Exammy.....

my statement was not that you cannot have human rights without 'Christianity'....but without 'religion'.. it could be Islam, Hinduism.. or Bahai.. any 'religion' which believes in a revelation from a higher outside power.. is valid.

The only question then is.. 'what kind of rights' does this higher power then allow?

You might want to have a peek at the 'Spirit of Australia' thread to see some of my thoughts on THAT issue.

You need to listen/view the whole lecture to understand the philosophical truth of the statement "Human rights do not exist apart from Religion".

I smiled also when I read your comment:

<<secularists don’t believe in god(s) but acknowledge the rights of those who do.
We need mutual respect not the excesses of evangelists from either extreme.>>

FOLLOWED BY :)

<<Particularly religious people who impugning others’ beliefs through implication by their ill-considered dogma and lack of respect.>>

Notttt bad going there :) 180 degree turn in 2 small paragraphs.

"Mutual Respect"

"Ill considered dogma" :)

Not bad.. try stand up some time ^_-

"Love your enemies" is not as crazy as it sounds. It depends a bit on why the other person is your enemy.
If he is so based on misinformation about you.. like he believed that you, because of your religion 'drank babies blood'.. well.. truth delivered by a cool head might save the day.

Also.. if there is like in Orissa hatred based on misinformation.. love might well save you from a firey death... or..it might not.(Graham Staines and children)

But in Principle.. loving your enemies can be effective in removing the source of the reason for the person being an enemy.

When the Arameans attacked the Israelites in the Old Testament.. and Israel had them in its' power.. Elisha said 'treat them well..feed them' and the Arameans went back to their own land as friends of the Israelites. (until the next generation and a new king that is)

Grim,
Of course you’re right of PEOPLE abuse concepts.
And those people’s misuse of the concept tends to be symptomatic of the individual’s personal proclivities.

Religion however can and does exist in both extremes tolerant of others and bigotry at the other.

Atheism doesn’t accept any other belief structures dismissing others as superstition etc. There are degrees of tolerance to intolerance of non-atheists.

Secularists while they don’t personally believe in religion they accept the right of individuals to personal beliefs…by definition they can’t be evangelists in the terms of imposing their religious perspective on others. They can ad do advocate separation between government and Churches.

There is a clear difference between religion and the imposition of “intelligent (sic) design” as science therefore both atheists and secularists oppose this.

I agree with you about secularists.

Polycarp wrote:

"But in Principle.. loving your enemies can be effective in removing the source of the reason for the person being an enemy.

When the Arameans attacked the Israelites in the Old Testament.. and Israel had them in its' power.. Elisha said 'treat them well..feed them' and the Arameans went back to their own land as friends of the Israelites. (until the next generation and a new king that is)"

Dear Polycarp,

I agree with you. It works. It is only unrealistic in that most will not do it. The Marshall Plan after WW2 ended the enmity with Germany and Japan. Rather than making a punitive peace the US under Truman had enough sense to help the enemies recover from the ravages of war. That good sense was lacking when the Soviet Union broke up, and Putin is rattling sabres.

The wise thing to do with the world's resources is to work out how best we can share them with other nations rather than have a series of wars over them.

Maybe we can try to love Muslims, Catholics, homosexuals and others who see things different from the way we do. Maybe instead of trying to get them to see things the same way we do we can accept and love them as they are.

It is hard sometimes even to love those near to us, but we can try to love all including our enemies.

From Coleridge;

He prayeth best, who loveth best
All things both great and small;
For the dear God who loveth us,
He made and loveth all.

Foxy; “High levels of atheism are strongly correlated with high levels of societal health, such as low homicide rates, low poverty rates, low infant mortality rates, low illiteracy rates, as well as high levels of educational attainment, per capita income, and gender equality.”

Yes. But this strong correlation doesn’t necessarily indicate causality. That is, it doesn’t indicate that a less religious society has a greater chance of achieving high levels of social health.

But what it clearly does indicate is that those who achieve this higher level of health, education and general wellbeing can see past the illusion of religion and see that it is unnecessary in order to live a fulfilling life.

As people become better educated and more able to think independently, the less they are into religion. This is very telling.

You would think that if religions were truly valuable, in terms of giving us a moral compass and in improving our lives, then the healthier and better-educated populations would be much more into them than the poor and uneducated masses.

“Religion encourages high birth rates, intellectual weakness and dependence of its followers.”

Yep. And aren’t these factors of the utmost importance. So to this end, societies need atheists considerably more than religious people….yes?

Dear Ludwig,

I think it was examinator
who said in his post we need Atheists, Christians,
et cetera... we need them all, not just one or the
other. But, we also need to respect and tolerate
each other. And therein lies the problem.

It seems that some religious groups aren't capable
of respect and tolerating others who are different
from themselves.

As a poster on another website stated:

"In most cases I would agree that correlation does not
imply causation. However, in this case, I would have
to say that it does imply causation. I live in
Alabama in the US. The bible belt. Religion dominates
everything here. I would say it could be cultural
differences, but that points to religion as well.
That IS the cultural difference. It is following the
religion overe here that makes things so bad.
All the countries that don't let Christianity run their
lives live better lives..."

Polycarp wrote:

"But in Principle.. loving your enemies can be effective in removing the source of the reason for the person being an enemy.

When the Arameans attacked the Israelites in the Old Testament.. and Israel had them in its' power.. Elisha said 'treat them well..feed them' and the Arameans went back to their own land as friends of the Israelites. (until the next generation and a new king that is)"

Dear Polycarp,

The above clearly contradicts any need for Christ. Jesus stated the wisdom in the above. However, it comes from his Jewish background. It does not depend on being a Jew either. Any people with common sense can see the wisdom of the above without subscribing to any belief in the supernatural.

The command to love your enemies demands nothing from them. If you demand their repentance you demand that they recognize your version of the facts and demand their admission that your view is the correct one.

There is wisdom in scripture. However, the wisdom is surrounded with fairy tales of virgin birth, raising people from the dead, the creation of Eve from Adam’s rib and the like. One can realize that the miracles and much of the narrative is strictly fiction, but the wisdom is there. One does not have to believe in nonsense to accept the wisdom.

Abandon your prejudice against Islam, Catholics and homosexuals. Sura 9 is far outweighed by the Inquisition, Crusades, Holocaust and the other evils of Christianity which you choose not to acknowledge. The ugly reality outweighs the nasty words.

I think there is much more reason to fear one of the Christian followers of Franco and Hitler taking power than there is to fear Sura 9.

“The use of the Bible to justify our prejudices must be abandoned. We do not abandon that sacred story in which the sins of scripture are embedded in the “terrible texts,” however. We rather claim it for our own.”

From “The Sins of Scripture: Exposing the Bible’s Texts of Hate to Reveal the God of Love” by John Shelby Spong.