Talk about God from a biology forum thread

[Moontanman]

It is their choice to ignore reality. The only schools passing off myths as far as i know, are the private Christian schools. Which impunative violations and which laws being ignored are you referring to?

 

Which laws? Well lets see, polygamy and child molestation are two that come to mind pretty quickly. Christian groups are consistently trying to get creationism taught in public schools and to say that private Christian schools have the right to teach what ever they want is troubling on many levels. Christian groups want to teach programs for sex education in public schools that are approved by their church such as abstinence only despite the fact they have been shown to be ineffective over and over.

 

 

tis true

 

thank you

 

which religions are you referring to and can you cite examples of forceful tactics?

 

Islam is the most famous for being quite forceful in it's recruiting techniques but Christians are forceful as well although this is often more of a emotional bulling than physical force but on people who are vulnerable for some reason being drawn into the these sects can be devastating emotionally and financially.

 

These religions can also keep people from getting real medical help, instead they are drawn into a world of superstition and guilt that only serves to keep them in the sect and away from real help. Religion thrives on the emotionally crippled and disenfranchised.

 

Who is suggesting this?

 

You are.

 

Quote: from pamela

here again, this is not the collective whole, but conjecture based upon those extreme fundamentalists that would choke religion down all of our throats. We need to repect the individual and their right to believe in what or whomever they choose. We do not have to admire or esteem what that ideology is.

[pamela]

originally posted by Pyro

The intrusion of religion and "faith" into our mundane secular activities is far more pervasive than you might have assumed. Take another look.

i have never alluded to that. I am fully aware of what is going on.Reread my post, respect is only for the individual not the religion:)

[Turtle]

Too many great responses to quote, but I can sum it all without. I enjoyed the vid though Infinite, particulary the pencil in the eye line. :dust:

 

So in this thread, I'm not on about all Christians being pushy, stubborn, rebellious, yada, yada, stone-worthy, (that's in other threads ) rather here I'm on about Goku the Christian being pushy, stubborn, rebellious, & bleh, bleh, mock-worthy. The fact is he is here, is pushing, is preaching, is proselytizing, is thumbing his nose at each & every one of us personally and the rules of the forum. What's more this is not an occasional occurence but the sum & total of all his postings.

 

Moon Tan, I only gave you the lash because you said you deserved it & I think you were mistaken in that. Inspite of God Kook's hiding behind "simple farm boyhood", he knows what he is doing.

 

Goku, I'm all for giving you the respect you have earned. :dust:

[pamela]

Originally posted by Moon

Which laws? Well lets see, polygamy and child molestation are two that come to mind pretty quickly. Christian groups are consistently trying to get creationism taught in public schools and to say that private Christian schools have the right to teach what ever they want is troubling on many levels. Christian groups want to teach programs for sex education in public schools that are approved by their church such as abstinence only despite the fact they have been shown to be ineffective over and over.

you infer what you wanted out of my post and did not take it as a statement, no different than the sects picking and choosing verses out of the bible to support their beliefs. I never stated they had the right to teach that, simply that it is being taught. Child molestation is punishable by law , it is all a matter of catching them.Polygamy is against the law as well

 

Islam is the most famous for being quite forceful in it's recruiting techniques but Christians are forceful as well although this is often more of a emotional bulling than physical force but on people who are vulnerable for some reason being drawn into the these sects can be devastating emotionally and financially.

agreed

 

These religions can also keep people from getting real medical help, instead they are drawn into a world of superstition and guilt that only serves to keep them in the sect and away from real help. Religion thrives on the emotionally crippled and disenfranchised.

agreed

Again it is obviously not the entire body of religion that does this but it is most, one of the prerequisites of Islam and Christianity is to bring the world into the fold, to pursue and bring everyone to the fold, make believers out of everyone. It is a basic idea behind the religion to recruit by force of will, laws, and in some instances by physical force. To suggest other wise is disingenuous to say the least.

I fail to see how you can possibly find a connection between your post and mine

Quote: from pamela

here again, this is not the collective whole, but conjecture based upon those extreme fundamentalists that would choke religion down all of our throats. We need to repect the individual and their right to believe in what or whomever they choose. We do not have to admire or esteem what that ideology is.

exactly what is disingenous about this statement???

[Pyrotex]

Infinite Now! Howdy!! :dust:

 

I really enjoyed the video. Who is that guy? Does he have a website?

P/Nels

[Moontanman]

you infer what you wanted out of my post and did not take it as a statement, no different than the sects picking and choosing verses out of the bible to support their beliefs. I never stated they had the right to teach that, simply that it is being taught. Child molestation is punishable by law , it is all a matter of catching them.Polygamy is against the law as well

 

Then why are the old men hiding behind religion to justify marrying little girls in groups not punished?

 

I fail to see how you can possibly find a connection between your post and mine

 

exactly what is disingenous about this statement???

 

This is what is disingenuous about that statement, you are inferring that only a small part of religion is doing this when most are guilty of this in some degree.

 

 

here again, this is not the collective whole, but conjecture based upon those extreme fundamentalists that would choke religion down all of our throats.

 

and this....

 

We need to repect the individual and their right to believe in what or whomever they choose. We do not have to admire or esteem what that ideology is.

 

As long as they insist we give them special treatment because of their religion, whether they get it or not, it is out there, the often subtle, but sometimes extremely overt message they are better than us godless amoral atheists who are dammed to hell and brimstone and should be regarded as some how flawed and dangerous. That we have no place in government, schools or anyplace else a person who is of the superior religious view might be encountered.

[InfiniteNow]

I really enjoyed the video. Who is that guy? Does he have a website?

 

For PTex and the Turtler, his name is Pat Condell. Many good short vids and critiques, all wroth the watch.

 

YouTube - patcondell's Channel

 

 

I've selected another here for your viewing pleasure.

 

 

YouTube - The tyranny of scripture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BaGHKe5oi0

[pamela]

from Moon

Then why are the old men hiding behind religion to justify marrying little girls in groups not punished?

cite an example. Each state has a set of laws governing the marrying age. If they are in violation of these laws, then they need to be prosecuted

This is what is disingenuous about that statement, you are inferring that only a small part of religion is doing this when most are guilty of this in some degree.

okay, so in your mind, you equate not all with small.

I did not infer any such thing. Infact, being a diehard proponent of keeping Church and State separate, and having the utmost contempt for the likes of Rick Warren in close proximity to our president, would never even conceive of thinking this is only a SMALL part.

 

As long as they insist we give them special treatment because of their religion, whether they get it or not, it is out there, the often subtle, but sometimes extremely overt message they are better than us godless amoral atheists who are dammed to hell and brimstone and should be regarded as some how flawed and dangerous. That we have no place in government, schools or anyplace else a person who is of the superior religious view might be encountered

i have NEVER stated giving them any special treatment, only respect for the individual

Quote:from Infinite

Believers want to be treated as special, but irreligious atheists should treat them like everyone else and, perhaps more importantly, treat their religious claims and opinions like any other claim or opinion."

from Pam

I could not possibly agree more with this statement

did you infer something this this as well?

Your comments and what you derive from them other than what they are saying, is a prime example of how misinterpretation is not only common among the believers, but non as well

[Moontanman]

cite an example. Each state has a set of laws governing the marrying age. If they are in violation of these laws, then they need to be prosecuted

 

The fundamentalist Mormon polygamists that were in the news last year, all were married to multiple women and forcing the marriage of young girls to old men. The were not prosecuted due to this being part of their religion.

 

okay, so in your mind, you equate not all with small.

I did not infer any such thing. Infact, being a diehard proponent of keeping Church and State separate, and having the utmost contempt for the likes of Rick Warren in close proximity to our president, would never even conceive of thinking this is only a SMALL part.

 

Ok i see no reason to continue to argue this point, my adverbs are different but we agree it's a problem.

 

i have NEVER stated giving them any special treatment, only respect for the individual

 

How can you give individuals respect that give you nothing but contempt? I'm all for respecting anyone who deserves it whether I agree with them or not it's the flagrant contempt they show anyone who disagrees with them I have a problem with. Living with the contempt would be easier if they didn't use this contempt and the power of religion to affect the lives of non believers in a negative way. They cannot even leave us alone they believe they have to intervene on our behalf to save us from our selves, it's pompous BS.

[pamela]

from Moon

The fundamentalist Mormon polygamists that were in the news last year, all were married to multiple women and forcing the marriage of young girls to old men. The were not prosecuted due to this being part of their religion.

Then, this is a serious problem.The LAW has to set the standard for all people, religion should not give you a free pass.

 

How can you give individuals respect that give you nothing but contempt? I'm all for respecting anyone who deserves it whether I agree with them or not it's the flagrant contempt they show anyone who disagrees with them I have a problem with. Living with the contempt would be easier if they didn't use this contempt and the power of religion to affect the lives of non believers in a negative way. They cannot even leave us alone they believe they have to intervene on our behalf to save us from our selves, it's pompous BS.

Respect by reserving the right to let them believe what they choose. Do not equivocate kissing @#!# with respect, two different things.

People will speak, you cannot change that. Every time I check out at the Almighty Walmart, I am given a "blessing" by both the cashier and the greeter. I find this highly unprofessional and if I so choose, could find it highly offensive. Rather, I choose to smile back and let them feel good about what they deem is an act of kindness. What would it profit me to get pissed off? I would rather let them think and live the way they choose. My emotions are my own, and therefore are not subject to react to their words

[Moontanman]

Then, this is a serious problem.The LAW has to set the standard for all people, religion should not give you a free pass.

 

Agreed

 

Respect by reserving the right to let them believe what they choose. Do not equivocate kissing @#!# with respect, two different things.

People will speak, you cannot change that. Every time I check out at the Almighty Walmart, I am given a "blessing" by both the cashier and the greeter. I find this highly unprofessional and if I so choose, could find it highly offensive. Rather, I choose to smile back and let them feel good about what they deem is an act of kindness. What would it profit me to get pissed off? I would rather let them think and live the way they choose. My emotions are my own, and therefore are not subject to react to their words

 

True but forcing their views on the general population via laws, regulations and even firing people from jobs due to being atheists is wrong but it happens. Try to get elected to office if you are an atheist.

 

The general idea that atheists are immoral and somehow flawed in general allows them to control others that are not generally religious. In the same way that racists controlled the actions of others who were really not particularly racist but simply listened to the people who were and their stupid arguments and went along because they didn't understand that these people are really full of ****.

 

Works that way for religion too, You can take someone who is only slightly religious and threaten him with being seen as satanic or as being less than intelligent for not caring if one of the godless atheists teaches his kids and he will go with the religious nut instead of his own feelings. go with the flow group think is wonderful and religion is really good at controlling it.

[InfiniteNow]

Every time I check out at the Almighty Walmart, I am given a "blessing" by both the cashier and the greeter. I find this highly unprofessional and if I so choose, could find it highly offensive. Rather, I choose to smile back and let them feel good about what they deem is an act of kindness. What would it profit me to get pissed off?

 

I sincerly doubt that your reaction would be as warm and understanding if the same cashier or greeter at WalMart had said to you, "Masha Allah," or "Allah Akbar." Open your eyes to the truth, Pamela, and don't be a hypocrit. You're better than that. If, by some miniscule chance, you are more evolved than that, you simply must concede that most of your fellow church attending brethren are not, and I posit that they would in large part be profoundly offended (potentially even demanding that the greeter/cashier be terminated from their position for such "rudeness.")

[pamela]

originally posted by Infinite

I sincerly doubt that your reaction would be as warm and understanding if the same cashier or greeter at WalMart had said to you, "Masha Allah," or "Allah Akbar." Open your eyes to the truth, Pamela, and don't be a hypocrit. You're better than that. If, by some miniscule chance, you are more evolved than that, you simply must concede that most of your fellow church attending brethren are not, and I posit that they would in large part be profoundly offended (potentially even demanding that the greeter/cashier be terminated from their position for such "rudeness.")

First of all, I have a great deal of love and respect for all humanity, the religious ones included. I have been "blessed" by Muslims often, and am NOT offended. I know many people of many faiths and cults and I do not sit in judgement of them due to their beliefs. I do not see why you think i am a hypocrit, this accusation is unwarranted. I do NOT attend church, and do not call these people "brethren". Again, your supposition is unwarranted

[modest]

The controversy over those Dutch cartoons of Mohammad are kind of a guidepost for me personally when it comes to respecting religion. The idea that newspapers, magazines, and television are censored from publishing or showing any depiction of Mohammad because it is offensive to Muslims seriously offends me.

 

Whenever I see proselytizing or other lower-key displays of public religiosity, I sometimes have to tell myself that they should have a right to disrespect my lack of religion just as much as I should have a right to disrespect their religion. I personally would not publish an image of Mohammad because I'm not the type to disrespect cultural beliefs, but I do want that right, and I do want the religious members of my family to have the right to disrespect my Atheism.

 

~modest

[InfiniteNow]

I know many people of many faiths and cults and I do not sit in judgement of them due to their beliefs.

The larger point I was making is that these people with their personal beliefs get offended (and themselves sit in judgement) when it comes to the beliefs of others. I'm not trying to engage you directly, nor put you on the spot, so I'll back off. My intent was to show just how frequently people who tout their own tolerance often fail to exemplify it.

 

If you look back, you'll see that my intent was to suggest how "good Christians" would very often seek that a muslim employee be fired for wishing them well in their own way. It's hypocritical, and sickening.

 

 

I do not see why you think i am a hypocrit, this accusation is unwarranted. I do NOT attend church, and do not call these people "brethren".

Well, it seems that I need to spend more time trying to understand your position, as the posts I've read from you since you joined this site have implied to me otherwise. I'm far from perfect, though, and often prone to mistakes. I hope you know enough about me to realize that I'm the type of guy who learns from them, and tends not to repeat them. :cup:

[pamela]

posted by infinite

The larger point I was making is that these people with their personal beliefs get offended (and themselves sit in judgement) when it comes to the beliefs of others. I'm not trying to engage you directly, nor put you on the spot, so I'll back off. My intent was to show just how frequently people who tout their own tolerance often fail to exemplify it.

 

If you look back, you'll see that my intent was to suggest how "good Christians" would very often seek that a muslim employee be fired for wishing them well in their own way. It's hypocritical, and sickening.

I live in the buckle of the bible belt and have seen much hypocrasy.

 

Well, it seems that I need to spend more time trying to understand your position, as the posts I've read from you since you joined this site have implied to me otherwise. I'm far from perfect, though, and often prone to mistakes. I hope you know enough about me to realize that I'm the type of guy who learns from them, and tends not to repeat them.

I do not know what you have derived from them. I often remove myself from the sidelines and enter the court in response to the religious poster. I have never touted religion, never stated myself as a believer nor have I proselytized. What I do not believe is my own, and I do not share it;)

I have read many of your posts and enjoyed them immensely.I look forward to your future posts.Welcome back, Infinite:)

[CraigD]

Try to get elected to office if you are an atheist.

Representative Pete Stark of California comes to mind.

 

In office continuously since 1972, Stark “came out” as an atheist in 2007, and was reelected in 2008 with 76.3% of the popular vote.

The general idea that atheists are immoral and somehow flawed in general allows them [religionists] to control others that are not generally religious.

While one need look no further than these forums to see some religionist make the claim that atheist cannot be moral, I think this is an extreme minority view. Although many religionists of my acquaintance have told me that they believe I will suffer eternal torment in hell because I do not share their beliefs, none have told me they consider me immoral (at least not in the past couple of decades – earlier in my life, I was, justifiably, accused of immorality fairly often by theists and atheist alike).

 

Civility between atheists and theists is a complicated subject. My take on it, though, is that a simple, key requirement is honesty. Though it’s impractical to reply to a Wal-Mart clerk’s “have a blessed day” with more than a noncommittal “thank you”, when circumstances permit, atheists should take pains to assure that theists with whom they interact know they don’t share their beliefs. Too many and too often atheists succumb to the convenient practice of allowing theists to assume they too are theists (and, less often, vice versa). In addition to reinforcing theists misconception that almost everyone is a theist, this a deception-through-inaction can also give us atheists the impression that theists are more disapproving of our beliefs (or lack thereof) than they actually are (or would be, were they aware of them).

 

Ultimately, I believe that we humans, atheist and theists, must come to grips with some fundamental realities about our psyches and the universe, and the dichotomy created by the absence of the supernatural in the universe, but the utility, and likely neurological basis of our belief in the supernatural. This is a difficult dichotomy, requiring that we both understand that the supernatural is not real, but our psychological tendency to believe in the supernatural is. Our mental health, as individuals and as a society, depends, I think, on our ability to embrace these two conflicting realities.