Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 1,301-1,350 of 12,463

[Alona]

I don't fail to understand what you're saying, but what I am saying is that in this country, people have a choice and can believe in whatever it is that they want, despite of their parents' religion or upbringing.

[Hazel]

yes, thats true. But the fact is, do they? Or do they stick with following what their parents and their local pastor have indoctrinated them with since they were very very small? For the most part, they stick with the religion they were raised with. And if they'd been born elsewhere to different parents, they'd have been raised to a different religion.

Freedom of religion is all well and good, in fact, the very idea is wonderful, if only it were true in practice and no-one in America was prejudice about religions that differ to theirs, but I digress, in the end few people deviate from what they're raised with.

[Bunnie]

hazel and keith--what does it matter to any of us if Einsteins theory is wrong--scientists will just work on something else and who knows what they will find-i got the info from my grandson who graduated from
CAl Tec a couple years ago --he is no doubt smarter that any of us.of course that still doesn't make him right--we'll see

[Alona]

Well, in some cases, it's true, but there are exceptions of people that deviated from their own faith! Of course, they may have paid the price for it, but it does happen!

[Connie]

Hazel wrote: "Whirlwind, we hit 7 billion on Monday:

http://mylbsonline.net/index.php?opti...

And somehow the world didn't fall..."

What does it matter whether we hit it on Monday or Wednesday? No one could POSSIBLY know the precise count on any given day, but that was hardly my point. Neither was my point that the world will fall apart. I asked the question to see what the opinions are from the people in this group, not to be corrected on which day it did or did not happen. Cheers.

[Connie]

Hazel wrote: http://www.stefanoboeriarchitetti.net...

LOL! This is just a change-up of the human filing cabinets that we already have. (That's what I call apartment buildings). Nothing really innovative in it.

[Rovilla Francesca]

obviously you can't live without both for they balance each other... take away the other and the balance within it will be upset...

[Hazel]

Whirlwind, I wasn't correcting you, I was showing you the article, because I thought you'd be interested.

Personally I think that vertical farms would be innovative, can you imagine the amount of technology for irrigation and hydroponics that would be needed to create a vertical farm? In the future every town and city might have vertical farms and forests. And the amount of extra growing room they would create. I think its quite an exciting prospect.

Bunnie, its interesting, its true that very little will be effected in the grand scheme of things, but its intriguing nevertheless. I'm looking forward to what they find. Of course, if they do find that the neutrinos are moving faster than the speed of light, they then have to work out if the results are valid, ie whether they can be applied to the natural world outside of the lab, because its possible that even if the neutrinos are found to be travelling faster than light, that they may only do it in the conditions created by the accelerator in which they are being tested, and not in the natural world. Its all really interesting.

[Bunnie]

hazel,, i don't think i am going to argue about neutrinos anymore--i asked my grandson and he sent me a link which i hope i took down correctly--this stuff is way over my head--the link is---http;//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/tachyon------hope you can get this-i have kept his message in case-let me know will you?

[Connie]

Well, that's one scientific way of dealing with the future population problem.

What about teaching responsible birth control and making it affordable and available in 3rd world countries where some women are still dying in childbirth?

Plus, somehow sometime, people have to get the catholics to listen to good sense and reason, AND ethical behaviour vis a vis the rest of world population, in their ridiculous no-contraceptives religious rule. Their bull-headedness gets really sickening after a few millennia. It's time they were shown up for what they really are.

[Bunnie]

hazel--i;ll try again--------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon----

i noticed the Tachyon was capitalized
who was it i was arguing with ? i think it was keith--forgot!

[Connie]

Alona wrote: "I don't fail to understand what you're saying, but what I am saying is that in this country, people have a choice and can believe in whatever it is that they want, despite of their parents' religion or upbringing. "

More or less. Politically, we have freedom of choice and all that...I am speaking of the Western world, as I live in Canada. But there are factors sometimes holding us back such as financial, and other circumstances, but that's not my point.

Religion often overrides those political freedoms no matter where you live, holds people back from being free to make their own personal, individual choices. Would parents kill their daughters if not for their religion? (There is a court case happening currently in my province, in which a couple killed their daughters and their aunt when their car was pushed into a canal.) This insanity took place because they believe in so-called "honour killings"--I wish someone would tell me this: where is the honour in the father, brother and mother who are responsible for the deaths of FOUR women???? THIS IS WHAT RELIGION NOT ONLY TEACHES, BUT ALLOWS! WTF??

I do mean to be dramatic by the way, this just gets under my skin. It is revolting, unimaginable and so barbaric!

Would women be free to decide what to wear if not for their religion? Would there be smaller families if not for their religion? Would there be less prejudice if not for religion? Would there be less child abuse if not for religious clerics sodomizing little boys and raping little girls? Religion provides refuge for the clerics when they commit a hideous crime; on the other hand they threaten followers with punishment if they dare to practice birth control!

Religion is such hypocrisy.

This post isn't meant as a rebuttal to you Alona, but some of what has recently been mentioned seemed to call for this comment. I truly do wonder just what good, if any, religion in and of itself is doing, that people would not already do without it? The human race is inherently good and it is inherently bad, in some sort of balance, but I'm not sure that the balance is equal. It is not possible to get rid of evil, but religion is surely not even trying! It brings more evil to the world than we can imagine. The trouble is, people don't think about that fact.

I'd really like to hear from a religious believer to challenge my point.

[Hazel]

Whirlwind, I actually don't conisder it purely a way to cope with the overpopulation problem, sure it would help, but if we had vertical farms, then we would be able to leave more wild places as they are instead of converting them to farmland, while also helping to feed the ever growing population.

China, as you pointed out, has their one child only policy, and to an extent this is working to prevent population growth, unfortunately it is also resulting in girls being rejected, meaning that many of them end up in orphanages, or being aborted before birth. ANd one type of abortion I don't like is gender specific abortion. However, they have now passed laws in china that you can't be told your childs sex when you have a scan, and they are introducing measures to encourage people to keep their baby girls - financial incentives etc. So, hopefully, the imbalance between males and females will start sorting itself out. I can understand why they've made the law about only one child, though I do shudder at the idea of such control over peoples decisions.

ON the Catholic situation, I agree completely that they should be more lax on their contraception laws (Jean Paul 2 nearly folded on them a couple of times, but the cardinals wouldn't allow it), and they should be made to take responsibilty for the results of their teachings over contraception, especially in relation to the lies the pope has sanctioned about condoms and AIDS. I'm reasonably sure there are actually plenty of catholics (in the western world at least) who ignore the rules on contraception, I know several couples where at least one in the relationship is catholic, and as yet, despite a full sexual relationship over several years, no children have been forthcoming. My godparents are catholic, and just celebrated their 40yr anniversary, they only had one child, and it would be niave to think they had no physical relationship beyond producing one child.

What is this case of "honour killings" you mention? I haven't heard of this, and would be interested to know whats going on.

[[deleted user]]

Hazel, BBC has a good explanation for honour crimes, follow the link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/honourcri...

[Thomas]

I find it Ironic that the very same question posed differently is what got Adam and Eve thrown out of the Garden of Eden.

God said not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, or some people intrepret it as just the Tree of Knowledge, seeking knowledge for its own right.

Yet that is what got them taken out of paridise! Humans, God's creation, will always be corruptable! It is the very knowledge and search for knowledge that prevents us from finding peace.

I have always heard that ignorance is bliss, but in my later years this has taken on a deeper meaning.

I Used to think how wonderful the stupid, unintelligent have it, they don't even know what they are missing or enough to be upset about this or that.

Now the more I learn the more I realize I don't know squat! With some more learning and studying I will eventually realize I don't know anything and return to an educated position of ignorance, and thus Bliss!
Something to ponder now isn't it?

[Hazel]

One issue with your logic there, and that's the stuff relating to Adam and Eve. If for a moment we pretend they even existed, then before they ate from the tree they had no concept of right or wrong, thus, it wasn't until they ate the fruit that they realised what they'd done. On top of this, God is sold to us as omniscient, so God knew they were going to eat the fruit before he even made them, he didn't prevent it, when he could with his omnipotence, and he allowed the serpent to tempt them, thus can be read as God tempted them, and did so before they had any concept of what they were being tempted with. And THEN God punishes them for doing what a) he always knew they would do and b) what he engineered to happen. The question was never posed to Adam and Eve if you accept them as real, because they hadn't the mental ability to even understand right from wrong, because God had withheld it from them. To punish someone for doing something that you specifically prevented them from understanding while also engineering the situation yourself is plain petty and childish, never mind cruel and contemptible.

[[deleted user]]

Thomas, if everyone thought like you do science wouldn't exist and we still would be in pre-historic times.

I agree with you when you say that the more we learn the more we feel ignorante. But I see it in other perspective: the more I know the more I want to learn and understand what's around me. The more I know the better I can be and turn this world in a better place.

Ignorance isn't a bliss. I prefer Martin Luther King Jr. saying: “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”

[Hazel]

Oh, and what Nicia says too ^^

"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance but to overcome it" Lawrence M. Krauss

Learning more, and discovering there is even more beyond that is one of the greatest joys in life, in my humble opinion.

[Thomas]

One way I heard it explained was that God created Adam and Eve and put them in paridise, but he gave them a free spirit to choose and do what they may.
Did he know the outcome? Yes. He gave us our free spirit, he gave us the choice, he tricked us if you will but I also believe in my soul life wouldn't have advanced, we wouldn't be human, faulable, loveable, awful, and perfect in all our many forms and wonders if we had been left to rot in the garden with the fruits and the flowers.

Of course the entire story is actually a metaphor of many layers that could be argued and has been argued and warred about for centuries.

As to the original question I honestly believe that spirituality and science are entertwined as much as time and space are. Religion is a different matter, and I would say through it out and leave the science.

I myself believe in God the Father, the grand designer of order out of chaos, right over wrong, and light into the darkness. I tend to catorigize religion as spirituality gone awry with differing beliefs to the point sophmoric individuals want to fight to defend their position or God forbid "Convert or Die!"
If faced with Convert of Die, I am Scottish by the history of my family, American by Grace of where I was born! I will say Prepare to Defend Yourself and FIGHT!

I would much rather be left alone to read and write books while a sip a good scotch. Amen!

[Hazel]

If god withheld the understanding of right and wrong, how was he giving free will? There is no free will if the basic tools needed to use it are withheld. To go back to an earlier part of the conversation, several pages ago, free will provided by a omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent being is an illusion and a fallacy, because if the being is all of these things, then you only have it at that beings tolerance, and he can take it away whenever he chooses. The very ability to take it away makes a mockery of the freedom of will that people profess that god has provided.

And seeing as god, being the omni-etc being that he is, created the snake that tempted eve, and gave that snake the personality and intentions that it had, then how did they ever have free will when he didn't allow them the knowledge that disobeying him is wrong. Without that understanding, how in the name of all that is sane are they supposed to make an informed decision about what they're being tempted with? He set them up to fail from the start. Of course, non of it actually happened, but its interesting from a theoretical point of view.

The fact that its been argued and warred about for centuries, and that it continues to be warred about is a big feather in the cap of the "no religion please" camp.

When it comes down to it, what's important to me is that anything I believe is true, and through investigation, rationality and the search for evidence, the only conclusion is that there is no truth in the claim that god exists. As such, the belief is rejected as false.

I can agree on the sitting with a good book and a good scotch though.

[Geoffrey]

yup. whatever. so which would you prefer to live in the world with, oranges or apples. Duhhh. Pass me an intelligent question

[Deanna]

World without religion. Science can find cures for diseases. Too many people are killed in the name of God. Where do we get the ego to think we can speak for God?

[Thomas]

As far as Good Scotch goes. During WWII when rationing was at its worst in Great Britain they let the Scotch makers get what ever they wanted in order to keep the elixer of the Gods flowing in order to provide Scotch to the Allied Troops and Commanders!

[[deleted user]]

But you were stupid enough to comment on the thread, didn't you Geoffrey?

We are not choosing between apples and oranges, we're choosing between an healthy apple and a rotten one. And if you were intelligent as you claim you would have something to say about it.

[Wayward Child]

This is a tough question. On one hand, I am an extreme believer (though not in the religious sense), because I believe in anything and everything paranormal, inexplicable, fantasy-like, you name it. The word impossible doesn`t exist in my vocabulary. But, on the other hand, I must admit that I am sceptical when it comes to God and church and religion in general. I don`t really believe in God, but I do believe in a God-like creature or force, or whatever you want to call it. Maybe it`s karma or just energy. But, after reading Angels and demons, I was certainly convinced that there are some real psychos and fanatics, both religious and scientific. So, the best thing would be for all of us to try and live peacefully in harmony, everyone believing in what they want to. But, we also know that human race has been trying to establish this peace for centuries and we still have idiots today fighting and killing themselves over some questions that might never get an answer to. So, have people learned anything from previous and present confrontations? Or, are they just too God damn stupid?

[Thomas]

My final comment on this thread.

I know we live in a super natural world where strange and explainable things happen all the time that neither Science or Religion can explain. There is so much that we don't know, much more than we do know, from our ancient past right up to the present day.

We are the readers and thinkers of this day in age, we are the best hope at explaining, understanding, and making any sense out of it all to pass down as writers for the future generations. The others either don't care, can't read, don't want to read or learn or individuals out for their own self interests.

Are we too God Damn Stupid? Hell Yes! I will read and learn until they plant me in ground. I pray I die in my sleep with a book tucked under my pillow that I fully intended on finishing. I would love for mankind to get along and jump for joy for world peace. But as long as there are idiots protesting for moronic reasons, politicians ruining our country and robbing us blind to buy their way back into office, or fanatics willing to strap a bomb to themselves to kill innocent people I can't sit idly by and do nothing.

If faced with submitting to the tyranny of government or religious frantic groups I would rather take up arms and fight. I don't submit.

I was in the United States Army and when you join the service the initial part of Basic Training is two fold.
One they take away all your freedom. Until its gone you have no true idea what it is you have!

Two they wear you down to get rid of all of mommy and daddy's crap and that of our wimpy society bullshit, so they can re-educate you to be a soldier. Some might say brain washing, those who have lived it know it is survival training 101.

The price for our Liberties has been paid over and over again, and if need be, will be re-financed with the lives of soldiers and citizens. I will not convert or die! I will not go gently into that goodnight!

As far as the atheists and non-believers! It is truly amazing the power of God and how he moves over people when you're in a fox hole taking fire and believe you could be killed at any second. The Army has a saying. There are NO Atheists in Foxholes.

Religion is each persons choice and beliefs, to be separate from the government. This nation was founded as a Christian Nation and still is to a large extent, no matter what certain politicians say. Until you have a supernatural experience, a Come to Jesus moment or something of the like that cements your faith it can be difficult to believe in that which we can't touch, see or prove. To those who have experiences such things we realize the faith of a mustard seed can move a mountain. Hope can be the difference of life and death.

The first break I got from Basic training I went to a little store on the base and bought some personal hygiene items. There was a little snack bar, where I freely purchased a small bag of M&M candies and a Coca-cola soda pop. While sitting by myself eating my M&M's and drinking a cold Coke, thinking about how great and wonderful it is to sit in a free country, have the freedom to choose what I want and the Freedom to sit and eat it, I wept! I will to my dying day remember that moment!

It's America, we are FREE! Believe what you want don't tread on others freedoms, and pray tyranny and fanatics don't push their points to hard, because people, common people, like me are in the majority, and we know and will fight to death to protect what was already bought and paid for by the Blood of Christ and the Blood of American Soldiers!

Goodnight and God Bless, the discussions in this thread have been fun, exciting, and thoughtful!
I really love the interactions on and within this site.
Thomas Wilson Writer, Patriot, Father, Christian, and forever an American Soldier.

[Connie]

Thomas wrote: "My final comment on this thread.

I know we live in a super natural world where strange and explainable things happen all the time that neither Science or Religion can explain. There is so much th..."

Very eloquently stated. Thanks for stopping by and letting us all know how you feel. You sound like a lovely man. All the best to you. :-)

[Connie]

For Hazel:

Somehow my browser isn't 'browsing' tonight so here is a term you can type into your search engine and you'll find plenty of news articles on the web about these murders. The crime took place about 300 miles from where I live:--

Global News | Timeline: Shafia family murder trial //

OR you could try searching for: "Kingston Ontario canal murders"

The sick and demented father says that he killed them for his honour. Yeah, ok buddy. And, what about how you dishonour your own self in killing 4 innocent victims, women victims? Your own daughters? Son of a bitch! The COLOSSAL mind-fucking (sorry, folks) that goes on in religion! It stymies me to no end! How CAN people be so STUPID as to believe that acts like this can bring them "Honour"? 4 dead relatives and a lifetime behind bars. Yeah, that's honour.

Think I'll go get some of that...

[Giansar]

Thomas wrote: "I know we live in a super natural world where strange and explainable things happen all the time that neither Science or Religion can explain."
Strange and inexplainable (I believe this is the word you wanted to use) in no way implies supernatural. How can you "know" something is supernatural, especially given the history of progress of our species. If you took a guy from two hundred years back and showed him how you heat up a pizza in a microwave he would probably be sure you are some kind of warlock.
I don't remember, which writer wrote something along the lines of: every technology advanced enough will seem like magic to a primitive enough society.
You cannot conclude that something is supernatural only because science is unable to explain it for now.

Thomas wrote: "The Army has a saying. There are NO Atheists in Foxholes."
I have an equivalent for the saying:
"a drowning man will clutch at a straw"
If a guy only starts believing in God when he shits his pants of fear I dare say his faith is not a true one.

Thomas wrote: "...how great and wonderful it is to sit in a free country..."
Oh, come on! "Free country"? You surely must know that this phrase is just an oxymoron, out there with honest politician and military intelligence.

[Hazel]

Giansar, Thomas said that was his last post, thats why I didn't bother addressing some of the falsehoods in it. Nor did I address the army training techniques which here in the UK were banned decades ago as a infringement of human rights. Also, the linking of military to religion as Thomas has done is terrifying, because the army should be secular, allowing anyone of any religion or lack thereof to be members, and not inflict religious teachings on its members. Nor did I address the idea that america was founded as a christian nation, because it wasn't, it was founded as a secular nation that allowed religious freedom, and freedom from religion. Nor did I address that the words "freely purchase" are contradictory, he either got something for free, or he purchased them.

I don't think I've repeated any of the things you mentioned Giansar, I felt it would be pointless.

I live in a super natural world too, its a natural world, and I think thats super...

[[deleted user]]

Hazel wrote: "I live in a super natural world too, its a natural world, and I think thats super..."

Thumbs up. :)

[Connie]

I see that the comments on Thomas's posts are coming! :-)

He talks the big talk, but if I read between the lines correctly, he is one terrified man and I don't know how wholly convinced he could be that he's actually invested in the right ideologies. However, that kind of permanent mind-fucking can't be undone by a forum like this. Dedicated deprogramming and years of therapy would help to undo the harm that has been done to his mind. But he doesn't see it that way; he of course believes very strongly that his view is the right one, so powerful is the indoctrination he has been put through.

It's so sad that he thinks he's free. He is imprisoned in that thinking and training but as long as he thinks this is the way to happiness, well...we should just wish him luck because he'll need it.

[[deleted user]]

I've been reading but haven't commented for a bit ....

Something keeps nagging at me. By the way, I saw the whole discussion awhile ago about the intent of this thread. The question is clear. Would you rather live in a world without religion or without science?

The key is what "you" would rather live without. The question was not what everyone on the planet should live without. I wonder if that's lost on some.

Some have said they want to live in a world without religion and some have stated they'd do without science. Then, there were some of us who said we'd rather not do without religion or science.

Instead of being able to discuss our thoughts and individual beliefs respectfully, for any length of time, it seems people are continually trying to prove that one point is 100% right and the other is 100% wrong. Sometimes people have even tried to prove the worth of their point, without allowing for another view, while swearing, name-calling and resorting to other unseemly comments. Both sides are doing that, by the way. Why?

Might I suggest something?

There's a very, very, very fine line between a fundamentalist Christian, etc... stating everyone should believe in God else they'll not live a good life and will go to Hell and an atheist stating that religion should be abolished and anyone who believes in God is an unfortunate sop who was indoctrinated and needs years of therapy in order to be a rational adult in a rational world.

A very fine line ...

Both groups, both, are trying to foist what they value on the other.

Here's a new line of thought ...

Would you rather live in a world where you're not 100% certain on some points and attempt to live and learn despite the fact that you're not necessarily going to be right ... despite the fact that there might not be a right or wrong? Or ... would you rather live in a world where you are always, 100% of the time, on every issue and in every way, right?

I'm going to go with the former. I believe it allows for more thought.

[Hazel]

Yes, the former, the way science does things ;P Honestly, that description is the scientific method down to a tee.

[Rebecca]

This is a really hard question and to be honest, I don't know. I think science is like the head of humanity and religion(or belief) is the heart. I don't think one could exist without the other. Science has created medicine and has saved so many lives and if there wasn't a set religion then people could make up their own minds about Higher Powers and what happens after death. A lot of scientists believe that there is some kind of God out there anyway.

But a lot of our history and art is surrounded by religion, any religion is like a sanctuary for some people and most religions strive to help people less fortunate which may push others to do the same, if they haven't already decided to anyway.

This is really hard but I think I would choose religion. Not all science is good and I think a world only ruled by your head wouldn't be much of a world. Religion brings people together and goes toward explaining why we are here. It gives people a sense of purpose.

[Hazel]

Rebecca wrote: "A lot of scientists believe that there is some kind of God out there anyway."

NOt true, 94% of the National Acadamy of Sciences reject the concept of god. Thats an overwhelming majority. Its higher in the Royal Society. And we don't count creationist scientists as scientists, because they don't practice science.

As to everything else you wrote... religion has made some amazing contributions, the art, architecture and poetry is for the most part beautiful (though I've seen some very ugly churches), I'll give you that, but so have a lot of other things that aren't related to religion. There are lots of beautiful artworks created by non-religious people, there are beautiful non-religious buildings created by non-religious architects.

You've rejected science on the grounds that not all of it is good. By saying that, it is reasonable to assume that conversely you think that all of religion is good (please correct me if I'm wrong, and that you don't think that). Religion is responsible for the vast majority of conflict throughout history, it creates divisions (us and them), it marginalises people and teaches that some people don't count as people. It commits atrocities in the name of god, and the people doing it feel justified because they believe god (little g, meaning any diety, depending on personal belief) would be pleased with what they do.

When it comes down to it, what we believe should be based on what is true, what is testable, and what is backed up by evidence. As there is no evidence for any deity, it is therefore rational to reject the claim of his/her/its existence.

And what you really need to think about is, if there was no science, would you have survived the bout of rubella, or measles that you had as a child? And thats assuming that you survived being born. Would you be willing to accept the increased death rate due to childbirth complications that medicine wouldn't be there to help with? Would you be able to survive without the science of fire making, and tool making, without the science of preparing and tanning hides to create clothing, or to work cotton plants for the same thing? Farming is a scientific pursuit, even in its most basic form, so is gathering and hunting, for all need tools, which is a technology, which is science.

If there was no religion, it wouldn't mean there were no communities, communities exist without religion, but religion doesn't exist without communities. Religion can't heal us, religion can't clothe us, or feed us.

Yes, science has produced some horrible things, but the good things it produces far outweigh the bad, and it has never been the reason for conflict, ever. It also holds higher ethical and moral standards than you'll see in the bible.

So, when you really really think about it, which would you honestly do without?

[Connie]

My two cents: I'd always rather do without religion.

For all of the innumerable reasons we've already gone over and then this: that religion is the single most FRUSTRATING institution! It teaches lies, and the very morals that it preaches to all of its followers are disobeyed every moment of every day, by the leaders!

Alright, so politicians are no angels, neither are our school teachers, doctors, or policemen, to mention just a few of the professions. But THEY don't go around pretending to be on the right side of a god, immune from all scrutiny, hiding behind a false image of stand-up virtue--supposedly the experts on: morality, god him-or-herself, sexuality, the soul, the mind, how you should think and behave, how you should live, and how to give thanks for your life, how the world began, and how to save yourself.

Religion ELIMINATES individual thinking and commands you to think like they tell you to, like The Group. Well, thank you very much, but I don't want to have my mind so controlled and manipulated.

Religion IS the embodiment of the very hypocrisy that it claims to be against! If only the "religious" would open up their eyes and see how they're being conned, but alas, they're dumb as sheep and I find it fascinating to witness how people go lining up on the Sabbath to go through a bunch of ritual, song and prayer, thinking that this somehow places a safety net around them (what, with fairy-dust?), and ensures that their afterlife will be spent in the the heaven of your choice, which is whatever you'd like to conjure up in your imagination. 'Cause what it is, where it is, or what it's like is up to you. It's ALL in your head, trust me.

[Hazel]

don't hold back now, will you, Whirlwind :P

[Connie]

Hahahaha! Nope, I'm a whirlwind!

[Connie]

Jeannette wrote: "I coulld easily, happily, joyfully and thankfully live in a world without religion. It has caused the human race nothing but heartache."

Yay!

[[deleted user]]

You must be right, Whirlwind. You must be right. I guess
anyone who disagrees might as well not ever respond to this thread again. Because ... the atheists must have the only belief system that is valid. Right? Oh, the irony.

[Hazel]

Irony? Atheism isn't even a belief system. Its a stance, nothing more. And its a stance based on evidence and rational thinking.

[[deleted user]]

Okay, Hazel. You must be right. Your stance, atheism, is right and it's the only stance that's right.

Anyone disagrees with this stance might as well not share his/her opinions in this thread. After all, atheism is right and everyone who disagrees is, at the very least, an unfortunate who is incapable of seeing the "truth" without a crutch ... at the very worst, everyone who disagrees, well, they're stupid sheep who require therapy.

And, the irony ...

The Christians who think their beliefs are the only true beliefs.

The Muslims who think their beliefs are the only true beliefs.

The Norse who believe in the old ways and think their ways are the only true ways.

The Atheists who believe their stance is the only true stance.

I think I've gotten it now.

[Hazel]

I think you're sounding a bit petulant to be honest Shannon. If you can prove to me that god exists, then I'll spin on a sixpence, but do remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and anecdotal evidence isn't good enough.

I'm not saying anyone should give up on their beliefs, I'm saying people should look at their beliefs and the teachings of the religion they follow and apply logical, rational and skeptical thought to it, and they should look for evidence to back up their beliefs. If they find evidence, then all well and good, but if they don't, why keep hold of the belief? For any other aspect of life, people wouldn't accept the idea that they should accept something that is so important to their lifestyle and that can effect not only themselves but others around them purely on face value. Religion is as open to being investigated as anything else, and unless investigation results in evidence to back up any claim someone makes (any claim, about anything), then the claim can be rejected. If at any point evidence does appear, then the situation can be reassessed.

And in relation to this question, I honestly can't understand someone choosing religion over science, because by doing so they are essentially returning us to before we stood upright on two legs, they are removing the human race from the world, because it is the development of technology and science in its most basic forms that has shaped our evolution into Homo sapiens. Without science and technology, we'd still be in the trees, we wouldn't even be at Sahelanthropus tchadensis level. The very reason that Homo habilis was given the genus Homo is because they made and used tools, and so were applying themselves to the problems they faced in a scientific way. And being of genus Homo means they were human, any species of genus Homo was human. Our evolution and science go hand in hand. Religion came much later.

And just to be clear, I'm not saying any of this because I am an atheist, I'm an atheist because this is the way I think. There is a subtle but important difference.

[Bunnie]

shannon--don't be so unhappy about it--i don't care what anyone believes-i think it is a waste of time to try to educate stupid people. they prefer to believe that an imaginary being is going to make it all better-the truth is--the world is a harsh place--a cruel place that favors those who have the brains or LUCK to survive.

[Bunnie]

hazel--just to prove how stupid some people are --in todays paper there is an article titled --Parents warned It's not legal to mail chickenpox--can you believe these parents are fearful of vaccinations and are making deals with strangers who promise to mail Lollipops licked by children with chickenpox- i suppose they think that getting the pox via some spit by an infected child is less harmful--IS THAT STUPID OR WHAT?

[Hazel]

I can't understand mailing licked lollies, but I have heard of chicken pox parties, where the idea is to get your child infected with chicken pox (back in the day, at least, before doctors started advising immunisation over infection), as the disease is less dangerous in children than it is in adults, and so it was better to get it out of the way as a child. But with the vaccine, there's no reason to do such a thing anymore.

[[deleted user]]

I think you misunderstand me, Hazel, but thank you for labeling me as petulant. I've always found it to be a lovely word.

I'm not now, nor have I been, determined to prove or disprove that God exists. I have no intention of trying to change your beliefs or your stance. Period. You have your stance, and I think that's just fine, frankly. I've never felt the need (...and still don't) to label you, tell you that you're wrong, etc...

In addition, I'd don't want to pick one over the other. I appreciate and respect science. I appreciate and respect the ability for people to choose a religious belief ... or not ... and appreciate and respect certain aspects of religion.

My point has always been that people are different. Perhaps, in the year 2011, we should, I don't know, consider for two seconds accepting that and allowing for those differences ... without feeling the need to tell people they're wrong, they're stupid, they're misinformed, they're ...

Oh, yes, less than ... with random swears and nasty names thrown in.

Lovely, on the part of both sides.

Again, the question to be answered in this post is ... what YOU would rather do without .... Some have answered one way or the other. Some have said, you know what, it's just not that easy and we'd like to live in a world where we don't have to live without either. The question is not ... what should everyone on the planet do without ... because ... we need to foist our beliefs/stance on everyone else ... and, ultimately, be RIGHT!

Or, is it? Has that become the question? I hope someone helps the person who sees this thread pop up for the first time and responds without reading the past posts. Well, help them if they say they wouldn't be able to do without religion. If they do, an atheist will respond by challenging the person's beliefs, calling them sheep, etc.... I've seen that happen over and over and over and ... over again.

Is there a reason that people can't share their ideas and discuss why they believe as they do without someone else feeling the need to challenge those beliefs and call people names? Do we have to agree with one another? Heck, no! But, do we always, 100% of the time, have to say ... you're wrong and I'm right?

Seriously, Hazel, I truly do know why you've challenged some of these posts. There have been inaccuracies, etc... that have made me shake my head ... like ... the sun coming up tomorrow. But, ...

I see that you have a point. I'd never want to take that from you. Frankly, you have several points that make sense. You have a right to your "stance" and I respect that. Here's the kicker, though. I don't think most of the atheists who write here could say the same of me. Oh, you and they might say, "Shannon, of course you have the right to your beliefs. But, you were indoctrinated, poor thing, and need to smarten up a bit, sweet pea." Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge. "That Shannon, she's such a sad schmuck who believes." And, of course, there are religious fanatics who would tell you and all the atheists that you are the reason the world is going to Hell and that you're going there soon.

You know what? Both responses, both sides, make me shudder. And, frankly, I'm all but choking on the irony and hypocrisy. (Please don't make me explain that. I know. Both sides think, given the fact that they're right, they're not hypocrites. I'm choking.)

[Hazel]

Thanks for clarifying Shannon, and I'm sorry if I called you petulant if you weren't, but the post you made did come across that way. BUt hey, its written, so I can accept that I was wrong.

I'm reasonably sure that I've done my best not to be insulting, and when I have slipped up, I've apologised. If you're happy with your religion, or beliefs, or whatever, then great, but don't ask me to respect it. I can respect you, but not the belief. I respect that you stand up and say what you think, I respect that you aren't cowed or scared of telling people that you think they're wrong, or that they have behaved badly. That I can respect. I respect your right to hold whatever belief you choose, but I also urge anyone to inspect their beliefs closely and make sure they hold as many true and as few false beliefs as possible, that is not unreasonable, I think. To do this, I think they have to skeptically evaluate them. I don't think you're a sad schmuck, I think you're obviously a bright and intelligent person.

[[deleted user]]

Bunnie ... I have a question for you. However, you don't need to answer it. Truly. If you feel comfortable, I think it would be interesting in understanding the current conversation.

Why do you feel the need to call people who don't agree with your stance stupid?

Do you truly believe that every person who disagrees with Atheism is stupid? Or, did you get caught up in the heat of the moment?

I've not called you stupid. I've not called your stance stupid. This can be a cruel place, especially if we make it so. I'd appreciate being able to share my ideas and beliefs without being called stupid. I'd not stand for it if someone called you or Hazel or Whirlwind or ... stupid. I'm not going to stay silent when you call me stupid, either.