Why You Should Respect Religion

[hipsterdufus]

Let me refer you to the first hit in a Google search for "ACLU defends Christians":



Yeah, they must really ****ing hate Christians if they're defending Jerry Falwell for free. Bastards.

How dare you let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

Don't you watch the Colbert Report.

 

[Deegan]

Many people do not refuse simply because they do not want to make a scene.

Me personally, I don't place that much respect upon a book.

You can respect religion and the Bible all you want. The fact remains that many people do not.

It's not the book, it's the religious principles that many practice, and believe hold us to a higher standard. Believe it or not, it is still used in all of our major traditions in this country, and demands respect. I don't know what you are trying to imply when you say "many do not" that could not be more false, we even go as far as to ensure our enemies have their books, so they can continue their religious activities. To suggest we can begin to disrespect religion in this country, is to find yourself in the minority, just ask the liberals.

 

[Thorgasm]

It's not the book, it's the religious principles that many practice, and believe hold us to a higher standard. Believe it or not, it is still used in all of our major traditions in this country, and demands respect. I don't know what you are trying to imply when you say "many do not" that could not be more false, we even go as far as to ensure our enemies have their books, so they can continue their religious activities. To suggest we can begin to disrespect religion in this country, is to find yourself in the minority, just ask the liberals.

Who is disrespecting religion?

 

[Deegan]

Who is disrespecting religion?

That is what we are trying to uncover here, I assume?

 

[Engimo]

Well, I suppose the ACLU is not the problem then. It is more of the Michael Newdows of the world.

Yes, those bastards trying to remove unconstitutional endorsements of religion from our state establishments.

 

[Stace]

How dare you let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

Don't you watch the Colbert Report.

I do, I do!!! LOL....

"...snug in their beds, while visions of truth danced in their heads"....

That has got to be my favorite "truth" line.

 

[Stace]

It's not the book, it's the religious principles that many practice, and believe hold us to a higher standard. Believe it or not, it is still used in all of our major traditions in this country, and demands respect. I don't know what you are trying to imply when you say "many do not" that could not be more false, we even go as far as to ensure our enemies have their books, so they can continue their religious activities. To suggest we can begin to disrespect religion in this country, is to find yourself in the minority, just ask the liberals.

There's a difference between disrespect and indifference. For myself, I couldn't care less about religion. Sure, I can spout off some Bible verses when others want to bring 'em up, but that's about the extent of my religiousness. I respect the fact that everyone has the right to practice the religion of their choosing, and the right to NOT practice if that's what they choose. I respect the fact that many people do find comfort and faith in their religion. But respect the institution of religion, when to me a lot of it is based on falsehoods? Can't do it.

 

[Deegan]

I respect the fact that many people do find comfort and faith in their religion.

This is all I am asking, I don't know about others, but this is a small sacrifice on your behalf, thank you.

 

[Stace]

This is all I am asking, I don't know about others, but this is a small sacrifice on your behalf, thank you.

Hey, I have no problem saying that. Just because I don't find comfort in those things (and I'm not atheist, either :2razz: ), doesn't mean I should belittle those who do.

Whatever works, ya know?

 

[FreeThinker]

Poor FreeThinker is a perfect example. He needs religion to want to survive in life. You and I don't need to believe in something that is fake to have those same desires. Religion has done nothing throughout my life, which is fine. He has less than 30 posts, and all I see is a very angry conservative Christian--the poor thing.

First of all, your post count does not determine your education, and no aps, none of your 1400 or so posts have made your brain any bigger.

And about me needing god:

I myself am an atheist.

Try reading the entire post before responding. Perhaps your post count might be a few hundred less if you spent more time thinking and less time talking.

 

[FreeThinker]

Holy hell you people took this debate totally in the wrong direction. You keep naming religious figures with questionable eithics as proof that religion is a bad thing.

I wonder how many people read the title of this topic then responded without reading my post. Take the time to read it please.

I said that religion is a tool for human survival in the face of overwhelming odds. When an animal sees no way out of a cage it sometimes dies.

Everyone has, at some time or another in their life, felt completely hopeless. They have been through a time in which nothing seemed to make sense, and there appeared to be no reason for living. When I say everyone I mean EVERYONE. If you say that you have gone through life without ever losing purpose you are a liar.

Humanity's greatest weapon against this is religion. We use it to fight despair. I will make this analogy:

A hammer has been used since men carried sticks and stones to build homes. It has been used to defend against wild animals. It has helped man survive. Hammers have also been used to murder people. Does that mean that the hammer is evil? No. Of course not. The hammer is a tool.

What I am saying is, don't hate the hammer that killed the man. Hate the person that used it.

 

[Stace]

I said that religion is a tool for human survival in the face of overwhelming odds. When an animal sees no way out of a cage it sometimes dies.

Everyone has, at some time or another in their life, felt completely hopeless. They have been through a time in which nothing seemed to make sense, and there appeared to be no reason for living. When I say everyone I mean EVERYONE. If you say that you have gone through life without ever losing purpose you are a liar.

Humanity's greatest weapon against this is religion. We use it to fight despair.

Not entirely true, however. You must also recognize that not everyone follows any sort of religion, nor do they believe in any sort of higher power. They, therefore, have relied on their own inner strength, or maybe their family and friends, to help see them through the hard times.

I'm not saying that religion is a bad thing; I'm just saying that it doesn't work for everyone.

 

[FreeThinker]

Not entirely true, however. You must also recognize that not everyone follows any sort of religion, nor do they believe in any sort of higher power. They, therefore, have relied on their own inner strength, or maybe their family and friends, to help see them through the hard times.

I'm not saying that religion is a bad thing; I'm just saying that it doesn't work for everyone.

I didn't say everyone has to have it. I was an atheist the day I learned about world war II.

What I am trying to debate is some liberals out there that say religion is a scourge on humanity. It isn't.

 

[aps]

First of all, your post count does not determine your education, and no aps, none of your 1400 or so posts have made your brain any bigger.

I didn't say anything about a post count making someone more or less intelligent. Where did you get that? What I'm talking about was that in 26 posts, you exuded an angry person with an agenda to attack people, particularly Engimo. That's all I was talking about. If you want to take it as an attack on your intelligence, that is your problem.

Originally Posted by FreeThinker
And about me needing god:

Try reading the entire post before responding. Perhaps your post count might be a few hundred less if you spent more time thinking and less time talking.

You're right--that was my fault. When I saw how angry you were, I stopped reading your posts, so I must have missed that part of your post. Thanks for the advice. I appreciate it coming from someone like you.

 

[hipsterdufus]

I guess I would answer the question, because when our judges, presidents, congressmen, senators, and right down to your average citizen in any court of law, puts his or her hand on the bible, and swears to tell the truth, or make any number of promises, or commitments, this book of religion is obviously one that demands respect. Sorry for the run on sentence.

It always seems ridiculous to me that the only qualification we have for political candidates is that they believe in God. Nothing else..

 

[HU-210]

A hammer has been used since men carried sticks and stones to build homes. It has been used to defend against wild animals. It has helped man survive. Hammers have also been used to murder people. Does that mean that the hammer is evil? No. Of course not. The hammer is a tool.

What I am saying is, don't hate the hammer that killed the man. Hate the person that used it.

Homer: The blade in itself incites violence.

You ask others to read the whole thread, yet you have not even done so. You have replied to neither of my posts.

Mr U

You should respect religion. Such words are poison. First of all, respect for a certain school of thought compromises thought in itself. if you are too worried about offending the school in itself, you will never accomplish a succesful argument. Second, even if you had said "You should respect individuals who are religious", your argument is still silly as you make obvious a measure of force. 'should'. As if what follows, respecting religion, or religious folk is some truth that follows from your arguments.

What is respect worth if you extend it to everyone? Perhaps you advocate some basal amount of courtesy, but I fight that definition of respect wherever I find it. Respect is something that is earned, for which you are prepared to fight and die for, because it connects you and your closest of kin and friendship.

"Respect all life" suggest a non-conflict society of Christian origin. Compassion, slave-morality, it has all been shown for its true face in Nietzsche's work and your attempt to force it into atheist morality is a silly attempt at that. We need to find our own system of values that allows us to worship beauty in our own ways, and freedom plays a large role in that. Someone telling us what we should/need to/must do doesn't.

I can't wait till someone realizes you are holding the book up side down.

Puissant peasant. Look at your signature and with the same condescending tone address yourself. Your hypocrisy is as unflattering to humanity as the manner in which you attempt to control his morality. Megalomania is fun when it comes with a good dosage of self-humour.

Mr U

 

[Deegan]

It always seems ridiculous to me that the only qualification we have for political candidates is that they believe in God. Nothing else..

I don't think that is true at all, though it is a good start, but it's certainly not the only qualification. I assume that a large majority would be uneasy with an atheist in the W.H, but that's just my opinion.

 

[kal-el]

I don't think that is true at all, though it is a good start, but it's certainly not the only qualification. I assume that a large majority would be uneasy with an atheist in the W.H, but that's just my opinion.

Come on now, do you really think an atheist or an agnostic would have a chance on the political frontier? The majority of Americans believe in god, therefore it is logical that the majority would want a candidate to mesh with their worldviews. IMO they would run an atheist out of office before he could blink!

 

[shuamort]

I don't think that is true at all, though it is a good start, but it's certainly not the only qualification. I assume that a large majority would be uneasy with an atheist in the W.H, but that's just my opinion.

I'd agree on that point. It's a shame but I think there's still a real prejudice against atheists out there. In fact, I saw a study recently where people would actually rather have a homosexual, an african-american, or a woman before they'd have an atheist as the president.

according to the latest Gallup poll asking who people would vote for for U.S. President. Only 49 percent would vote for an atheist, while 59 percent would vote for a homosexual, 92 percent would vote for a black, and 95 percent would vote for a woman. This figure is up from 1958, when only 18 percent would have voted for an atheist. No other group has ever gone lower than 26 percent, which was how many people would have voted for a homosexual in 1987 (when the homosexual category for this poll began).

 

[Thorgasm]

Come on now, do you really think an atheist or an agnostic would have a chance on the political frontier? The majority of Americans believe in god, therefore it is logical that the majority would want a candidate to mesh with their worldviews. IMO they would run an atheist out of office before he could blink!

At least an open atheist. An atheist would have to feign being a christian.

 

[kal-el]

At least an open atheist. An atheist would have to feign being a christian.

Yep, they would have to throw out alot of bible quotes, and try not to mention that they don't believe in god.

 

[hipsterdufus]

Yep, they would have to throw out alot of bible quotes, and try not to mention that they don't believe in god.

Sort of a "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" hypocrisy. I'm pretty sure if Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he would consider himself an agnostic or an atheist or some combination of both. Of course, he'd never get elected today. Jefferson feared to tell the public his true beliefs on religion. Rememer, he re=wrote the Bible without all of the miracles. Jefferson only went to church because it was "expected" of him to do so as a political figure.

 

[kal-el]

Sort of a "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" hypocrisy.

Exactly.

I'm pretty sure if Thomas Jefferson were alive today, he would consider himself an agnostic or an atheist or some combination of both. Of course, he'd never get elected today. Jefferson feared to tell the public his true beliefs on religion. Rememer, he re=wrote the Bible without all of the miracles. Jefferson only went to church because it was "expected" of him to do so as a political figure.

Wow, I wasn't aware of this. I didn't know Jefferson re-wrote the bible without all of the miracles. Can you provide a link? Thanks.

 

[Stace]

Exactly.



Wow, I wasn't aware of this. I didn't know Jefferson re-wrote the bible without all of the miracles. Can you provide a link? Thanks.

You've never heard of the Jefferson Bible?!?!?!

http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible

There's a couple to get you started.

 

[kal-el]

You've never heard of the Jefferson Bible?!?!?!

http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible

There's a couple to get you started.

Wow thanks Stace. I probably heard of it sometime, but I prefer reading the good ole fashion regular bible for a good bed time story.