| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: D-brane
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:00 am Post subject: |
  |
|
| anamoly wrote: |
A theocratic government is inherently violent because it holds its religion true and religions are inherently violent. A secular government is not inherently violent until there is a mandate or decree that violence must be perpetrated according to law or the leaders (war for instance). Something is not inherently violent until there is a call for violence.
|
I would say we, human beings, are prone to violence, and religion can be used (and has often been used by manipulators=leaders)as the excuse to sanction this human tendency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
Chaoslord2004
Logician
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 8411
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | anamoly wrote: |
A theocratic government is inherently violent because it holds its religion true and religions are inherently violent. A secular government is not inherently violent until there is a mandate or decree that violence must be perpetrated according to law or the leaders (war for instance). Something is not inherently violent until there is a call for violence.
|
I would say we, human beings, are prone to violence, and religion can be used (and has often been used by manipulators=leaders)as the excuse to sanction this human tendency. |
But religion is more prone to violence, in virtue of the fact that there are dogmas. Dogmas cannot be questioned. So, if people cannot sit down like rational human beings and discuss these issues, what other method is their to get people to "see things my way" than resorting to violence? If I am certain that Hell exists and that you are going there if you don't believe what I believe, then there are two ways of getting you to "see it my way." 1) have a healthy discussion and evaluate the evidence. If this doesn't work, then 2) use physical force. Perhaps there are other options available, and I am eager to hear what those are. But for now, it seems like in the absence of dialogue, violence will ensue.
_________________
An artist sees beauty in a painting. I see beauty in a logical proof.
"All error is due to extraneous factors, reason itself does not err"
~Kurt Gödel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kmisho
Stochastic
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 4683
Local time: 1:22 PM
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Isambard wrote: | Hey genius, there have been atheist related dictators, genocides, wars as well. Anyone remember Stalin?
Face it, a god (especially Yawah variant) is a collection of abstract values. The Stalinist and Maoist propaganda followed a similar ideal, do something for X because X demands it!
Weather it be for God, for Islam, for Zeus, for a marxist paradise, for capitolism etc it doesnt matter.
At its core its just different forms of similar ideologies with different dimensions.
So then pinning religion as the problem is retarded as the exact same methodogy for justifying violent actions, manifest destiny, or even genocide are found in secular tradition in different forms |
You said yourself for the average joe god is NOT a set of abstrat values. For most people, god is a very concrete superman who makes magical things happen for them. If this is true of most people in general, it would also be true for most people in the military.
I wish you'd stop disagreeing with yourself. You seem conflicted on the issue, but only to the extent that you can twist it whichever way you want that is least advantageous to the atheist.
Cut your fence-sitting snobbery.
_________________
K Michau
Now this religion happens to prevail/Until by that one it is overthrown/Because men dare not live with men alone/But always with another fairy tale.
al-Ma'arri, Syrian Poet, died 1057
You deny the existence of 999 alleged Gods. I merely deny one more - yours.
John MacKinnon Robertson, "Godism" 1896
"Never is a long time." Robert Fripp, 1998
Poetry, Art, Music |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23071
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Hey genius, there have been atheist related dictators, genocides, wars as well. Anyone remember Stalin? |
Stalin did what he did in the name of Communism.. not atheism. Nice try, though. try again.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaoslord2004
Logician
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 8411
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Moloth wrote: | | Quote: | | Hey genius, there have been atheist related dictators, genocides, wars as well. Anyone remember Stalin? |
Stalin did what he did in the name of Communism.. not atheism. Nice try, though. try again. |
Saying atheism caused Stalin to do what he did is like saying Mustaches caused Hitler to do what he did. Its a false cause fallacy.
_________________
An artist sees beauty in a painting. I see beauty in a logical proof.
"All error is due to extraneous factors, reason itself does not err"
~Kurt Gödel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chaoslord2004 wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | anamoly wrote: |
A theocratic government is inherently violent because it holds its religion true and religions are inherently violent. A secular government is not inherently violent until there is a mandate or decree that violence must be perpetrated according to law or the leaders (war for instance). Something is not inherently violent until there is a call for violence.
|
I would say we, human beings, are prone to violence, and religion can be used (and has often been used by manipulators=leaders)as the excuse to sanction this human tendency. |
But religion is more prone to violence, in virtue of the fact that there are dogmas. Dogmas cannot be questioned. So, if people cannot sit down like rational human beings and discuss these issues, what other method is their to get people to "see things my way" than resorting to violence? If I am certain that Hell exists and that you are going there if you don't believe what I believe, then there are two ways of getting you to "see it my way." 1) have a healthy discussion and evaluate the evidence. If this doesn't work, then 2) use physical force. Perhaps there are other options available, and I am eager to hear what those are. But for now, it seems like in the absence of dialogue, violence will ensue. |
A lot of this is associated with power. Those in power must do everything to stay in power or increase their power -- that's the nature of the beast. And what more to secure that power if someone can rally people to his cause under the umbrella that his cause is sanctioned by the gods. This is basically, and tragically, our history. Enlightment, sadly to say,has been only an afterthought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anamoly
Recess Monitor
Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 682
Local time: 10:22 PM
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | anamoly wrote: |
A theocratic government is inherently violent because it holds its religion true and religions are inherently violent. A secular government is not inherently violent until there is a mandate or decree that violence must be perpetrated according to law or the leaders (war for instance). Something is not inherently violent until there is a call for violence.
|
I would say we, human beings, are prone to violence, and religion can be used (and has often been used by manipulators=leaders)as the excuse to sanction this human tendency. |
I do agree with you there. Humans are prone to violent and are inherently violent. My take on that is that violence shows when a human is being threatened for it's very survival. It's a survivalist instinct there. But! When a human considers himself/herself a certain religious follower that becomes their identity. Once that identity is threatened, violence ensues to be the one on top. But I also think that religion is inherently violent given that religion can and HAS made decrees for violence and it must followed else suffer the wrath of the holy one(s). So I think both humans and religions are inherently violent.
_________________
I is dsylexic.
__________________________________
Just because I don't put my life story in my signature, doesn't make me uninteresting....I'd like to think I'm mysterious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anamoly
Recess Monitor
Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 682
Local time: 10:22 PM
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chaoslord2004 wrote: |
| anamoly wrote: | | Please note for future reference that assuming things make you look like a bigger ass than you probably are....Maybe you are this big of an asshole because all that BS haughty smarter-than-chaoslord snide remarks you've been making only make you sound like a jackass because your arguments are ill-contrived and even *I* can see right through them. |
The ignorant always make the most noise... |
Hang on a second *grabs megaphone*
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?!
Hahahahaa...hehehe 
_________________
I is dsylexic.
__________________________________
Just because I don't put my life story in my signature, doesn't make me uninteresting....I'd like to think I'm mysterious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimitz
Guest
Local time: 1:22 PM
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JCMAC said:
| Quote: | That religion is not responsible for the bad things that are blamed on it, like war, murder, genocide and so on.
I agree, if they are willing to accept that religion is also not responsible for the good things that are credited to it.
Any thoughts?
|
You also see this at sports games. Guys scores a touch down he gives a little prayer. Guy gets a basehit thanks the sky daddy. You don't see him give god the finger for striking out or dropping the ball do you?!
/Buckey Dent didn't call god asshole! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chaoslord2004
Logician
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 8411
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Minnesota
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| anamoly wrote: | | Chaoslord2004 wrote: |
| anamoly wrote: | | Please note for future reference that assuming things make you look like a bigger ass than you probably are....Maybe you are this big of an asshole because all that BS haughty smarter-than-chaoslord snide remarks you've been making only make you sound like a jackass because your arguments are ill-contrived and even *I* can see right through them. |
The ignorant always make the most noise... |
Hang on a second *grabs megaphone*
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?!
Hahahahaa...hehehe |
I hope you realize I wasn't talking about you.
_________________
An artist sees beauty in a painting. I see beauty in a logical proof.
"All error is due to extraneous factors, reason itself does not err"
~Kurt Gödel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Isambard
Forum Leader
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 892
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kmisho wrote: | | Isambard wrote: | Hey genius, there have been atheist related dictators, genocides, wars as well. Anyone remember Stalin?
Face it, a god (especially Yawah variant) is a collection of abstract values. The Stalinist and Maoist propaganda followed a similar ideal, do something for X because X demands it!
Weather it be for God, for Islam, for Zeus, for a marxist paradise, for capitolism etc it doesnt matter.
At its core its just different forms of similar ideologies with different dimensions.
So then pinning religion as the problem is retarded as the exact same methodogy for justifying violent actions, manifest destiny, or even genocide are found in secular tradition in different forms |
You said yourself for the average joe god is NOT a set of abstrat values. For most people, god is a very concrete superman who makes magical things happen for them. If this is true of most people in general, it would also be true for most people in the military.
I wish you'd stop disagreeing with yourself. You seem conflicted on the issue, but only to the extent that you can twist it whichever way you want that is least advantageous to the atheist.
Cut your fence-sitting snobbery. |
Umm when have I disagreed with myself? (assuming it isnt a typo)
And what is this about fence-sitting? I have a position. There are more than two positions, but if you want to see it as white and black then I guess it is invisible to you
_________________
Composite things are like dreams. Fantasies. Bubbles. Thoughts. Like a dewdrop and a flash of lightning. A new dress and a burning tire. Waves of sand and sinking ships. The shadow of a statue, and an entry in a diary. A brain tumor and an ice cream sundae. We are thus to be recorded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huff
Intern
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Posts: 63
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: OMICRON PERSEI 8
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chaoslord2004 wrote: | | Moloth wrote: | | Quote: | | Hey genius, there have been atheist related dictators, genocides, wars as well. Anyone remember Stalin? |
Stalin did what he did in the name of Communism.. not atheism. Nice try, though. try again. |
Saying atheism caused Stalin to do what he did is like saying Mustaches caused Hitler to do what he did. Its a false cause fallacy. |
Sam Harris? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Isambard
Forum Leader
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 892
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
lol I love how you missed the pt and failed to address the second pt completely.
In regards to Stalin and the like not being representative of secular ideology, well of course its silly, but thats why the example stands, its what chaos lord did in regards to christianity.
I ask you, if religious folk are inherently more violent, what about the Amish community? Id say they are very conservative and fundamentalist to a degree, yet are completly passific. Hell, looking at early christian communities, they were the same.
As mentioned before, the OT is waaay more violent than the NT yet youall seem to be hesitant to portraying Jews as nasty relative to christians. I would agree that christians have amuch nasty history even given their almost altruistic ideology. So then what changed to make the early christians from being annoying, to being violent? Wasnt a change in the holy books or that Jesus stood for peace, it was the aquisition of power. Does this mean that a religion will always be violent once it attains power? Yes and no.
Its not so much about the religion, rather its how oppressed it is and how quicklyits flung into the spotlight. This applies to any ideology not just christianity. Looking at Stalin, Hittler, Robespierre and others, they all came from ideologies that were either persecuted or ignored and were suddenly thrown into power.
Seeing as christianity has been around for awhile as well as Islam, would a state fully goverened by conservative religious hold up? Well no. Just like Smith's Capitolism, Marx's Communism, Keynes' welfare state, they all had their time. To impliment a 'traditional' system wheather secular or religious would be silly. Youd have it either collapse completely if its unable to 'modernize' or morph into something different. As to what it would morph to would depend alot on the geography, local customs, economy etc so it would be much to hard to predict.
_________________
Composite things are like dreams. Fantasies. Bubbles. Thoughts. Like a dewdrop and a flash of lightning. A new dress and a burning tire. Waves of sand and sinking ships. The shadow of a statue, and an entry in a diary. A brain tumor and an ice cream sundae. We are thus to be recorded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Isambard
Forum Leader
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 892
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chaoslord2004 wrote: | | anamoly wrote: |
"Securalism" is not inherently violent because there is no all-encompassing belief structure or books or scriptures that should be followed. The definition of secular means 'separate, or apart from religion, not sacred/holyblessedbygod'. Some violent decrees can be secular but not all secular 'decrees' are inherently violent. The reason that all religions are inherently violent is becuase they have made decrees that promote violence and on top of that the mob effect that is has on people. Spiritual leaders can incite a riot by saying something is unholy or blasphemous and it must be stopped and/or protested. |
Well put. What he refuses to comprehend, is that there is a difference between people doing evil and being a secularist, and doing evil because they are secularists.
| anamoly wrote: | | Please note for future reference that assuming things make you look like a bigger ass than you probably are....Maybe you are this big of an asshole because all that BS haughty smarter-than-chaoslord snide remarks you've been making only make you sound like a jackass because your arguments are ill-contrived and even *I* can see right through them. |
The ignorant always make the most noise... |
Again you use the word 'evil'. So then I ask you again, by what ethical standard do you deem it 'evil'?
And yes, I have addressed you pts but you seem to refuse to read my posts and are sticking to your idea of "lol christianity = bad" with seemingly little to no depth to your hypothesis. Thats ok, I suppose thats part of 'free-thinking' aye? lol
_________________
Composite things are like dreams. Fantasies. Bubbles. Thoughts. Like a dewdrop and a flash of lightning. A new dress and a burning tire. Waves of sand and sinking ships. The shadow of a statue, and an entry in a diary. A brain tumor and an ice cream sundae. We are thus to be recorded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 10:22 PM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| anamoly wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | anamoly wrote: |
A theocratic government is inherently violent because it holds its religion true and religions are inherently violent. A secular government is not inherently violent until there is a mandate or decree that violence must be perpetrated according to law or the leaders (war for instance). Something is not inherently violent until there is a call for violence.
|
I would say we, human beings, are prone to violence, and religion can be used (and has often been used by manipulators=leaders)as the excuse to sanction this human tendency. |
I do agree with you there. Humans are prone to violent and are inherently violent. My take on that is that violence shows when a human is being threatened for it's very survival. It's a survivalist instinct there. But! When a human considers himself/herself a certain religious follower that becomes their identity. Once that identity is threatened, violence ensues to be the one on top. But I also think that religion is inherently violent given that religion can and HAS made decrees for violence and it must followed else suffer the wrath of the holy one(s). So I think both humans and religions are inherently violent. |
Just saw the other day a film in which a group of monkeys attacked another group. There was very little to do with survival. The first group of monkeys could have easily picked other fig trees to eat. They quietyly surrounded the second group, and on a signal from their leaders, using surprise as an element, jumped on the second group. They killed a child and a mother, and one more before calm was restored. That scene was savaged, and I don't think any kind of ideology was in the motivation.
I believe even if one would subtract religion from the equation, humans would go to war on other pretexts. Religion is just a tool, and like any tool, can be used to justify any form of violence. If religion errs, it is on the side of what is the truth. But as far as our violent impulse, it has very little to do with it, except leaders have used it to consolidate or increase their power. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
