I'm curious as to why more people don't see this. All I see religion as, is a crutch for the weak minded.

Example:

A bird dies, and two young boys and a girl see it. Jimmy says, "Chances are that bird died because of that wound on its wing. Perhaps it was attacked by a venomous animal, or just bled to death. However without full examination, the birds true death will never be ceratin", then the other boy, Billy, says, "No Jimmy, it was simply the birds time to go!". Both boys turn to the girl, Lucy, and stare waiting for her response as it will settle the argument.

However Lucy doesn't know why the bird died and is debating between whichof the two answers is best. If Lucy agrees with Jimmy, that there is an obvious sign of possible death, but truly no evidence, and the bird must be examined properly to determine the cause of his demise, then it is clear Lucy is willing to take time/effort, and use her mind to dsitinguish between the thousand possiblities to come to a comclusion. However if she agrees with Billy, that it was simply 'his time to go', then it is clear Lucy does not want to examine evidence, or put work into her decision, because it is easier to believe things just happen because they're supposed to, rather then for a sometimes lengthy, and difficult to come by reason.

OBVIOUSLY there are some holes in the story, but its not some iron clad statement meant to change the ways of religious people, its just soemthing to get across how I feel.

I don't understand, how people can simply sit back, and accept everything in this earth, as a work of god. Don't you ever seak proof, or evidence?

And don't you realize religious folk have a sort of circular logic, that simply turns your question around instead of answering it? For example if I say, "Has there ever been proof of gods existance?" instead of replying with the true answer, of NO, they will say, "Has there ever been proof that god doesn't exist!?"

Now, thats just stupidity. If I find a person dead on the street, and soemone says "Hey you killed her!" it's logical that my defence would be "Wheres the proof I killed her?" the prosecuter however cannot come back and say "Wheres the proof you didnt!"

By all logic the burden of proof should be on those making the accusation. Or in religious cases, those introducing the ideas. How can soemone simply say "Here is what happened, and I am right simply because it is just as impossible for you to prove me wrong, as it is for me to prove myelf right!" Thats 100% illogical, and that portraiys many religions very accuratly.

The way I see it, religion is a crutch. When soemone does not possess the mental capacity to realize that the world is full of questions we will never be able to answer, because what we need to know is so far out of reach, they turn to religion because it lays out all the answers. Well, it lays out whats said to be the answers.

Death fits into that a lot. Some people can't acept that when we die we will simply not exist. We will just no longer be here. So they turn to religion, because it even explains our 'after life'.

But Im sure this will all be turned around, wityh that circular logic. For example thigns like, "If you're not dead how do you know there is no afterlife!" well just the same, I can use the same logic to say unless they're dead they dont know it does exist. As well, Im sure I'll be told that non-believers are too weak to accept the fact that the 'answers' are all right here, and they just cant realize/handle it.

But I digress, and await responses out of simple curiosity.

Im not even going to read that. I think everyone here is tired of newby 15 year olds coming on here and saying the same thing over and over again because their sell-out hippie public-educator said so.

Actually, he didn't appear to be some belligerent atheist pre-teen with an issue with his father figure, or any of those series of stereotypes, Spirit.
You Ass-U-Me too much.

I like what he said about circular logic

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Im not even going to read that. I think everyone here is tired of newby 15 year olds coming on here and saying the same thing over and over again because their sell-out hippie public-educator said so.

---

You have a real shitty attitude and are very arrogant. Stop it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SomeEverydayNobody:
I'm curious as to why more people don't see this. All I see religion as, is a crutch for the weak minded.

........

I don't understand, how people can simply sit back, and accept everything in this earth, as a work of god. Don't you ever seak proof, or evidence?

.

But I digress, and await responses out of simple curiosity.

---

Your post hinges on the preconception that religion is always a crutch, whereas many would say their religion is a means of asking the questions to reveal the mystery of life. Stereotyping of all 'religious' people as of the same mind is as ignorant of the truth as those who do not take the time to "seak proof, or evidence".

I think it would apply very well to most Christians a lot of us are so accustomed to.

i'm more used to christians who would have said "that bird died because it didnt believe in christ the lord. its going to hell"

>>>Actually, he didn't appear to be some belligerent atheist pre-teen with an issue with his father figure, or any of those series of stereotypes, Spirit.
<<<<

I didnt say he was. He is, however, obviously a barely pubescent wet-behind-the ears sophomoric pain in the ass, who obviously heard some similarly ignorant jackoff and regurgitated it on here. As if we havent heard this argument 57683 times before. Honestly, its no different than me making a topic that says, "ignorant savages: why giants obviously dont live in the earth."

So... does that mean you went back and read it, or are you still assuming?

quote:

---

Originally posted by SomeEverydayNobody:

And don't you realize religious folk have a sort of circular logic, that simply turns your question around instead of answering it? For example if I say, "Has there ever been proof of gods existance?" instead of replying with the true answer, of NO, they will say, "Has there ever been proof that god doesn't exist!?"

Now, thats just stupidity.

---

It's more than stupidity, it's sheer idiocy. It's an argument from ignorance. People that believe in things because they can't be disproven are blind to all reason and brainwashed beyond repair. If God didn't exist, per the painfully obvious indication, there would be no way of showing it.

What would be the criteria for falsification of the proposition that there is a God? In other words, if there wasn't a God how could one show that?

Well formed, objective statements about reality, usually have some criteria of falsification. If the statement "There is a God." doesn't have any criteria for falsification, then there are reasons to think that the statement is not a well-formed, objective statement about reality.

I will expand a bit on my above point.

What I'm asking is this. What would it take to prove that there was no God?

"If you can show "_______", than that would be evidence against their being a God."

If they can't fill in that blank with some criteria, then the statement that there is a God seems to be without content since no matter what the evidence was, they would still believe in a God.

The credibility of a religion depends on the justifiability of its truth claims. There are three basic criteria we commonly employ to determine the validity and truthfulness of a worldview. These criteria affirm that in order for a religion to be true it must be: Logically consistent - Factually Verifiable - Existentially Livable. It is meaningless to say that reality is beyond logic or that religion is a matter of faith and devoid of reason for this very statement presupposes logic.

I could say that sock puppets are conspiring to take over the world when not being observed or recorded and there's no way you could prove me wrong. You can't disprove something that has no proof to begin with. There is no proof to dispell. The same reason they shouldn't be believing it is the same reason it cannot be shown to be false in the first place, that reason being no proof.

Here's an example to illustrate what I mean:

Jimmy says that he has an invisible pink elephant in his room. If all non-visual tests fail to reveal the elephant and require such ad-hoc rationalizations such as "He's weightless and doesn't leave footprints.", then it becoomes evidence against it's existence.

So ultimately, religion is a baseless claim because it has nothing to base it's assertions off of. They are human constructs. If the religion was actually based on something that a testable hypothesis could be built on, then it would be credible. Since their is no criteria for falsification and the religion was founded of a basis of beliefs and not data, then they seem to be without merit.

It's the easyest thing in the world to tell someone that good things will happen to them after they die if they submit to your rules and if they don't, bad things will. That is a propaganda tactic. It pressures you into believing it with social pressure, fear, propaganda, and threat. Subsequentially, since we have logically evolved since then and now know much more about reality, we can shed these ancient superstitions in pursuit of the real truth and not just some ill-contrived baseless conclusion cooked up several thousand years ago.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dark_Magneto:
[B] So ultimately, religion is a baseless claim because it has nothing to base it's assertions off of. They are human constructs. If the religion was actually based on something that a testable hypothesis could be built on, then it would be credible. Since their is no criteria for falsification and the religion was founded of a basis of beliefs and not data, then they seem to be without merit.[B]

---

Thats exactly my point, when it comes to the existance of god. Which is pretty ironic seeing as how I'm sure if I walked upto a very religios person, and accused them of murder, they would want proof.

Some might say a scenario like that is way more serious. Is sending a man to jail worse then pushing/forcing your beliefes on people, based on just about the same amount of evidence, as 'You did it because you can't prove you didnt!'.

Like you said, pure idiocy. Seeing as how proving soemthings non-existance is a serious oxy moron. If something doesn't exist, then not only are there no traces of existance, but there are no traces of non existance. Proving non-existance is impossible.

quote:

---

Your post hinges on the preconception that religion is always a crutch, whereas many would say their religion is a means of asking the questions to reveal the mystery of life. Stereotyping of all 'religious' people as of the same mind is as ignorant of the truth as those who do not take the time to "seak proof, or evidence".

---

You're right. I'm no better then tose who preach their religion. They will sit there and say, 'All non-believers are the same' while I sit here and say, 'All believers are the same'. The only difference I see is that their assumptions are way more obvious. If Jim and Joe don't believe in any god, then of course their almost exactly the same on a religious level. Whereas if Kate and Lisa believe in a god, theres a hundred different options there! So truly Im the wrong one to generalize all those who are religious, but it would be mind numbing to sit here point out the flaws of each different type of believer.

I guess I'm more after those who are strong believers. Obviously when it comes to the feelings of soemone whos simply christian, the possibilities are endless. But with strong believers/fanatics their roughly on the same page.


Spirit of '22:

quote:

---

Im not even going to read that. I think everyone here is tired of newby 15 year olds coming on here and saying the same thing over and over again because their sell-out hippie public-educator said so.

>>>Actually, he didn't appear to be some belligerent atheist pre-teen with an issue with his father figure, or any of those series of stereotypes, Spirit.
<<<<
I didnt say he was. He is, however, obviously a barely pubescent wet-behind-the ears sophomoric pain in the ass, who obviously heard some similarly ignorant jackoff and regurgitated it on here. As if we havent heard this argument 57683 times before. Honestly, its no different than me making a topic that says, "ignorant savages: why giants obviously dont live in the earth."

---

I know I shouldn't even waste my time on garbage like this, but what the hell, I have a few minutes to kill. On the issue of being a 'newbie', why does it even matter when I joined? Does my being a member for a week, make my opinion less important then if I was a member for a year? No. And just to clarify, you joined Dec, 2001. I joined Jan, 2002. So I'm a whole month behind you!

As for being 15, you're not too far off. Im turning 17. So you where pretty close. But I think my age is irrelavent. I didn't come out and say 'Hehe, religious people are gay!' so as long as my posts are mature, and well thought out there shouldnt be a problem!

And finally, as for my having 'regugitated' soemthign I heard, not exactly. Granted a few of my points are influenced by others arguments, but that going to be the same for anyone. However, this is how I feel about it, not soemone elses feelings. And you know what, if you've heard it a million times, and don't like it, then don't read it. Why even comment on it? I myself enjoy debating religion, so making a post about it is obviously a good choice. And truly everything you hear about religion is back and forth with newly shaped opinions. Thats all it can be, as its not like we can attack a new piece of scientific evidence on the subject, as it doesnt exist!

So you know what, I think you should really find a small kid to go beat up, or molest, or jerk off to as they walk down the street, or whatever it is you do to release tnesion, because you seem to have a lot of it. And I just couldnt see you talking the way you do to someone even 3/4 your size, because when they where done, youde probably come out 1/2 their size! Dont you love hiding behind a computer screen and acting liek a big man!

Anyways, dont even reply to that, Ide rather keep this on topic. We've both got our shots in, so thats it, Ide liek to keep this on topic please!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:

I didnt say he was. He is, however, obviously a barely pubescent wet-behind-the ears sophomoric pain in the ass, who obviously heard some similarly ignorant jackoff and regurgitated it on here. As if we havent heard this argument 57683 times before. Honestly, its no different than me making a topic that says, "ignorant savages: why giants obviously dont live in the earth."

---

Point One: Do you do anything other than flame? Ever? I have honestly never seen you post anything worthwhile. But your stupidity is not the point of this thread, which brings us to

Point Two: SomeEverydayNobody raises a valid point. Those who have entered upon religion by chance rather than reason should not be allowed to subject others to their bullshit. However, I think you forget a group of people (small as they may be)who actually come to grips with christianity (as I you are generally illuding to it) through reason. Let me state before I proceed any further, that I am an Athiest, and I am also 17. (shut the fuck up spirit im not 15 either)

I think your argument is fundamentally flawed as it deals only with the problem of death. Religion does not have to center around the afterlife, best illustrated by the Jews from about 3500 BC to 250 BC. Their religion existed pretty much as it does today, except they had no concept of heaven or hell. True, the fundamental human fear of death is a strong reason for religious thinking, that is rarely the only reason for adhearing to a creed.

Religion, more often than death, has been used to help impose an underlying system of values upon a culture. Dont cheat. Dont steal. Dont kill. These concepts are nescessary to a functional society. (We all know that hell comes into play as a means of enforcement) I feel that as a moral code, religion is a useful tool. Without religion, people wouldnt walk down street and kill each other, but there would probably be more crime and violence.

I think you are faulting a good idea for the actions of an overzealous few. <<Cough>> <<Cough>> <<Jerry Falwell>> <<Cough>> Since you seem fairly interested in the subject, I would recomend reading a bit about Karl Rahner, a catholic theologan who could probably give you a better understanding of where theyre comming from, even if it isnt for you. (or me for that matter)

>>>>Do you do anything other than flame?<<<<

Often, yeah. You probably just dont read it.

>>>>>I have honestly never seen you post anything worthwhile. But your stupidity is not the point of this thread<<<<

Oh good. Perhaps you can enlighten me and begin one to make yourself more clear to me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hired_Thug:


Religion, more often than death, has been used to help impose an underlying system of values upon a culture. Dont cheat. Dont steal. Dont kill. These concepts are nescessary to a functional society. (We all know that hell comes into play as a means of enforcement) I feel that as a moral code, religion is a useful tool. Without religion, people wouldnt walk down street and kill each other, but there would probably be more crime and violence.

---

But look at christianity for example, what are the goals of a christian, on religious terms? Treat people well, do as youre told, and worship god. And for what? To get into a place of enternal happyness after death. Basically they tell us life is like a test. If you can prove youre worthy, and have faith, when the test is over, you may proceed to your afterlife, which is the true goal. SO really a lot of religion does focus on death, as they tell us everythign we do while alive, is simply leading up to that BIG thing we'vbeen waiting for.

But dont get me wrong, I do understand what youre saying, and youre right.

As for Spitit of 22, ignore him. [Im sure hes used to that]

While not a religious person myself I can sympathize with people who were raised in a religious environment, I think it would take a lot of confidence in whatever new viewpoints he/she had arrived at to shrug off a belief system that saturated their early lives. This is probibly why even some very rational, scientifically minded people will go to great lengths to justify their belief in a higher power. To describe religion as a crutch would, in my opinion, be fairly accurate, especially if it is used to support secular views, ie:anti gay, anti abortion, but I would like to make it a point to separate organized religion from personal belief systems. While religion may be a crutch, a belief system (that is to say, things we choose to believe rather than things things that are proven to us empirically ) is an important part of a persons psyche. A couple of you mentioned your ages, I am 32, and have endured my share of personal crises that sometime had me wishing I had a god to pray to. You will find that as you get older (fuck, I swore I would never talk like that, but WTF this is a religious discussion, rules of engagement are suspended), defining your place in the universe will become more important. "I am (name) the __________." , that blank will eventually become important to you. Religion is tempting even to a rational mind because it sorts this out in a manner that does not require any further explanation, just a commitment of time and belief, and provides a baseline for further refining ones place in the universe. ie: Christian Onion Farmers of North Dakota (heh,heh) Obviouly a member of this group would define himself primarily as a christian, then by his career, then by his geography. By defining himself as a christian first he solidifies in his mind his place in the world and may go about farming onions without worrying about any nasty theological debates. The poor non believer on the other hand searches endlessly for ways in which to define himself, some end up adopting religious views from foreign countries, usually whatever is getting the most press. For every 5 occidental Taoists I meet, maybe one has delved deeply enough into taoism for it to really be a religion to them, the rest are just looking for a little structure for their personal beliefs and a way to be a little different. My end point being, while religions can constrict the viewpoints of their followers and are often abused to support secular viewpoints, the need to define one's self is very powerful, a little unfounded belief can go a long way towards separating a person from the herd or finding community, depending on whatever a person needs in their life at the time.

And as for you 'spirit of 22', piss off eh'! Just because you have discussed this before doesnt mean it is valueless as a topic, everybody else posting in this thread seems to be genuinely interested in the topic, do do us all a favor and roll right on past it the next time youre looking to crap on somebody.

[This message has been edited by culinaryoverlord (edited 10-05-2002).]

culinary,

Good post, good points, I enjoyed it.

Nox

quote:

---

Originally posted by SomeEverydayNobody:
And for what? To get into a place of enternal happyness after death. Basically they tell us life is like a test.

---

Thats basically what I was refering to with my allusion to Karl Rahner. (sorry if I didnt go too deeply into it, it was 330 am and I was tired) At any rate, to paraphrase, Rahner says that good deeds and kindness, ect. are the reward in themselves. We need to stop thinking of hell as a punishment and heaven in terms of a reward and focus more upon the actions themselves. (He says a lot more about the nature of God that I dont really buy into, but his other teachings have some merit.)

I think this leads into another topic that I am about to post on actually, about how the church has been so warped since its conception that it now bears little resembelance to the cult Jesus intended.

btw, great post culinary

Thanks for the compliments, I love discussing religion, unfortunately my favorite place to do it is in a bar, this is like doing jumping jacks in a bathtub full of rattlesnakes, posting here is much safer! Also, I have been without weed for over a week because I am totally fucking broke (hint hint anbody in Vancouver BC), and my brain is starting to function in a linear non-weeded fashon.
Cheers.

We'll yes weak minded people use religion as a crutch. There's nothing wrong about needing God for something. But really smart people who don't need God who still worship him I think are good people cause they see past everything that blocks us in this world. The movie MATRIX presents this. Are you a smart person and find if theres really a God or do you just tell everyone cause you don't know where He is that there is no God. Can you see the wind smart person?

[sarcasm]Wow you must be the first person to ever think that![/sarcasm] *cough* moron *cough*