The world might be better if people actually followed their religions like they should...
Or, if people just thought rationally, there would be no reason for anyone to follow any religion in the first place.
Do you believe the world would be better off without religion?
I would have to guess “no difference”. Religious groups undeniably do a lot of good in the world, but there are also many wars centered on religious differences. Without religion, I believe there would still be the good deeds - those people who do such deeds do so because it is in their nature and a church (for example) is just their means, but other means would be used instead (i.e. nonprofits). I also believe mankind would still find something to go to war over (and so religion is just an excuse to fight over something - basically that war is in our nature too)… and so I don’t think there would be much of a difference. Our actions are not in spite of or because of religion. Religion is just a means to multiple ends that all derive from human nature.
Oh, me too. I just don't like the idea of people who don't believe in god getting down about themselves feeling unimportant. If they can't turn to god is there anything that could make them more content? Either way, creation or evolution, we are clearly living miracles.I think it's a little of both. Its too much stress and tension to think that the world is not being guided towards a certain path by a superior being, so I prefer to believe that God just made things this way for something we don't understand yet. So...God made it so this is just the way it is, IMO.
:lol: So what, exactly, is rational about purporting life came into being by a series of improbable coincidences?
It's supported by every shred of evidence that we have, unlike the existence of imaginary friends in the sky.
Nah, here's a few cool things religion has given us:
Has anybody ever figured out the odds of life today? With all the death and diseases and wars and famine and disasters, what are the odds of a life surviving every single one of them? More than winning the lottery every day for ten years? Something like that. It would be a big project but we could come up with a very good estimate of the odds.
You understand what I'm saying? I have a dad and he had a dad and he had a dad and...........green slime. The chain has never been broken for anyone alive for tens of millions of years. Is there a part of evolutionism that admits "That's just a miracle!" Is there any other word that could be used?
No, because for every you that exists right now, there are many many more that didn't. The odds of you being here may be one in a trillion, and each of those alternatives are one in a trillion, and there are a trillion attempts... Someone will make it. Life is actually a statistical imperative. It takes a staggering number of coincidences for life to not only exist on a planet, but for it to exist like this... The odds are tiny. But in this vast universe, there are many many many many many possible planets. Many of them have some of the qualifications met. Some have others. Statistically, one of them (or more), is likely to have them all. And maybe it's not quite an imperative. Maybe the size of the universe only belies a one in three chance for life. That's suddenly less a miracle and more just a good roll in Yachzee.
To reply to the main question. Religion is largely obsolete, I feel. When these faiths were created, they were a way for dealing with the world. To answer unanswered questions. In some cases, we have better answers. In others, where the theories have stood the test of time, they were good ideas by their own merits.
I say no. For every evil act committed in the name of religion, there are probably ten positive acts committed in the name of religion.
The Salvation Army is a perfect example. They have touched the lives of hundreds of millions of people, in a positive way, for decades and they're not the only religious group to do so.
THANK you for this.No. The world would be better off it those who practice a religion would keep it in their private sphere, would cease all proselityzing and would respect the beliefs of other faiths. And this goes double for the insufferably rabid atheist that make me ashamed to admit my own atheism.
There needs to be a profile thingy that indicates a member is smart.
Do you believe the world would be better off without religion?
I would have to guess “no difference”. Religious groups undeniably do a lot of good in the world, but there are also many wars centered on religious differences. Without religion, I believe there would still be the good deeds - those people who do such deeds do so because it is in their nature and a church (for example) is just their means, but other means would be used instead (i.e. nonprofits). I also believe mankind would still find something to go to war over (and so religion is just an excuse to fight over something - basically that war is in our nature too)… and so I don’t think there would be much of a difference. Our actions are not in spite of or because of religion. Religion is just a means to multiple ends that all derive from human nature.
thoughts?
Then you got the wrong message. It was to demonstraight that religion or not, we would find other things to fight wars over.
They also refuse to feed people who don't profess religious beliefs and you have to pray with them to get a bed for the night. They're a really poor example of a positive religious influence.
No. Apdst is exactly right. Another for instance, nobody helps AIDS victims in cities more than the catholic church. Nobody is refusing any of these people if they are gay.They also refuse to feed people who don't profess religious beliefs and you have to pray with them to get a bed for the night. They're a really poor example of a positive religious influence.
Bull****, I've done voluntary work with the Salvos, no-one was turned away if they were in need.
All you have to do is look, but instead, you pretend that just because you didn't see it, it doesn't happen. Hardly surprising.
Lown et al. v. The Salvation Army et al. (Challenging government-funded, faith-based practices of The Salvation Army)
Congratulations, you posted an article that not only had nothing to do with the Salvos refusing to 'feed people who don't profess religious beliefs', but also said that the case against them was dismissed. :lol:
In a settlement agreement signed by a federal judge on Feb. 16, 2010, the government defendants adopted auditing procedures or standards of conduct to ensure that The Salvation Army does not force people in need of government-funded services to engage in religious activities, such as worship or religious instruction. The procedures and standards will also ensure that recipients of social services are not discriminated against because of their religious beliefs.
As part of the settlement, the NYCLU will receive regular reports from the government agencies on The Salvation Army’s compliance with the agreement. A federal court will maintain jurisdiction over the agreement for two years to ensure that it is enforced.
Which only proves you didn't read the article, which is hardly a surprise:
You do realize that those atheists factors were religious. The belief in a supreme being is not required for something to be a religion. Enviro-loons for example are religious even though a great number of them are atheists. Enviro-loons have a certain set of beliefs and practices agreed up by a lot of enviro-loons and they agree to those beliefs and practices.
Religion | Define Religion at Dictionary.com
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7.
religions, Archaic . religious rites.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?