
Frank Tipler (Professor of Mathematical Physics): "When I began my
career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced
atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be
writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-
Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are
straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand
them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable
logic of my own special branch of physics." (16) Note: Tipler since
has actually converted to Christianity, hence his latest book, The
Physics Of Christianity.
Alexander Polyakov (Soviet mathematician): "We know that nature is
described by the best of all possible mathematics because God created
it."(17)
Ed Harrison (cosmologist): "Here is the cosmological proof of the
existence of God – the design argument of Paley – updated and
refurbished. The fine tuning of the universe provides prima facie
evidence of deistic design. Take your choice: blind chance that
requires multitudes of universes or design that requires only one....
Many scientists, when they admit their views, incline toward the
teleological or design argument." (18)
Edward Milne (British cosmologist): "As to the cause of the Universe,
in context of expansion, that is left for the reader to insert, but
our picture is incomplete without Him ." (19)
Barry Parker (cosmologist): "Who created these laws? There is no
question but that a God will always be needed." (20)
Drs. Zehavi, and Dekel (cosmologists): "This type of universe,
however, seems to require a degree of fine tuning of the initial
conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'." (21)
Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981
Nobel Prize in physics): "It seems to me that when confronted with the
marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how.
The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God
in the universe and in my own life." (22)
Henry "Fritz" Schaefer (Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and
director of the Center for Computational Quantum Chemistry at the
University of Georgia): "The significance and joy in my science comes
in those occasional moments of discovering something new and saying to
myself, 'So that's how God did it.' My goal is to understand a little
corner of God's plan." (23)
Wernher von Braun (Pioneer rocket engineer) "I find it as difficult to
understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a
superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to
comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science." (24)
Carl Woese (microbiologist from the University of Illinois) "Life in
Universe - rare or unique? I walk both sides of that street. One day I
can say that given the 100 billion stars in our galaxy and the 100
billion or more galaxies, there have to be some planets that formed
and evolved in ways very, very like the Earth has, and so would
contain microbial life at least. There are other days when I say that
the anthropic principal, which makes this universe a special one out
of an uncountably large number of universes, may not apply only to
that aspect of nature we define in the realm of physics, but may
extend to chemistry and biology. In that case life on Earth could be
entirely unique." (25)
"The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a
little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the
ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that
someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It
does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the
child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a
mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly
suspects." - Albert Einstein
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most
precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be
generated by accident, is zero."- Ilya Prigogine (Chemist-Physicist)
Recipient of two Nobel Prizes in chemistry
I. Prigogine, N. Gregair, A. Babbyabtz, Physics Today 25, pp. 23-28
"The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a
knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge,
and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off
even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a
chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems
unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived --
you might say a 'put-up job'."- Dr. Paul Davies
(noted author and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Adelaide
University)
Sir Francis Bacon - established the scientific method of inquiry based
on experimentation and inductive reasoning.
Nicolaus Copernicus Catholic canon who introduced a heliocentric world view.
William Turner the "father of English botany"
John Napier Scottish mathematician known for inventing logarithms,
Napier's bones, and being the popularizer of the use of decimals.
Johannes Kepler His model of the cosmos based on nesting Platonic solids
was explicitly driven by religious ideas; his later and most famous
scientific contribution, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion, was
based on empirical data that he obtained from Tycho Brahe's meticulous
astronomical observations,
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use
and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can obtain by
them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical
matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or
necessary demonstrations.
- Galileo Galilei 1615.
..science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with
the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling,
however, springs from the sphere of Religion... science without religion
is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein "Ideas and Opinions" 1954
The glory and greatness of the Almighty God are marvellously discerned
in all His works and divinely read in the open book of heaven
- Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Blaise Pascal well-known for Pascal's law (physics), Pascal's theorem
(math), and Pascal's Wager (theology).
Nicolas Steno a pioneer in both anatomy and geology
Robert Boyle Scientist and theologian who argued that the study of
science could improve glorification of God.
John Wallis As a mathematician he wrote Arithmetica Infinitorumis,
introduced the term Continued fraction, worked on cryptography, helped
develop calculus, and is further known for the Wallis product.
Gottfried Leibniz A polymath who worked on determinants, a calculating
machine
Isaac Newton (He is regarded as one of the greatest scientists and
mathematicians in history.
Thomas Bayes Bayes' theorem. Fellow of the Royal Society
Firmin Abauzit A physicist and theologian.
Carolus Linnaeus father of modern taxonomy, contributions to ecology.
Leonhard Euler mathematician and physicist,
Maria Gaetana Agnesi mathematician
Isaac Milner Lucasian Professor of Mathematics
Michael Faraday
Charles Babbage
Gregor Mendel "father of modern genetics"
Asa Gray - Gray's Manual remains a pivotal work in botany.
Louis Pasteur Inventor of the pasteurization method, a french chemist
and microbiologist. He also solved the mysteries of rabies, anthrax,
chicken cholera, and silkworm diseases, and contributed to the
development of the first vaccines.
Lord Kelvin Thermodynamics. winner of the Copley Medal and the Royal Medal,
Pierre Duhem Thermodynamic potentials
Dmitri Egorov mathematician - differential geometry
John Ambrose Flemingthe Right-hand rule and work on vacuum tubes,
Fleming valve. the Hughes Medal.
Max Planck founder of Quantum mechanics (1918 Nobel Prize in Physics
Edward Arthur Milne astrophysicist and mathematician proposed the Milne
model and had a Moon crater named for him. Gold Medal of the Royal
Astronomical Society,
Arthur Compton Nobel Prize in Physics.
Georges Lemaître proposed the Big Bang theory. Roman Catholic priest
Sir Robert Boyd pioneer in British space science
von Weizsäcker nuclear physicist Bethe-Weizsäcker formula.
Charles Hard Townes 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics 1966 wrote The
Convergence of Science and Religion.
Freeman Dyson the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, and the Lewis
Thomas Prize.
John T. Houghtonco-chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change gold medal from the Royal Astronomical Society.
Micha? Heller mathematical physicist relativistic physics and
Noncommutative geometry.
Eric PriestSolar Magnetohydrodynamics , won the George Ellery Hale Prize
Francis Collins director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute.
John D. Barrow English cosmologist implications of the Anthropic principle.
Denis Alexander Director of the Faraday Institute and author of
Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century.
Christopher IshamTheoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism.
Martin NowakEvolutionary biologist and mathematician best known for
evolutionary dynamics.

And that's just a partial list of Western scientists who were believers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_scientists
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. And how many of those
had to overcome the hinderances of the religion to which they belonged in order to make any contributions to our scientific knowledge?

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." Nowhere does this phrase seem more applicable than in the day to day workings of religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. That's irrelevant.
These are great men of science who were also people of faith.

Something the extremists on both ends believe is not possible.

How others reacted is irrelevant to the discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. Oh it's very relevant.
You see, it's not that religious PEOPLE individually stand against science and progress, it's that RELIGIONS do so en masse and have done so for centuries, and wherever possible they force their adherents to do the same.

In other words, to use someone like Galileo as an example of a person who achieved scientific significance while espousing belief is dishonest. He achieved that significane in spite of his faith, since he had to go up against said faith to back up his work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #65
67. If you say so.
Might help you to learn some history first, tho.

You see, Galileo didn't succeed in spite of his faith. In fact, Pope Urban VII, who granted Galileo permission to publish his book "Dialogue on the Two World Systems", was Galileo's long time friend and supported him. It wasn't until Urban felt mocked by the character Simplicito in that book that their relationship soured.

Like I said, extremists on both ends...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ironbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #67
68. Add to that…his ‘church’ was not his ‘faith’. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
41. Not really.
It is men, who don't fear God, using His word to further their personal agendas that is causing the division and animosity.

Nothing in the Bible, and certainly not the teachings that Jesus left for us, has anything to do with the craziness that abounds in today's society. Any cursory reading of the New Testament will reveal that the same kinds of men were in control of the establishment of Jerusalem back in the day. It's Worldly politics and the people that are driving it that is the problem.

The last U.S. politician I can think of that sincerely feared God is probably Jimmy Carter. We all see where that got him. Oh well, he's still one of the finest men I've ever met.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #41
47. I may be misinterpreting your post, but everything after your title seems to support
what I believe. I did not say that "faith" or "belief in God or Allah or Yahweh or whoever" was the problem. I said RELIGION was.

Religion is the manmade set of traditions and rules that often have nothing to do with the Bible, the Quran or any other text except, perhaps, a bestselling series of paperbacks which have made one of the high priests filthy rich. It was inevitable that some political operative would eventually realize: "Hey, if these idiots will buy Jim and Tammy, Benny Hinn and Pat Robertson, I can sure as hell sell them ol' George W.!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #47
55. In that context...
you are, of course, exactly right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-10 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. Bullshit n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
60. It seems curious, that in a society dominated by corporate advertising
that aims to create artificial insecurities and needs, with consumerism promoted as the "cure" -- a society in which specific sectors have every material interest in confusing and misleading people about the actual structure of power -- a society in which hardly any important issue is discussed on a careful factual basis and where policy conversations at the public level occur at the level of emotional soundbites -- a society where the consumption of fictional entertainment is perhaps the greatest common denominator of an atomized population -- it seems curious that in such a society one could seriously identify something vague nebulous and ill-defined (like "religion") as the cause of the loss of the body-politic, of the loss of civility, of the loss of some mythic harmony that we had in some forgotten past

Political division and animosity are natural when there are conflicting interests. And it is common in history for some people to attempt to mask and mystify the important existing material conflicts, by seeding and nurturing other conflicts, in order to keep people divided and atomized and powerless, and to divert attention from real issues

The view advocated in the OP is at best sophomoric, and at worst it actively serves reactionary interests by providing a vague nebulous and ill-defined scapegoat. How, for example, does one look at the Iraq war -- a war launched by an administration controlled by oil interests, that promised oil revenues from Iraq would pay many costs, a war started with a myriad of conflicting dishonest public claims, echoed uncritically and amplified by the corporate media -- and conclude that "religion" was to blame for the whole mess?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
66. Yep, and if you even dare criticize a religious notion as BS you are called a bigot.
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC