Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-27-2014, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Chicago Area
12,688 posts, read 6,759,651 times
Reputation: 6598

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
Actually, no. In the Soviet Union, for instance, the government rejected the idea that believers were enemies of the state - mainly because there were just too many of them and also because there were many loyal Soviets who just happened to be religious. They were hounded with atheist propaganda and communist party officials tried to infiltrate the churches in order to control them. But by and large, there wasn't some massive attack that killed millions as you say.

Marxism did not advocate the destruction of religion through violence. Marxism said that religion originated from the poor who used it to comfort and reassure themselves that a better life would await them after death. Therefore, the way to eradicate religion was to eradicate the harsh conditions that made them poor. So yeah ... the Marxist policy was just the opposite of your idea. Marxism wanted to elevate the poor to a better standing so they wouldn't have to rely on religion as a crutch to get through the day.

The Soviet Union, "only" executed 28 bishops and 1200 priests. Yeah, I'm not belittling their deaths nor am I justifying their executions. Atheists are not immune from committing atrocities. But millions? No ...

The problem is that people only see this whopping huge number of deaths but really don't categorize them.
A.) You're missing thousands and thousands of believers who really were targeted. Thousands of Jews, Catholics, Muslims, Eastern Orthodox and Protestants were forcibly relocated to Siberia where they ultimately died. And the USSR didn't really give up the fight either. They just postponed it, putting it on their "to do" list. They never stopped abusing religion until the fall of Communism.

B.) You're also missing the point. Lenin, Stalin, Kim Sung, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and all of the others prove their "devout" militant atheism beyond all doubt by their anti-religious crusades. I'm not saying that all of their victims were targets of anti-religious mass movements. Some certainly were. Taken together, millions of people died for their religion in Marxist countries. But the real point: Yes, they most definitely were atheists. Some of the most inhuman monsters in human history absolutely were atheists.

C.) Thusly, you had the supreme leaders and the entire ruling elite in those nations that were -- to a man -- hardcore atheists. Atheists who ardently believed what you suggested earlier: "If we could just get rid of all religion, problems X, Y, Z would cease to exist."

Quote:
Yes, but the difference is that your mixing atheism with Marxism. It's not pure atheism. You have to keep in mind that atheism doesn't tell anyone to do anything, so you can't actually blame a person's or nation's actions on atheism.
I'm not suggesting that atheism is in any way dogmatic, but there is no denying that atheism carries the same stigma with it that every religion does. "I'm right and you're wrong, therefore I'm better/smarter/more enlightened than you are." Far too many atheists carry their contempt for religiousness proudly, wearing it like a badge of honor.

Jesus Christ never taught his followers that Jews and heretics should be tortured and killed. Self-righteous (or otherwise corrupt) human beings came up with that all on their own. It's about like having one of your kids decapitate your neighbor, bring you the head and tell you, "I did it for you daddy!" Jesus is not amused.

Marxism failed horribly because atheists are not immune to human nature. They are not immune to self-righteousness. They are not immune to being corrupted by absolute power. They are not immune to greed and general selfishness. We tend to delude ourselves into believing in quick and easy fixes to for everything bad in the world. There are no quick and easy fixes. Eliminating certain religions won't help. Eliminating all religion won't work. Eliminating atheism won't do it either. The real battle is a purely case by case struggle against the worst aspects of human nature across all religious, socio-economic and racial demographics.

Hating gay people or black people or white people or any other people is not a religion vs atheism problem. It is a human problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2014, 06:33 PM
 
650 posts, read 515,011 times
Reputation: 53
suggesting to gay people , not the movement, they are hated is irresponsible and simply not true .

Last edited by alexcanter; 02-27-2014 at 07:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2014, 07:15 PM
 
12,595 posts, read 6,675,970 times
Reputation: 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
Good post. Perhaps what this comes down to is what counts more - law or religion?

"To Hell with Man - made Law" shouted the poster of a Muslim demonstrator.

I say to hell (meaning - get rid of) with religion -based law.

Ok, if the Law says something, you should observe it. We have done this discussion several times with checkout personnel who won't handle bacon, Pharmacy staff who won't handle contraceptive pills, registrars who won't marry gays, Amish who won't put legally required signs on their buggys if they drive outside the Amish area.

This is responded to variously, but it should not be. If you can't observe the law when you ride a bus, drive a motor -bike, a buggy or act as a marriage Registrar, or if you can't do the job you are in, because of religious views, you had better look for another job, and not drive a car, bike or buggy.

You have no right to demand that the law or indeed the terms of the job should be bent in order to accommodate one's religious beliefs.

I concede that I do feel that, in your own home, area or place of worship, there is some wiggle room. You can't break the law on health and safety, fraud, hate -speech, age of consent or violence, but I can see some merit on asking the law to stay outside and not force revision of religious beliefs.

I would never agree to anyone insisting that you had to have some forbiddden image in your mosque because of some law or other, but the law should intervene if you has someone's hands cut off there.

Broad and inaccurate, but you get my point.

Thus I do have sympathy with some churches not wanting to permit same -sex marriages and indeed those who won't provide a cake with two brides on. But if they have no problem with a cake with two dogs on, that's up to them.

That's why I can only say it's not a legal matter, but a personal one and all we can do is let the people take their business elsewhere.

Now, if they refused to provide a cake for a mixed marriage because they'd been told 'make the groom out of Coffee Icing', then the law is being broken. I might have sympathy with their right to think even reprehensible thoughts like 'No decent black dude should ever hitch up with a honky blonde' but the law is the law and it's out of my hands.

So, in the end it does seem to be not a matter for religion or even morals, first and foremost, but what the Law says.

The law is not always right - for a long time being gay was a crime - but the law is always the law. If you don't like it, change it. You don't ignore it.

If anything the law is driven by public opinion, and public opinion is driven by moral views - either based on human reason or on religion.

I'd say that there is no case to oppose same sex -marriage so reason does not support the prejudice against it, and religion is not in itself a good reason for enacting Law.

So law -what the law says - is the operative thing here and, if (for religious reasons) these people can't provide a particular service in their own business (if it's someone else's they can shut up or find another job) that is their own affair, unless the Law steps is, like if they refused to rent a hotel room to blacks.

We had a case here about a couple who wouldn't rent a room to gays. The law seemed to have gone far enough to say they had no right to. I don't know whether it goes so far as to say that you have no right to refuse to make a wedding cake with two dudes on.
Since this is a U.S. issue...I will address it from the standpoint of U.S. law.

As you know...I don't think much of "law"...any law. They are too differing from place to place, ever changing, arbitrary, tools used to unjustly control, and many times contradictory & conflicting.

The "contradictory & conflicting" aspect is what is at play in this situation.
This is a BIG problem. We have basic and fundamental law in place as part of our Constitution that says the government can't make any law (not some laws, or a few laws, but NO law) that prohibits free religious exercise. It is even referred to as a "right".
Then...there are laws passed that deal with "discrimination"...and set rules that proscribe actions and conduct toward certain groups that are demonstrative of bias and prejudice.
It has now come about that this could conflict with the fundamental laws that are coined as "rights"...to be in compliance with the new laws.

Now...we actually have people arguing that it is okay to have that most basic laws (more than a law--a "right") violated over something as insignificant as saving people the hassle of going to a different bakery or hiring some other photographer...based on these new (and I submit: lesser & subordinate) laws.

What a mess these legislators make of everything...pitiful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2014, 05:16 PM
 
1,114 posts, read 1,226,680 times
Reputation: 466
Where in the bible does it say that thou shalt not take photographs or bake a cake for two people of the same sex being civilly married? A civil marriage really has nothing to do with god, but is just basically the joining of two people into a legal contract. Does god have something against two men being in a contract together?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2014, 06:06 PM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,267,114 times
Reputation: 14072
Quote:
Originally Posted by mythunderstood View Post
Where in the bible does it say that thou shalt not take photographs or bake a cake for two people of the same sex being civilly married? A civil marriage really has nothing to do with god, but is just basically the joining of two people into a legal contract. Does god have something against two men being in a contract together?
Apparently, some people's god does.

Pretty sure it's the same cranky god who wiped out the earth in a fit of pique. And sent 42 bears to kill some kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2014, 08:27 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,264,775 times
Reputation: 32581
Quote:
Originally Posted by mythunderstood View Post
Where in the bible does it say that thou shalt not take photographs or bake a cake for two people of the same sex being civilly married?
I suspect the same verse that described Jesus telling homosexuals he wasn't going to give them any fish or bread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2014, 08:37 PM
 
Location: Free State of Texas
20,454 posts, read 12,841,926 times
Reputation: 2497
Quote:
Originally Posted by mythunderstood View Post
Where in the bible does it say that thou shalt not take photographs or bake a cake for two people of the same sex being civilly married? A civil marriage really has nothing to do with god, but is just basically the joining of two people into a legal contract. Does god have something against two men being in a contract together?
The issue at hand has nothing to do with God or religion. It has to do with private businesses being told by the state who they MUST serve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2014, 09:50 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,588 posts, read 37,227,838 times
Reputation: 14043
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej View Post
The issue at hand has nothing to do with God or religion. It has to do with private businesses being told by the state who they MUST serve.
Then why are the only ones backing these proposed laws the religious? I'm not buyin' what you're sellin'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2014, 05:53 AM
 
5,458 posts, read 6,727,211 times
Reputation: 1814
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej View Post
The issue at hand has nothing to do with God or religion. It has to do with private businesses being told by the state who they MUST serve.
Yeah, it is so terrible we live in a country where landlords can't refuse to rent to Jews and black people. What a terrible burden that places on people running a business. They should have the ability to do whatever they want no matter who it hurts - the rights of businesses are way more important than the rights of actual people in this country...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2014, 07:24 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,254,176 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej View Post
The issue at hand has nothing to do with God or religion. It has to do with private businesses being told by the state who they MUST serve.
Then why are these bills being tried all over the nation called "religious freedom acts"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top