Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I were to make a set of assertions that totally goes against everything known and provable to man without any basis in reality, I would rightly be mocked. If I called it a region, it would be considered unassailable by logic.
Why should anyone care what you believe as long as it doesn't impact the safety and well being of others? Is there something in human nature that likes to mock, poke fun, ridicule another person? If so, it's a controllable you know.
Understandably, if a person has found something spiritually fulfilling that makes his or her life better, they'd want to share it with others. They, on the other hand, are free to listen, accept or reject. No need to mock ... or IS there?
You only think so because the topic is religion. I bet you wouldn't show the same regard for cults or Scientology.
If I were to make a set of assertions that totally goes against everything known and provable to man without any basis in reality, I would rightly be mocked. If I called it a region, it would be considered unassailable by logic.
Yes! Thank you. If I were to claim that there's an invisible Basset Hound running around the room I would be mocked unless I could prove it. However if I say there's an invisible being in the sky listening to our every thought, watching our every deed no one says a word about it except "oh well we must respect everyone's beliefs, etc."
Yes! Thank you. If I were to claim that there's an invisible Basset Hound running around the room I would be mocked unless I could prove it. However if I say there's an invisible being in the sky listening to our every thought, watching our every deed no one says a word about it except "oh well we must respect everyone's beliefs, etc."
I think philosopher Bertrand Russell explained it well:
"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense.
If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
Oh yes, those godawful atheists not living by any standards! Just running rampant committing atrocity after atrocity! Thankfully we have such great Christians committing zero crimes!
What always amazes me is that christers believe that they'd be out raping, killing and screwing everything in sight if it weren't for their book of mythology.
What always amazes me is that christers believe that they'd be out raping, killing and screwing everything in sight if it weren't for their book of mythology.
[SIZE=2][SIZE=4][/SIZE][/SIZE]If people are good only because they fear punishment and hope for a reward than we are a sorry lot indeed-Albert Einstein.
Why should anyone care what you believe as long as it doesn't impact the safety and well being of others? Is there something in human nature that likes to mock, poke fun, ridicule another person? If so, it's a controllable you know.
Understandably, if a person has found something spiritually fulfilling that makes his or her life better, they'd want to share it with others. They, on the other hand, are free to listen, accept or reject. No need to mock ... or IS there?
Oh, under normal circumstance I would agree with you. But you see, there are many people who think that important decisions should be base on such beliefs or even that others should be made to adhere tot hem as well. That's where it gets problematic.
It is difficult to believe this thread is still going. It seems that there are those here on C-D who actually believe they will anonymously convince someone else of their life view. Anyway, it certainly bolsters my belief that politics are simply a cover for the real division in America. Very prophetic.
It is difficult to believe this thread is still going. It seems that there are those here on C-D who actually believe they will anonymously convince someone else of their life view. Anyway, it certainly bolsters my belief that politics are simply a cover for the real division in America. Very prophetic.
Is it any wonder why individuals who make their own rules and follow standards that they make up for themselves would be distrusted?
Please expand on that poorly thought out statement.
In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies (Figures 1-9). The most theistic prosperous democracy, the U.S., is exceptional, but not in the manner Franklin predicted. The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly. The view of the U.S. as a “shining city on the hill” to the rest of the world is falsified when it comes to basic measures of societal health. Youth suicide is an exception to the general trend because there is not a significant relationship between it and religious or secular factors. No democracy is known to have combined strong religiosity and popular denial of evolution with high rates of societal health. Higher rates of non-theism and acceptance of human evolution usually correlate with lower rates of dysfunction, and the least theistic nations are usually the least dysfunctional. None of the strongly secularized, pro-evolution democracies is experiencing high levels of measurable dysfunction. In some cases the highly religious U.S. is an outlier in terms of societal dysfunction from less theistic but otherwise socially comparable secular developed democracies. In other cases, the correlations are strongly graded, sometimes outstandingly so.
Journal of Religion and Society (http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html - broken link)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
