Respecting religion???

[NWTony]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Gosh, I think you've got the wrong end of the stick entirely there! They are still doing it.

[Martin4x4]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

"Believe"?

Medical Researches face concerns about ethics, safety and efficacy on a daily basis and I have yet to see any evidence that presents me with any cause for concern on these issues.

I've already provided several examples of religion holding back progress which you've been unable to refute in any material way.

[///ajd]

Derek Smith said:

Stephan Fry's take on whether the abrahamic god deserves respect:

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/feb/01/ste...

WARNING: Those of a religious nature, look away now.

This is such a stark statement of the blindingly obvious. It does give some encouragement that we may finally start to see the beginning of the end of religions faltering grip on some in society.

Perhaps within a small number of generations in certain parts of the world it will be consigned to history like slavery and dunking witches.

[jogon]

///ajd said:

Derek Smith said:

Stephan Fry's take on whether the abrahamic god deserves respect:

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/feb/01/ste...

WARNING: Those of a religious nature, look away now.

This is such a stark statement of the blindingly obvious. It does give some encouragement that we may finally start to see the beginning of the end of religions faltering grip on some in society.

Perhaps within a small number of generations in certain parts of the world it will be consigned to history like slavery and dunking witches.

Be careful of what it is been replaced with though and those who are less willing to give up their religious beliefs currently taking advantage of the moral and cultural vacuum left in the wake of Christianity's demise.

[///ajd]

jogon said:

///ajd said:

Derek Smith said:

Stephan Fry's take on whether the abrahamic god deserves respect:

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/feb/01/ste...

WARNING: Those of a religious nature, look away now.

This is such a stark statement of the blindingly obvious. It does give some encouragement that we may finally start to see the beginning of the end of religions faltering grip on some in society.

Perhaps within a small number of generations in certain parts of the world it will be consigned to history like slavery and dunking witches.

Be careful of what it is been replaced with though and those who are less willing to give up their religious beliefs currently taking advantage of the moral and cultural vacuum left in the wake of Christianity's demise.

True, but the concept will be bin one, bin them all. It could evolve to become socially unacceptable, like smoking, or not wearing seat belts, or drink driving.

The rise of universal secularism and atheism, as a force for good and improved moral standards with equality for all, without vices such as homophobia and sexism.

[Troubleatmill]

jogon said:

..... of the moral and cultural vacuum left in the wake of Christianity's demise.

Yes - because Mother Teresa was one of the nicest people on the planet. So much so - she was beatified.
The reality was that she was an evil, vindictive, malicious fraudster. Who took under false pretences - millions of dollars - and then build a number of temples- with the aim of making her their spiritual leader.

And then we have a former Pope - who has protected hundreds if not thousands of paedophile priests, bishops ( and the odd friend of the incumbent Pope )

And not forgetting the study conducted in Spain - that found that all of the reported child rape cases between the 50's and 70's. 9% were conducted by priests. 9%!!

I think you need to look a bit more closer to home to find the morally reprehensible. Clue - They are peddling religion.


Edit.... we could discuss the Catholic Church's partnership with Hitler and Mussolini. Or the thousands of other nasty things that the Church did.

Edited by Troubleatmill on Monday 2nd February 19:36

[jogon]

///ajd said:

True, but the concept will be bin one, bin them all. It could evolve to become socially unacceptable, like smoking, or not wearing seat belts, or drink driving.

The rise of universal secularism and atheism, as a force for good and improved moral standards with equality for all, without vices such as homophobia and sexism.

A concept and that it well remain. If you honestly think changes will occur in the near future you are as deluded as those who believe Islam is a religion of peace.

[///ajd]

jogon said:

///ajd said:

True, but the concept will be bin one, bin them all. It could evolve to become socially unacceptable, like smoking, or not wearing seat belts, or drink driving.

The rise of universal secularism and atheism, as a force for good and improved moral standards with equality for all, without vices such as homophobia and sexism.

A concept and that it well remain. If you honestly think changes will occur in the near future you are as deluded as those who believe Islam is a religion of peace.

Sadly I don't really believe it will be quick, but you never know, recent advances in science and understanding of the planet are happening at an incredible rate.

Look at peoples outlook in the 50s & 60s. Unrecognisable today.

It would be nice to think intellectual energies of humankind could be turned to the modern challenges of simultaneously saving the planet and the V8, whilst leaving sun worship as a fond memory of the past.

[jogon]

///ajd said:

Sadly I don't really believe it will be quick, but you never know, recent advances in science and understanding of the planet are happening at an incredible rate.

Look at peoples outlook in the 50s & 60s. Unrecognisable today.

It would be nice to think intellectual energies of humankind could be turned to the modern challenges of simultaneously saving the planet and the V8, whilst leaving sun worship as a fond memory of the past.

I hope so too but the reality is that while we argue amongst ourselves over which direction to take we are letting an altogether much more dangerous and prejudice form of religion take a grip that is proving very difficult to combat given how preoccupied we are with appeasing everyone and anyones beliefs.

[Derek Smith]

jogon said:

Be careful of what it is been replaced with though and those who are less willing to give up their religious beliefs currently taking advantage of the moral and cultural vacuum left in the wake of Christianity's demise.

The churches do not teach morals, they teach rules. There is a massive difference. Further, much play is made of the 10 commandments but research has shown that if one excludes the 'praise me or else' bits, all of these rules had been used by most societies around the world who had not heard of Moses. They are, in effect, the norm.

Moral behaviour is not adherence to rules others have given you. All that is is obeying.

Churches teach that those outside their sect are lessor for being so. It is racism as such.

My kids would be shocked at the norm in my day. No black, no Irish, no dogs was accepted. There was justification for such racism in papers and no one was surprised. Once the control of churches was shrugged of, the rights of women to be treated as people was allowed to begin. Control of their own fertility was shocking to churches. When the pill first came out, there were threats of hell fires and rocks falling from the sky.

I've gone through my life with hardly any racism being apparent to me. Oddly enough, the only time I've felt it was in a social services office where I saw a poster which suggested that I, as a racial minority, deserved different treatment to others.

The odd thing is that the catholic church didn't really worry about condoms in the old days. I don't think they mentioned it and were happy for their congregations to control family size. My father was one of 18 kids and my mother one of 8. Yet there was just me and my brother and none of the family had more than 2 kids.

I can't really see why the change, but it is silly. It is nothing more than showing they haven't moved on. Stuck in the past with attitudes of the iron age.

Women are not a threat to the church. Indeed, there are suggestions that they will soon be 80% of church membership. But still not popes. How pathetic is that.

jogon said:

. . . but the reality is that while we argue amongst ourselves over which direction to take we are letting an altogether much more dangerous and prejudice form of religion take a grip that is proving very difficult to combat given how preoccupied we are with appeasing everyone and anyones beliefs.

There's no difference between any of the abrahamic religions. From a personal aspect, islam has considerably less effect on me than the anglican church.

We need to move away from appeasing anyone of religious prejudice, especially those misogynistic, homophobic and repressive abrahamic ones.

[Troubleatmill]

Derek Smith said:

The churches do not teach morals.

Sorry Fella... they do... by heck they do.

Do a number of the directors and the employees do the most reprehensible crimes possible. Yup. A track record of child rape as long as your arm.

[///ajd]

isis burning that pilot

yes, i'm sure that's what any reasonable god would want

it would be interesting how many votes a political party with a secular 'lets tone down this religious stuff and put it in its place' agenda would get.

[J4CKO]

///ajd said:

isis burning that pilot

yes, i'm sure that's what any reasonable god would want

it would be interesting how many votes a political party with a secular 'lets tone down this religious stuff and put it in its place' agenda would get.

Do IS/ISIS/ISIL or whatever have any other agenda that killing, they have in the last day or so launched a gay man off a roof seven stories up, then stoned him to death (with the help of the locals) as he didn't die, and burnt that Jordanian pilot alive, this isnt malicious rumours, they video it and put it on the internet.

I was trying to think of a way they can be stopped that doesn't involve being as bad as they are, but there isn't one.

[anonymous-user]

Martin4x4 said:

"Believe"?

Medical Researches face concerns about ethics, safety and efficacy on a daily basis and I have yet to see any evidence that presents me with any cause for concern on these issues.

I've already provided several examples of religion holding back progress which you've been unable to refute in any material way.

You brought up the CofE case as evidence of the CofE holding back progress. I challenged you on it, you copped out.

As to the Catholic condom thing, and I assume you mean American fundamentalist creationists, I wasn't arguing with you on that point.
Try not to tar all with one brush or to apportion blame to all based on the actions of specific groups. That's what nutters do.

[MC Bodge]

J4CKO said:

Do IS/ISIS/ISIL or whatever have any other agenda that killing, they have in the last day or so launched a gay man off a roof seven stories up, then stoned him to death (with the help of the locals) as he didn't die, and burnt that Jordanian pilot alive, this isnt malicious rumours, they video it and put it on the internet.

I was trying to think of a way they can be stopped that doesn't involve being as bad as they are, but there isn't one.

Similarly for Boko Haram. They are nominally "Islamic" and appear to be opposed to pretty much everything (and nothing), existing purely to barbarically kill in huge numbers.

...and for 2nd / 3rd generation immigrant Islamists in Europe.

The common thing is Young (mostly) men with no direction and a feeling of anger towards the world and everybody in it.

Sadly, the seemingly vacuous and pointless Extreme Islam is the current non-cause du jour.

Who knows what to do about it?

Edited by MC Bodge on Tuesday 3rd February 20:57

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

I have alot against religion but I don't profess to hate it - that is a word you introduced.

I highlighted FGM, sexism, homophobia and child abuse generically as failings of various religions. Ample examples are available to associate various shortfalls with various religions.

You attempt to clear the CoE by citing one atrocity they have spoken out against, as if that exonerates all the other failings of christianity based religions, missing the point entirely.

And then you accuse my thought processes of being inadequate by using foul language.

Once again - how do you feel about the sexism and homophobic shortcomings of christian religion - are you OK with those of will you dodge the question again by referring to something else?

Why should a sexist homophobic body have any valid say in the direction of scientific research?

Again, various this, various that. I'm not sure you are being objective here.
With regards the CofE it is foolish of you to talk about FGM and somehow blame that on the CofE. With regards sexism, the CofE has many female clergy and has appointed a female Bishop. This shows they are moving with the times. With regards homosexuality it is reported that perhaps one in ten of CofE clergy are gay, many are gay and married. I read an article from a CofE Bishop who stated that the whole thing was silly, that there are gays amongst them, that this is entirely known by those in charge, that they pretty much have said they are not against homosexuality but their own clergy are the ones who haven't had a definitive 'no problem' answer.
I would say that the House of Lords does need people with the skills and learning of CofE Bishops as a non-commercial voice of reason, people who have no interest in vote winning and saying 'the right thing' and people who don't have any favours owed to pals.


Anyway all this gay bashing and sexism, I can't say I've ever heard this preached in any Church I've ever been in, never felt compelled to do it myself because of reading something in the Bible either.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 3rd February 21:08

[anonymous-user]

///ajd said:

isis burning that pilot

yes, i'm sure that's what any reasonable god would want

it would be interesting how many votes a political party with a secular 'lets tone down this religious stuff and put it in its place' agenda would get.

Hmmmm, if people want to be religious (and are hurting nobody with it) whose right is it to make them 'tone it down'? Isn't that a little fascist?

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

Churches teach that those outside their sect are lessor for being so. It is racism as such....

Really? Wow! I've never been told that by any member of the clergy. Have you been to Church and have heard that from the pulpit?
Perhaps you should be more specific because it looks like you are insinuating all Churches do this.
Which churches, where and when?
Or is there a mahoosive chip of all chips on your shoulder?!

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 3rd February 21:15

[WinstonWolf]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You've obviously not read the bible then.

Remind me again of the church's liberal approach to gay marriage and women vicars...

[anonymous-user]

WinstonWolf said:

You've obviously not read the bible then.

Remind me again of the church's liberal approach to gay marriage and women vicars...

Which Church?