Posted on 11/01/2001 4:41:25 AM PST by Valin
Organized religion epitomizes the biggest crime against humanity. It has created divisiveness and killed countless beings. As we speak, another young generation is being indoctrinated everywhere, including at home.
Since the world was believed to be flat, we have accumulated enough evidence to show that supernatural scorekeepers like gods are extremely unlikely to exist. Yet, our nation is sadly the most religious of all industrialized countries.
We infest our children with propaganda inspired by Bibles and Korans. Because those texts are filled with contradictions, one's interpretation can justify any action.
Osama bin Laden was born knowing nothing about Allah. As he grew up in Saudi Arabia, he and his peers assimilated the Muslim faith. Fortunately, most remained moderate, but Bin Laden came to feel so strongly about his deity, he joyfully orchestrated faith-based attacks on the United States.
I say: Enough have innocently suffered or perished. The time has come to eradicate religion. Now isn't this worthy of a worldwide coalition? Let reason prevail.
Stop praying. Start thinking. Trust yourself. Kick the fairy tales out of your head. Imagine no religion.
Pierre Tardif
In my never humble opinion, it is any religion which attempts to force their beliefs and morals on others.
Most religions forget the concept that it is up to God to sort out the sinners, and believe they must do God's work for God. Judge not, lest ye be judged!
I think that we may be talking past eachother here. I was not arguing in the slightest that we should not go after the Bin Ladens in the world and kill them, nor should you hesitate in incapacitating/killing the thug who is trying to hurt your loved ones. Your actions in doing so are not due to a lack of value of the other person- it is in defense of the ones you love and your neighbors.
Practical personal values of people are well beyond the scope of this thread- everyone has different standards upon what they subjectively value in a person. However, if there is a God, particularly one who is actively involved in Creation and interacts with and cares about the people in that Creation (as Christianity asserts), then the values that Creator places on things become the objective values of those things. They are objective values because all things would theoretically proceed from Him (note that this concept goes a bit beyond what I can articulate here). Basically put, though, there is the subjective value of a person in another person's eyes, and then there is the objective value which proceeds from the creator. A Christian's goal would seem to be to conform their subjective views of people to God's objective view, in love of both God and the person being valued.
What I have said is by no means clear and by no means acceptable by everyone, but that is how I see this problem.
Wait 'till I show this to my wife. She won't believe it. That's the mildest thing I've been called in ages.
Thanks!
Hank
I cannot, however, accept you view of, "objectivity." It would mean a person could not be objective without believing in God and what the Bible teaches. I happen to believe a person has to be capable of objective thought and to reason objectively before he can believe in God or understand the Bible.
I'm not questioning your view, or making an argument, just pointing out our basic difference on this point.
Athiests always have one basic problem, I think we can agree on. It is impossible for them to admit that if this life is all there is, at some point in their life, they are going to have to ask the question, what's the point, and they won't have an answer. Those who admit it usually become exhistentialist, and settle for their philosophy of despair. It is what Paul meant by "having no hope, and [being] without God in the world."
Hank
On a practical level, I think we would be for the very same thing, I agree.
I cannot, however, accept you view of, "objectivity." It would mean a person could not be objective without believing in God and what the Bible teaches. I happen to believe a person has to be capable of objective thought and to reason objectively before he can believe in God or understand the Bible.
I'm not questioning your view, or making an argument, just pointing out our basic difference on this point.
Athiests always have one basic problem, I think we can agree on. It is impossible for them to admit that if this life is all there is, at some point in their life, they are going to have to ask the question, what's the point, and they won't have an answer. Those who admit it usually become exhistentialist, and settle for their philosophy of despair. It is what Paul meant by "having no hope, and [being] without God in the world."
I generally agree with you more than you probably think. It is possible for one not to believe in God and still view things in ways close to as God does. And men as a whole, whether they believe in God or not, rarely tend to be COMPLETELY objective anyway. I have probably met some atheists who are more objective than some theists!
I think your assessment that honest atheists must eventually, if they are being completely reasonable and objective, come to atheistic existentialism. The mathematician Blaise Pascal made very good use of this in his Pensees (I'd strongly suggest him to anyone looking for a good thought provoking read... I find his arguments in favor of theism to be the most convincing).
Thanks for the interesting dialog. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.