Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion? Showing 2,701-2,750 of 12,463

[Travis]

The whole 'science is a belief system' bit is really an attempt to create a false equivelency and give people the idea that science and religion are on equal footing or 'two sides of the same coin'.

It's a bit of linguistic acrobatics to distract from the fact that religion never provides proof and so they need a distraction.

Otherwise they'd have to admit that the man in the sky is as real and provable as any other imaginary friend.

[Old-Barbarossa]

As has been stated earlier in the thread: "ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
It's sleeping, we can't see it (thankfully), therefore difficult to prove or disprove, therefore default possition is that dread Cthulhu exists...

[Shanna]

Where is that "Hermione gets it" pic?

[[deleted user]]

Hazel wrote: "If we were to accept the possibility of the existence of god as being an equal consideration to the non-existence of god, then we should be doing the same for absolutely any claim that is n the same position. We should start giving equal credence to all the different gods and goddesses, and to spirits, and dragons, and vampires, and fairies, and splorts."

I don't know, Hazel. I teach several middle school students who give equal credence to the existence of vampires. In fact, we were in the library the other day and I saw several girls sitting at a table. They seemed to be having a very intense and deep discussion. I walked over and heard ....

A fierce debate regarding whether or not vampires truly shimmer.

Oh, I'm not joking ....

[[deleted user]]

Hmmmm.....

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local...

[Shanna]

Shannon wrote: "Hazel wrote: "If we were to accept the possibility of the existence of god as being an equal consideration to the non-existence of god, then we should be doing the same for absolutely any claim tha..."

This inability to distinguish reality is disturbing, My friends fourteen yr old is "convinced" there are sparkling vampires too....
I reminded her the other day that if it were true the vast majority of sparkly vampires are not "vegetarian", even in Meyer's world... I wish I could describe her face.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Feckin' vampire lite...
Give them The Vampyre and Other Tales of the Macabre or Dracula to read...or even Anne Rice.
Even better, any of the Preacher tales with Cassidy eg: Preacher Special: Cassidy: Blood & Whiskey.

[Shanna]

Old-Barbarossa wrote: "Feckin' vampire lite...
Give them The Vampyre and Other Tales of the Macabre or Dracula to read...or even Anne Rice.
Even better, any of the Preacher tales with Cassidy eg: Preacher Special: Cass..."

They all just want their good looking but creepy undead stalker who breaks into their house to watch them sleep (shudder), tells them who they can and can't see, sulky, morose and condescending boyfriends who have to fight the urge not to kill them because thats Truuue Luuuurrve Sigh....

[Hazel]

Shannon wrote: "Hazel wrote: "If we were to accept the possibility of the existence of god as being an equal consideration to the non-existence of god, then we should be doing the same for absolutely any claim tha..."

show them Nosferatu, that should turn them off vampires... :P

[Matt]

Old-Barbarossa wrote: "Matt wrote: "And those atheists who flatly assert that God does not exist because there is no evidence to support that he/she/it exists are an example of the second. Although it's more fair to say ..."

No, we shouldn't assume everything exists because there is no evidence to the contrary.

But neither should we assume anything doesn't exist because we have no evidence that it does.

The key point being, we should not assume.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Hazel wrote: "show them Nosferatu, that should turn them off vampires... :P"

Aye...if a creepy old baldy undead chap doesn't do it they're beyond hope...

[Hazel]

Matt wrote: "Old-Barbarossa wrote: "Matt wrote: "And those atheists who flatly assert that God does not exist because there is no evidence to support that he/she/it exists are an example of the second. Although..."

we don't assume something doesn't exist if there is no evidence of it; if there is no evidence of it, thats support that it doesn't exist. The non-existence is supported by a complete lack of evidence to the contrary.

[Matt]

For how long was there no evidence of microscopic organisms, subatomic particles, etc...

Did those things not exist simply because we couldn't detect them?

[Old-Barbarossa]

Matt wrote: "For how long was there no evidence of microscopic organisms, subatomic particles, etc...

Did those things not exist simply because we couldn't detect them?"

They weren't held up as existing prior to the proof, they were proven to exist based on observation of phenomena.
The replication of results confirming the proof.
Your arguement here is not relevant.

[Shanna]

Nope, there is evidence for them even if we didn't have knowledge to understand it. Microscopic organisms manifest diseases, make cheese, raise bread, rot crops.
Sub atomic particles you know, light and gravity and stuff....

[Xdyj]

Travis wrote: "Don't know how I feel about this as a philosophical debate topic, but man, if this was a novel, I would read it.

anybody got Harry Turtledove's email address?"

I've seen an AH novel called The Years of Rice and Salt by Kim Stanley Robinson, in which the Chinese "discovered" the Americas but some north American tribes retained their independence, successfully adopted new technologies from the old world and formed a republic together with asian immigrants, finally became a minor and relatively progressive world power and end up providing some military support to revolutionaries in Europe. It's not "hard" AH like Turtledove but still might be interesting:)

[Jax]

I agree with both Heather and Jean...

Science and Religion go hand in hand and to some extent balance each other out...
So essentially I figure one with out the other would just end up on a rampage.

However, if one were to push the choice, I would have to go with a world without religion,
as there a far fewer wars started over science than religion.
And I do not think that religion makes a person good or bad... there are bad religious ppl, and good non-religious ppl.
I agree the point of the book is that any kind of extremist is not the way to go.

My mother insisted on my having a religion, and as a result I am a confirmed catholic, however, after leaving her house, I am now more agnostic.
I disagree that religion answers questions science cannot... and as a catholic I do not agree with some of "my" religions POV on certain issues.
The issue I have with todays Christians is that most of them don't seem to have bothered to learn their history.
They make claims like being christian means that one is above corruption, and yet, during the Crusades, the Churches were corrupt!
The point is, even a priest is only human! and as a human being we are all bound to make mistakes!
(Plus I could do without the unwanted early morning weekend wake up calls on my doorstep!) :-)

Though in some cases without the religions, the scientists would just go nuts!

I've found that the christian religion (no finger pointing at any one denomination) are the pushiest, and tend to offend me more.... no other religions stand there and tell me my beliefs are wrong, or that I'm on the wrong path (and I kid you not, I have been told this directly.)
I've never once had an atheist tell me I'm an idiot for believing in something they do not, Not one Buddhist has ever informed me of the error of my ways, no Wiccan has accused me of sin and destroying the earth...
And for me, religion is not simply putting in an appearance at Church each weak...

I think the biggest problem we have is the lack of knowledge or understanding of other religions, and each one believes that their own beliefs are superior. However, should you begin to do even the most menial of investigations, you'll find that most religions at their base are trying to teach the exact same life lessons... and as these lessons are so very often misinterpreted or miscontrued, I think a world without would be much more peaceful!! (though there'd have to be someone keeping the scientists in check..)

[Old-Barbarossa]

Shanna wrote: "Sub atomic particles you know, light and gravity and stuff..."

That is the best summary of A Brief History Of Time: From The Big Bang To Black Holes I've read...

[[deleted user]]

Hazel wrote: "show them Nosferatu, that should turn them off vampires... :P"

Aye...if a creepy old baldy undead chap doesn't do it they're beyond hope... "

Ha, ha, ha! Will take all of this under advisement!

[Old-Barbarossa]

Jax wrote: "However, should you begin to do even the most menial of investigations, you'll find that most religions at their base are trying to teach the exact same life lessons... and as these lessons are so very often misinterpreted or miscontrued, I think a world without would be much more peaceful!! (though there'd have to be someone keeping the scientists in check..)"

I think basic morals can keep folk in check, whether scientists or not.
It's the politicians we need to keep an eye on.
Scientists don't tend to have ideas of world or regional domination...they may have ideas of winning a Nobel prize, or getting a paper published, or discrediting a rival...I don't think many have actually created armies of killer robots...

[[deleted user]]

Jax wrote: "no other religions stand there and tell me my beliefs are wrong"

Hmmmm...?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/wor...

http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Christ...

[Jax]

Shannon wrote: "Jax wrote: "no other religions stand there and tell me my beliefs are wrong"

Hmmmm...?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/wor......"

I was referring to direct personal interaction...
I tend to ignore the religious generalisations as almost all of them have slightly extremist factions...:-)

[Jax]

Old-Barbarossa wrote: "Jax wrote: "However, should you begin to do even the most menial of investigations, you'll find that most religions at their base are trying to teach the exact same life lessons... and as these les..."

LOL - Damn! and I was so hoping to get me a few!!
Though they'd need to be reprogrammed for house-work!!
I would agree that basic morals should keep most of us on track... but I have to admit that some of our geneticists (sorry bout the spelling) these days make my eyebrows climb...LOL
But I agree, Scientists are much more interested in their research than taking over the world!!

[Hazel]

Matt wrote: "For how long was there no evidence of microscopic organisms, subatomic particles, etc...

Did those things not exist simply because we couldn't detect them?"

of course not, but would you have accepted their existence before the equipment that allowed us to see them, just because someone said so?

And though Shanna is correct in the evidence of their manifestation in disease etc, previously, disease was attributed to god, to the devil, to demons, to evil spirits and to bad air. Proof of micro-organisms is what blew such explanations out of the water.

I have £10,000,000 in my bank account, you can have it as long as you send me all of your worldly goods, and declare me the most magnificent being in creation.

[cHriS]

Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "Man I guess is born to explore and conquer. Or is that science that has made him like that? "
"Explore" - that's an important part of science certainly.
"Conquer" - comes from religion a..."

Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "Man I guess is born to explore and conquer. Or is that science that has made him like that? "
"Explore" - that's an important part of science certainly.
"Conquer" - comes from religion a..."

Is it not science that gives us the tools to Conquer, or is that the fault of religion as well?

[cHriS]

Hazel wrote: "Matt wrote: "For how long was there no evidence of microscopic organisms, subatomic particles, etc...

Did those things not exist simply because we couldn't detect them?"

of course not, but would ..."

........................... so you were created?

[Hazel]

yes, my parents had sex, and the gametes met and created me.

[Old-Barbarossa]

cs wrote: "Is it not science that gives us the tools to Conquer, or is that the fault of religion as well?"

A tool is just a tool.
It's what it is used for and who uses it that can cause the problems.
Most people don't fly aircraft into buildings...it takes religion to make folk do that.

[Jax]

I disagree on that point...
The actual religion has very little to do with it,
as if you actually ask about the religion - the suicide bombers or plane crashing weirdos are actually going against what their religion says....

Its the ppl, who unfortunately happen to be of that religion who make the choice to so.
They could just have easily chosen not to...
However, thoughout history those with stronger wills have persuaded those with lesser wills into doing their bidding...

The same applies to paedophile priests....
Its not the religion which makes them choose to make such twisted choices...
that doesn't mean everyone of that religion would do the same....

Ppl just always need something or someone else to blame for their actions.
We should learn to take responsibility for ourselves, our choices and our actions... and to accept the consequences of them.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Jax wrote: "Is it not science that gives us the tools to Conquer, or is that the fault of religion as well?"

I can't think of a single atheist suicide bomber situation.

[cHriS]

Hazel wrote: "yes, my parents had sex, and the gametes met and created me."

Then we should work backwards, keeping the word created in mind.

[Travis]

People use religion to justify their choices, as in a lot of cases it tells them whatever they are doing is okay.

pedophile priest would not be an issue if the church would let go of it's screwed up views on sex. So, in a way it is forcing them into choices.
There may be atheist pedophiles, but there is no huge organization that shields them.

Religion gives us an excuse to conquer, a justification.

[cHriS]

Old-Barbarossa wrote: "cs wrote: "Is it not science that gives us the tools to Conquer, or is that the fault of religion as well?"

A tool is just a tool.
It's what it is used for and who uses it that can cause the pr..."

No, it would be a pilot.

[Hazel]

cs wrote: "Hazel wrote: "yes, my parents had sex, and the gametes met and created me."

Then we should work backwards, keeping the word created in mind."

ah, ok eventually, on earth, we get to spontaneous chemical reactions undergoing abiogenesis. Before that stars went super nova, and ejected the building blocks of life. Before that the big bang caused an expansion of matter. No doubt you'll try to postulate a creator that triggered that, and you're welcome to that belief, but with no proof, it holds no water.

You're trying to claim a creator of the universe, but we're back to there being no proof, and I'm not playing that game with you cs.

[Jax]

Travis wrote: "People use religion to justify their choices, as in a lot of cases it tells them whatever they are doing is okay.

pedophile priest would not be an issue if the church would let go of it's screwed ..."

Precisely. :-)

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "People use religion to justify their choices, as in a lot of cases it tells them whatever they are doing is okay.

pedophile priest would not be an issue if the church would let go of it's screwed ..."

Well .... While pedophile priests disgust me and the fact that the Catholic Church protected them makes me shudder each time I pass a Catholic Church, I don't blame religion for their "choices" and their pedophilia. Do I blame the church for not turning them in? Yes. Do I blame religion for their being pedophiles? No.

A couple things .... How does the fact that the church does not allow priests to have sexual relationships with adults lead said priests to make the "choice" to violate children? Do nuns, who are not allowed to have sexual relationships with adults, violate children in the same numbers? Why children? Why wouldn't priests who are told they must abstain turn to ... other priests, nuns, adult members of their congregation? (Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing that it's healthy for the church to demand that priests and nuns take vows of chastity. I just don't believe that abstinence leads to pedophilia. How many of us have gone through a time of abstinence? During that time, did we start to fancy the toddler down the road? No, but hell no!)

In addition, I'm a teacher, and there have been a lot of incidences, I'm afraid to say, of teachers preying upon children. Teachers, coaches, troop leaders. And, for many, many years, schools covered these incidents up. Heck! There might still be schools that cover these incidents up! Do they do so based on religion? Heck, no! They do so for all sorts of reasons. Loyalty to colleagues vs. duty to students. Disbelief. Cowardice. Fear.

I've not read anything on this subject recently and don't have anything to cite. However, I do remember reading and hearing that pedophiles seek target-rich environments. They go where children are going to be .... I don't believe religion is the root or the draw. Their sickness is the root and the children are the draw. Schools, playgrounds, sports teams, youth groups, Sunday school classes, etc....

Now, regarding Old-Barbarossa's comment about suicide bombers and atheists .... The man who killed all the people in Norway popped into my mind. He's been all over our news today. However, when I looked into it, it seems religion might have been involved in his decision to commit mass murder. That and mental illness. So, I thought Old-Barbarossa was right. He still might be. But, while reading about the man in Norway, the Unabomber came to mind. I read a bit about him but can't find if he was religious or not.

[Old-Barbarossa]

Shannon wrote: " But, while reading about the man in Norway, the Unabomber came to mind. I read a bit about him but can't find if he was religious or not..."

Mass killers: yes...suicide bombers: no

[Xdyj]

Shannon wrote: "Jax wrote: "no other religions stand there and tell me my beliefs are wrong"

Hmmmm...?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/wor......"

All the muslims I've met in real life are nice, tolerant ppl, so are all christians. However at least on GR there do seem to be more christians than muslims but more crazy muslims than crazy christians.

iirc some russian and chinese revolutionaries in the early 20c did some suicide bombing then, and civilians did get killed. However they usually targeted government officials and not innocent civilian.

[Travis]

shannon: it's easy to say that the religion has nothing to do with pedophile priests, except that it seems to have a huge amount to do with pedophile priests.

decades of forced abstinence, added with possible forceable surpressed latent homosexuality, seclusion caused by your 'calling' and the knowledge that you'll most likely be protected after the fact (which could be seen as acceptance of your behavior) is a tiny bit different from 'not getting laid your first semester of college'.

even if you want to argue that religion is not the cause, it can be blamed for perpetuating a horrible crime that goes against everything religion is supposed to stand for and in fact giving pedophiles a safe haven.

So, I've got no problem blaming religion.

and the guy in norway and the unabomber can't be counted as suicide bombers, as they are still alive after they blew something up.

I think if you are still alive and go to trial the other suicide bombers laugh at you.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

Travis - you are confusing sexual preferences. Homosexuals are not necessarily pedophiles. Sexual repression does not lead only to pedophilia. Pedophiles want to have sex with children and can prefer little girls or boys. There are many cases of priests having sex with married women and men, in fact many more, than with children. Many religions allow their ministers and rabbis and priests to marry and have sex. Frankly, I despise organized religions, and one reason why is they ALL try to control adults of consenting age as to who, when, where, what, and how often, generally speaking. As a result, a hell of a lot of the faithful are twisted up about sex, not just abstaining priests.

[Jax]

Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "People use religion to justify their choices, as in a lot of cases it tells them whatever they are doing is okay.

pedophile priest would not be an issue if the church would let go o..."

With regard to your question as to how the forced celibacy would push a priest to being a paedophile...
Who says its necessarily the celibacy?
The same question could be posed as to why some kids in abusive homes go on to become abusive themselves, while others make every effort to be the opposite?
Why is it that when religion is involved issues seem to get more "coverage"?
What makes ANY person make the choice to violate children? its not only the priests!

Why do some kids snap under pressure and commit suicide or suddenly decide to go on a rampage? while others continue on to become highly successful adults?
In some cases it may be sub-conscious - but they make that choice....

Religion, TV, Video Games, Music, bad teachers... NONE of them make a good scape goat for making bad choices....for as much "bad" media there is out there, there is just as much good...
ppl make the choices they do for whatever reason they do, and human nature promotes that we find someone/something other than ourselves to blame.

I think the world would be a much happier and peaceful place if every person would only learn to take responsibility for the own actions and not try to place blame elsewhere...

If you like - on a religious side... We were created with the ability to choose... and yet now we want to claim we didn't choose - we were forced....
And yet - what forced us?? Religion, Media, schools - all created by humans...

[Travis]

April:
I'm not trying to make any statement about gay=pedophile. Just listing what I see are the things religion contributes to the whole pedophile priest thing. There are a lot of factors involved, but they all get filtered through the church

Jax: people do make choices, good and bad and it's all based on your options in life.
religion takes away choices and severely limits your options. It is one of the most oppressive forces on the planet.
Freedom and choice are good things. Take them away, and it always gets ugly.

I too think people should take responsiblity for their actions. Religion doesn't. It has 'the man in the sky's will' as it's perpetual, magical 'get out of jail free card'.

So, I'm still gonna blame the pedophile priest thing on religion.
After all the word 'priest' being there is a bit of a giveaway.

[Hazel]

Jax wrote: "With regard to your question as to how the forced celibacy would push a priest to being a paedophile...
Who says its necessarily the celibacy?
The same question could be posed as to why some kids in abusive homes go on to become abusive themselves, while others make every effort to be the opposite?"

Indeed, one could postulate that its been going on for so long that the priests that are raping children suffered the same themselves when they were children being schooled and "cared for" by priests, and so on, back through church history

[[deleted user]]

Have mercy!! You're right, of course. Suicide bombers kill themselves along with their innocent victims. The men I referenced did not kill themselves, thus ... they are mass murderers.

Very true ....

It's also true that murder is murder.

Dead is dead.

But, you're right ... they didn't commit suicide.

[Cara]

This one is easy. A world without religion would be a world without war, or at least a lot fewer of them. Superstitions make people do stupid things.

[[deleted user]]

Regarding religion and pedophile priests ....

Perhaps I wasn't clear. Given my linking two men who didn't commit suicide to suicide bombers, I can see why my clarity would be called into question. ;)

Let me be clear.

I blame every single Catholic priest, nun, bishop, cardinal (I'm not Catholic, so I might be leaving people out), and pope who knew priests molested children and did nothing to stop it. I blame them.

I think those who knew and did nothing ... those who knew and moved those pedophile priests from one parish to another in order to mollify one flock (but destroy the next) ... are despicable. I think they should be defrocked. I think they should be charged criminally.

I blame the church for that. Heck, several months ago, I started dating a man who was raised Catholic and started talking marriage. My mother said ... "Stop! There's no way this can go anywhere, with how you feel about the Catholic Church and what happened to all of those children. You'd never be able to be married in that church. Never. Does he know how you feel about that?!" Personal anecdote, but I want to be clear. Everyone who knows me knows .... I place blame where blame is due, quite readily and forcefully, when it comes to people who violate children or allow them to be hurt in any way.

I don't; however, blame celibacy for pedophilia. I have never in my life heard of such a thing. And ... in my past life, I worked as a social worker for a state agency that investigated crimes against children and took some children into custody. I read on the topic. I had trainings. I conducted 6 investigations with state police officers. Celibacy doesn't make a pedophile. Homosexuality doesn't make a pedophile. (Again, what about all of those nuns? What about all of the countless priests who have never ... ever ... molested a child.)

To believe that celibacy leads to pedophilia would almost be to believe what an American judge believed a several years ago .... A woman was raped. A man was charged. The case went to court. He was found guilty. But, the judge, when sentencing the man, asked him several questions. He asked if the man had a girlfriend. He asked how long it had been since the man had a girlfriend. He asked if it had been that long (years) since the man had sexual relations with a woman. Well! The judge said what the man needed was a girlfriend. And, his judgment? He ordered the man to go find a girlfriend. (This case is one of the reasons people started demanding mandatory minimum sentences.)

Now, Travis, I know you're not going down this road. Truly. I know you don't agree with this judge. But .... For me, given what I know and given my past experiences, I have to say ... linking something like celibacy with pedophilia is a slippery slope.

And ... I've worked in schools for 15 years. I know, from experience, that the church isn't the only organization to turn a blind eye. I also know that schools will do what is right. I have been in the position of turning in a fellow colleague for inappropriate conduct, whether of a quasi sexual nature or physical abuse. I've been supported ... and I've been treated like dirt for it. People's choices at those times and how they reacted had nothing to do with the church and their religious background or lack thereof.

[Travis]

I'm not saying celibacy= pedophilia either, but forced celibacy is on the long list of things the church has contributed to this horrible situation.
Celibacy is only on the list because religion put it there.

This is not a thing that you can point at one thing and go 'Ah-ha! That's it!" unfortunately, it's not that easy..
While I give a huge share of the blame to religion, I'm aware there are other factors, occurring both within and without the church.

Unfortunately, there is no way to fix the problem with the stranglehold religion has on the world.

and you can mention all the good priests and nuns, most likely there are some out there, and that will never balance out hundreds of hurt children. Never.
The church is responsible for that and they have chosen to not even acknowledge it, unless forced to, let alone do something to attempt to fix the unspeakable wrong they have allowed to happen.

They had a choice, they made the wrong one and I'm holding them responsible for it.

[[deleted user]]

Travis wrote: "The church is responsible for that and they have chosen to not even acknowledge it, unless forced to, let alone do something to attempt to fix the unspeakable wrong they have allowed to happen.

They had a choice, they made the wrong one and I'm holding them responsible for it.
"

I agree with you on this point, Travis. One hundred percent.

[[deleted user]]

Cara wrote: "This one is easy. A world without religion would be a world without war, or at least a lot fewer of them. Superstitions make people do stupid things."

So does greed. Throw out religion and you'd still have that ... greed. And, you'd still have wars.

[Hazel]

I think Cara's statement needs some modification, without religion, and other such indoctrinating ideologies, there would be no-one claiming moral righteousness over starting wars or committing atrocities.

One small point, about the enforced celibacy thing, there have been a number of cases of child molestation and abuse that have come to light in recent months in which the perpetrator has been a protestant cleric of some sort or the other. Interestingly, it appears that protestants tend to prefer little girls, whereas catholics tend to victimise the little boys.

Personally, I suspect that its become a bit of a witch hunt, and that about 10 years down the line we'll find some of the priests and clerics being convicted now will be exonerated.