How Can Religion Exist After Darwin? Is It Bound To Die?

[Balloon guy 158]

Theoretically true, but in practice people are basing this opinion on their religious views. http://www.lifenews.com/2010/09/20/nat-6706/On the issue of abortion, 26% overall say religion is the most important influence on their opinion, including 45% among abortion opponents.

What does it mean to have a major influence with regards to the truthfulness of something?Some people claim that something 'felt wrong' to them; be it religion or abortion or atheism, and later when they found something to confirm their feelings, they reacted in a positive manner, maybe even giving credit to the new information for basing their idea on.Many people don't like abortion, why? Because of a God given instinct of right and wrong in my book.And if you are in connection with your instincts that are a gift from God, wouldn't you incorrectly apply the influence on the religion, instead of the inner voice of your conscience telling you that you knew all along that taking metal scissors and jamming them into the back of the head of an 8 month old fetus was wrong?

[vbnautilus 48]

What does it mean to have a major influence with regards to the truthfulness of something?Some people claim that something 'felt wrong' to them; be it religion or abortion or atheism, and later when they found something to confirm their feelings, they reacted in a positive manner, maybe even giving credit to the new information for basing their idea on.Many people don't like abortion, why? Because of a God given instinct of right and wrong in my book.And if you are in connection with your instincts that are a gift from God, wouldn't you incorrectly apply the influence on the religion, instead of the inner voice of your conscience telling you that you knew all along that taking metal scissors and jamming them into the back of the head of an 8 month old fetus was wrong?

An eight month old? Yes I think some instinct (nature given in my view) would stop most people from doing that. But an 8 day old embryo that is just a microscopic collection of cells? I don't think our empathy instinct clearly extends to that. People who are opposed to killing unthinking unfeeling protohuman embryos are generally doing so based on religious doctrine. But surely you don't agree with sweet dee that religion doesn't affect us atheists?

[SweetDee 0]

An eight month old? Yes I think some instinct (nature given in my view) would stop most people from doing that. But an 8 day old embryo that is just a microscopic collection of cells? I don't think our empathy instinct clearly extends to that. People who are opposed to killing unthinking unfeeling protohuman embryos are generally doing so based on religious doctrine. But surely you don't agree with sweet dee that religion doesn't affect us atheists?

I'm not saying it DOESN'T, I'm saying it's just not all that special, statistically. You also are being pretty free with your stats here- basically you say just the belief is effecting you. What I am saying is that's a terrible way of looking at it, because now you are basically saying certain thoughts are illegal. If a person believes in not having an abortion and then never has an abortion, exactly how has that effected you in a way that impedes on your freedoms and also does not take away hers? It doesn't.

[speedz99 145]

I'm with BG in that you don't have to be religious to be against abortion...I do understand that a lot of people think that killing a microscopic bundle of cells is wrong, even if I disagree to a certain extent. The problem, of course, is that a line has to be drawn in the sand at some point between "cells" and "life", which is very difficult. But look, no christian leader is going to admit that something as polarizing as abortion involves internal morals, insight, personal beliefs, etc...those are the things that they want to force (though that might be the wrong word) on their followers. They can't leave room for interpretation; that'd be opening a pandora's box of sorts. Plus I'm sure, in many cases, they truly believe they're right, so there's always that aspect that I don't want to fully ignore.

[speedz99 145]

I'm not saying it DOESN'T, I'm saying it's just not all that special, statistically. You also are being pretty free with your stats here- basically you say just the belief is effecting you. What I am saying is that's a terrible way of looking at it, because now you are basically saying certain thoughts are illegal. If a person believes in not having an abortion and then never has an abortion, exactly how has that effected you in a way that impedes on your freedoms and also does not take away hers? It doesn't.

How are you not getting this? VOCAL MINORITIES ARE VERY CAPABLE OF SHAPING PUBLIC POLICY!!! Read that 20 times, internalize it, and then start over. Once you understand that, everything else we've said will make much more sense.Plus, the minority isn't as small as you think. Abortion rights issues are HUGE in every election, and many GOP candidates get tons of christian voters just through that issue alone. VOCAL MINORITIES ARE VERY CAPABLE OF SHAPING PUBLIC POLICY!!!Get it? We have to care about making sure they don't get their way, otherwise our freedoms absolutely will be impeded. Or at least they would if we were 16 year old girls who are pregnant after being raped by our fathers, now with 8 day old clumps of undifferentiated cells in our bellies, unable to get a legal and safe abortion.Also, I'm assuming your ignoring this:

So, to take your comparison one step furthur, we shouldn't bother trying to prevent sexual assault against women. You're saying that we shouldn't bother being active about refuting religious views because religion doesn't really affect us, and your main point is that realistically only a few religious people are a pain in our ass. Then you're using stats about sexual assault to back up your point that vocal minorities can be extreme minorities while still in the forefront. So, I totally agree, we'll stop pointing out how ridiculous religion is, and everyone can stop bothering to worry about sexual assault. Because, after all, most religious people aren't a problem for us, and 151 million women are NOT sexually assaulted every 3 minutes.

Means you realize that particular argument of yours was insane?

[Balloon guy 158]

An eight month old? Yes I think some instinct (nature given in my view) would stop most people from doing that. But an 8 day old embryo that is just a microscopic collection of cells? I don't think our empathy instinct clearly extends to that. People who are opposed to killing unthinking unfeeling protohuman embryos are generally doing so based on religious doctrine.

Once you acknowledge that an unborn 8 month old fetus is human and should not be aborted as a form of birth control, then you are just arguing semantics about which day is it okay to kill it, and which day is it not.If it's not okay to kill a fetus at 45 days, then what about 46 days? and what hour, what minute do we use to gauge.Because right now the baby can be 90% out of the birth canal and legally be killed if the mother thinks the baby will affect her financial situation.

But surely you don't agree with sweet dee that religion doesn't affect us atheists?

Of course it does, we give you freedom in the countries we established, schools of higher learning, hospitals, we help the homeless, the orphaned, the sick.I mean we affect every aspect of your life.You guys give back though, you give us....I'm sure there is something.

[speedz99 145]

Once you acknowledge that an unborn 8 month old fetus is human and should not be aborted as a form of birth control, then you are just arguing semantics about which day is it okay to kill it, and which day is it not.

[vbnautilus 48]

I'm not saying it DOESN'T, I'm saying it's just not all that special, statistically. You also are being pretty free with your stats here- basically you say just the belief is effecting you. What I am saying is that's a terrible way of looking at it, because now you are basically saying certain thoughts are illegal. If a person believes in not having an abortion and then never has an abortion, exactly how has that effected you in a way that impedes on your freedoms and also does not take away hers? It doesn't.

I'm not saying that certain thoughts are illegal. (?!?!!) Religion is obviously legal. But I am saying that certain beliefs are healthy for us to encourage -- they increase our collective well-being, and certain beliefs are unhealthy-- they decrease our collective well-being. For example, the belief that all black people should be enslaved or lynched is a belief which decreases our well-being. It's a belief our culture has moved past, and we discourage each other from having it. One day we will reach the same position with religion. Belief that the Bible is the word of god is detrimental to our flourishing.

I'm with BG in that you don't have to be religious to be against abortion..

Of course you don't have to be religious to be against abortion. I'm just showing ways in which religion influences things, and this is one arena where religious belief has a clear impact.

Once you acknowledge that an unborn 8 month old fetus is human and should not be aborted as a form of birth control, then you are just arguing semantics about which day is it okay to kill it, and which day is it not.If it's not okay to kill a fetus at 45 days, then what about 46 days? and what hour, what minute do we use to gauge.

That's a fair question. I think it has an answer which depends upon the development of the nervous system and the corresponding capacity for consciousness. The fact that it is a hard question to answer does not mean we should resort to searching ancient sheep herding books for some rule to follow.

Of course it does, we give you freedom in the countries we established

Except when what I want to do violates your ancient religious superstition.

, schools of higher learning, hospitals, we help the homeless, the orphaned, the sick.

I think the doctors are doing pretty well with the hospitals and the sick. We don't really need the priests in there. Mainly the doctors are doing well healing people because they are exercising the fruits of science -- the same science that invalidated your religion. Maybe we should erase medical science from our minds and go back to faith healing. Call up Bobby Jindal to get the demons out of the sick?

[Balloon guy 158]

I think the doctors are doing pretty well with the hospitals and the sick. We don't really need the priests in there. Mainly the doctors are doing well healing people because they are exercising the fruits of science -- the same science that invalidated your religion. Maybe we should erase medical science from our minds and go back to faith healing. Call up Bobby Jindal to get the demons out of the sick?

So now that we have created civilization and established law and order, you guys can take it from here?Careful with those nuclear bombs and harvesting children for spare body parts...

[vbnautilus 48]

So now that we have created civilization and established law and order, you guys can take it from here?

I don't know what religion Sid Meier is but I doubt he's on your team. And just because Dick Wolf is Catholic doesn't mean religion is responsible for everything he does.

[speedz99 145]

So now that we have created civilization and established law and order, you guys can take it from here?

Yup, thanks.

[Roll the Bones 74]

Yup, thanks.

Haha, really. I mean we should have done it eons ago. If it hadn't been for religon persecuting free thought for the 1000 year dark ages, we would have likely had the internet 400 years ago. I mean just think of allt he stuff we got screwed out of. We could have had JETPACKS when we were just kids! Instead I played with friggin' Tinker Toys. It's not fair!!!

[SweetDee 0]

How are you not getting this? VOCAL MINORITIES ARE VERY CAPABLE OF SHAPING PUBLIC POLICY!!! Read that 20 times, internalize it, and then start over. Once you understand that, everything else we've said will make much more sense.Plus, the minority isn't as small as you think. Abortion rights issues are HUGE in every election, and many GOP candidates get tons of christian voters just through that issue alone. VOCAL MINORITIES ARE VERY CAPABLE OF SHAPING PUBLIC POLICY!!!Get it? We have to care about making sure they don't get their way, otherwise our freedoms absolutely will be impeded. Or at least they would if we were 16 year old girls who are pregnant after being raped by our fathers, now with 8 day old clumps of undifferentiated cells in our bellies, unable to get a legal and safe abortion.Also, I'm assuming your ignoring this:Means you realize that particular argument of yours was insane?

No, never thought that idea was insane, just got bored. Something that hit me today though, whilst I was thinking about the Popes brilliant condom revelation, was, who gives a shit what the Pope says about people that don't follow Catholicism? His statement was along the lines that male prostitutes could use condoms? What? Why would he even have a position on how a Prostitute should live his life that did not start and end with "Don't be a prostitute?" Still trying to make sense out of that one. I mean, the only way this matters is that for some reason people are paying attention to what the Pope says even though they don't follow his brand, and I don't see people doing that. Seriously, for this too matter the prostitute would have to be all prostitutie and then think "Wait, I don't follow this shit GENERALLY- what with the the A, ****ing dudes and B, ****ing dudes for money, but the popes says I can't wear a condom so THAT I must follow." I mean, this whole line of thought basically says that if the Pope says it whether or not one is a Catholic it's supposed to matter on some level. Weird. It also talks about his positions against condoms in Africa, which is again retarded at best. People are ****ing left and right, everywhere, rapes, child abandonment, just sick goings on, and you don't have the sense as a man connected to the big JC to say "Look, don't do all this sinful stuff, it leads to no good end, but if you do, for Gods sake man protect yourself and others." I mean, it's already a plethora of sins, what's one more? Giving up condoms is going to be the thing that gets em in good with God?

[speedz99 145]

No, never thought that idea was insane.

That's unfortunate for you.

Something that hit me today though, whilst I was thinking about the Popes brilliant condom revelation, was, who gives a shit what the Pope says about people that don't follow Catholicism? His statement was along the lines that male prostitutes could use condoms? What? Why would he even have a position on how a Prostitute should live his life that did not start and end with "Don't be a prostitute?"

You need to think further than just the male prostitute example. It's a shitty world out there, with a scary amount of women, some Catholic, that are raped, forced to work in the sex industry, or whatever other horrible thing you could imagine, that are HIV positive through no fault of their own and now can feel absolved of the "sin" of using condoms in their sex lives. The Pope's announcement doesn't hurt anybody, but if it brings even a measure of hope to just a few women, of course it was a great thing.

[vbnautilus 48]

No, never thought that idea was insane, just got bored. Something that hit me today though, whilst I was thinking about the Popes brilliant condom revelation, was, who gives a shit what the Pope says about people that don't follow Catholicism?

You really can't see any consequences if people at high risk for HIV stop using condoms? Really?

[speedz99 145]

You really can't see any consequences if people at high risk for HIV stop using condoms? Really?

He's just saying that prostitutes don't care about what the pope thinks in the first place. It's a reasonable point until one thinks beyond the scope of the pope's sole example, as I said above.Edit: Then again, I shouldn't put words in SweetDee's mouth. Anyone who stands behind his comparison of a vocal minority to sexual assault victims (it's easy to ignore both!) has a brain that's working on an entirely different level* than my own.*lower...much lower, in case anyone was having trouble seeing the implication

[Roll the Bones 74]

He obviously doesn't understand the fundementalist influence of religon in Africa or that the the Pope's word are infallible, coming directly from God. Poor illiterate people in Africa pay attention to that even if Americans don't and likely lead to millions of deaths. It might be hopeful that he slipped and at least gave that tidbit up, but many are hoping he'll ring up God on the Bat Phone and get some new direction that would be even more helpful, for, you know, the suffering.

[Greatest I am 0]

He obviously doesn't understand the fundementalist influence of religon in Africa or that the the Pope's word are infallible, coming directly from God. Poor illiterate people in Africa pay attention to that even if Americans don't and likely lead to millions of deaths. It might be hopeful that he slipped and at least gave that tidbit up, but many are hoping he'll ring up God on the Bat Phone and get some new direction that would be even more helpful, for, you know, the suffering.

I think he is more interested in winning the population race against Islam. They are kicking his butt at the moment as Islam is growing faster than Catholics and Christianity.In fact, the E U is quite concerned as it looks like Islam will have majorities in many of the E U countries in 30 or 50 years.Even the usual Scandinavian countries are starting to make laws against too many Mosques.RegardsDL

[SweetDee 0]

He obviously doesn't understand the fundementalist influence of religon in Africa or that the the Pope's word are infallible, coming directly from God. Poor illiterate people in Africa pay attention to that even if Americans don't and likely lead to millions of deaths. It might be hopeful that he slipped and at least gave that tidbit up, but many are hoping he'll ring up God on the Bat Phone and get some new direction that would be even more helpful, for, you know, the suffering.

I understand it, I just don't get it and or like it. The Pope has pull/power, why? What if media never asked him the question? What if no one ever interviewed him? When the Pope speaks about this kind of thing and the media covers it, it gives power to the argument that fundamental, political religion needs to go, and ignores the majority who absolutely support people in Africa using condoms if it helps stop the spread of disease. The majority of religious people don't give two shits whether or not someone wears a condom to protect themselves. That's just good sense.

[Roll the Bones 74]

I understand it, I just don't get it and or like it. The Pope has pull/power, why? What if media never asked him the question? What if no one ever interviewed him? When the Pope speaks about this kind of thing and the media covers it, it gives power to the argument that fundamental, political religion needs to go, and ignores the majority who absolutely support people in Africa using condoms if it helps stop the spread of disease. The majority of religious people don't give two shits whether or not someone wears a condom to protect themselves. That's just good sense.

No, the majority of religous people in America don't care, know or understand religous doctrine and kind of live by some hazy childhood recollection of what their religon teaches as morality. In a poor culture they still believe their consciousnes is influenced by God and are scared to death of hell, so they follow what they are told by people in authority. Good sense would be to let science guide our morality, not faith.

[speedz99 145]

When the Pope speaks about this kind of thing and the media covers it, it gives power to the argument that fundamental, political religion needs to go.

Isn't it great!But really, are you going to ignore the positive benefits of the announcement that I already mentioned?

[vbnautilus 48]

The Pope has pull/power, why?

Mostly because he is the anointed leader of a billion-person religion which considers him to be the earthly representative of an all-powerful God. Not so much because of the media.

[SweetDee 0]

Isn't it great!But really, are you going to ignore the positive benefits of the announcement that I already mentioned?

Well, yeah, and you should too. For, in your glorifying his message you have taken the road of "If I can't beat them join them." Which surprises me.I would expect more of my attitude, which is to tell the Pope to shove it.

[Greatest I am 0]

Well, yeah, and you should too. For, in your glorifying his message you have taken the road of "If I can't beat them join them." Which surprises me.I would expect more of my attitude, which is to tell the Pope to shove it.

At this location---http://community.beliefnet.com/go/thread/v...was_sellin?pg=3A discussion is starting that discusses the infallibility of the pope as he reverses the stance of previous popes. This includes condom use, sex that is not done just for reproductive purposes and slavery.I am finding the two debaters to be interesting. Some here may want to watch or participate.RegardsDL

[speedz99 145]

Well, yeah, and you should too. For, in your glorifying his message you have taken the road of "If I can't beat them join them." Which surprises me.

Your reading comprehension is: atrocious.