fucking terrifying

[The STE]

see, I'm fine with that. Fuck hippies.


Note, however, that I said there is nothing wrong with RELIGION. It is the people that do horrible things I have a problem with. If someone came up to me and said "Hi, I'm a Scientologist", I wouldn't hold it against them. I mean, I'd think it was weird and random, but I wouldn't hold their religious beliefs against them

[PR3SSUR3]

No, but to the non-believer it breeds general contempt when the only real things we can see happening as a result of religion are bloody wars and convenient sadistic sexual assaults.

Bah! I misspelled degrees.

[The STE]

but those are the actions of people who are using religion to justify their misdeeds. That isn't the religion

[PR3SSUR3]

It isn't the Catholic religion to molest choirboys, but that such a proportion of priests have been at it suggests The Pope's understudies are non too reliable to say the least. Most damagingly, The Catholic Church have attempted to cover up such acts in the past. I'm sure no splinter of the Catholic Faith will condone child rape, but that this despicable act has occured under such hallowed circumstances time and time again makes one wonder about the dedication and sincerity of its teachers. So many bad apples in one basket?

Islam doesn't encourage murder, but the militants use their own interpretation of The Qur'an to justify it.

If the 'good' followers of these religions produced more than generally uptight and stuffy values and rituals and complaints to TV stations about violence and porn, the 'bad' side might be a little easier to stomach - but not much.

[Haunted]

Not all fascists are Nazis.

You mentioned experience as a reasonable way to come to a conclusion. How can you discount the experience of, say, a Hindu woman at the temple to Kali in Dakinswar India versus the experience of playing golf on the moon? To the woman in the temple, she'd probably say her experience is more profound.

Another sort of example... We can't actually see electrons. We know that they're there because they emit the ever famous electron cloud. So if we can't actually see them, how do we know that they're similar to the little red ball represented in the atomic model. What if they're actually little old British men on motor scooters driving really really really fast. It's absurd, but so is calling me a hippy.

You keep making references to varying Christian problems and crimes. My guess is that's because you don't actually know shit about religion. Don't give me the Oxford Dictionary definition of religion. That's retarded. They also don't know shit about religion. Religion is not something that is easily defined because it's different for every person that holds a system of personal beliefs.

The ostrich reference... Bury you head in the sand until you come across a topic you can rationally discuss.

[PR3SSUR3]

Without getting too deeply scientific or religious (though we can if you want), you are suggesting that because it cannot be proved than electrons are not in fact little men on scooters then religion still has some validity.

I have to agree that if electrons are actually these speeding men, your religious theories will indeed have more clout as the whole logic system collapses.

However not only are new discoveries, facts, links and causes unveiled in every new science journal (keep an eye out for those further electron understandings), you seem to think that because life still holds some mysteries then science and biology cannot possibly provide all the answers and there is room for speculative fantasy.

The only thing new in religion is The DaVinci Code, and I can't stand Tom Hanks.

I'm sure the woman in India did enjoy herself, but what use is this to anyone but her? What does it produce, and what would happen if she did not do it?

[The STE]

Originally posted by PR3SSUR3
It isn't the Catholic religion to molest choirboys, but that such a proportion of priests have been at it suggests The Pope's understudies are non too reliable to say the least. Most damagingly, The Catholic Church have attempted to cover up such acts in the past. I'm sure no splinter of the Catholic Faith will condone child rape, but that this despicable act has occured under such hallowed circumstances time and time again makes one wonder about the dedication and sincerity of its teachers. So many bad apples in one basket?

Islam doesn't encourage murder, but the militants use their own interpretation of The Qur'an to justify it.

If the 'good' followers of these religions produced more than generally uptight and stuffy values and rituals and complaints to TV stations about violence and porn, the 'bad' side might be a little easier to stomach - but not much.

You're still focusing on the negative portion of the people following the religion instead of the religion its self. My argument is simple: RELIGION is not bad. That people who follow particular religions have done terrible things does nothing to disprove that. All it does is show that people do bad things. The actions of those people are not indicitive of the core beliefs of the religion.

[The STE]

Originally posted by PR3SSUR3
Without getting too deeply scientific or religious (though we can if you want), you are suggesting that because it cannot be proved than electrons are not in fact little men on scooters then religion still has some validity.

I have to agree that if electrons are actually these speeding men, your religious theories will indeed have more clout as the whole logic system collapses.

However not only are new discoveries, facts, links and causes unveiled in every new science journal (keep an eye out for those further electron understandings), you seem to think that because life still holds some mysteries then science and biology cannot possibly provide all the answers and there is room for speculative fantasy.

The only thing new in religion is The DaVinci Code, and I can't stand Tom Hanks.

I'm sure the woman in India did enjoy herself, but what use is this to anyone but her? What does it produce, and what would happen if she did not do it?

I'll give you the candy bar of your choosing if you keep that book the fuck out of this discussion

[PR3SSUR3]

But religion needs people in order for it to exist, and the practice of its preachers is always going to affect perception of the product. The twisted irony of murder and abuse revelations inside systems where peace and harmony is so heavily championed is jarring, and medical and scientific advances are rapidly putting paid to any outdated theories of divine activity. Psuedoscience on the bigger questions is becoming more logical and conclusive.

Of course this does not mean all followers of all religions are idiots - stupid may even be too harsh a word - but they have been misguided into pursuing a nonexistent and irrelivant reality. Some 'turn' to religion, some are born into it, some pick it up as a fashion accessory trying to become all mysterious and give themselves an 'angle'. None achieve anything they could not achieve without this blind faith or go to a Heaven or Hell (prove otherwise, and I'll show you an electron).

If you're saying there is nothing wrong in the theory of reincarnation, that a superhuman God exists or that one can achieve spiritual enlightenment through intense introspection then fair enough - but as I've said there are a lot of rotten apples in the religion basket, enough to decide the whole concept of religious faith is much more bother that it is worth.

[The STE]

you act as though there are no non-religious assholes. You keep bringing in the actions of a portion (maybe the majority, maybe not) of the followers of certain religions as an indication of the religion its self. That is just faulty logic.

And I'm not going to argue the whole existence/nonexistence thing. Not because I agree, I don't, but because there is no evidence to support either side. I will simply say that lack of proof is not proof of a lack and then I shall leave it be and suggest that we not make the discussion so petty in the future.