The Forum > General Discussion > Religion do we need it?
Religion do we need it?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Page 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- ...
- 50
- 51
- 52
-
- All
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 19 November 2012 2:42:24 AM
| |
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/womans-death-shows-risks-of-putting-the-church-before-civil-law-20121118-29k4w.html
Welcome back DiamondPete, missed you. However, ALWAYS all views have a right to be heard. The link is about an unneeded death. It reports weeks before,note that, the death of this woman in IRELAND she was told her child was dead. But was refused abortion because of a law based on religion, not true law, she could not abort. IRELAND! a land torn for a century by two sides fighting for the SAME GOD! a non existent one. My respect for suseonline is without reserve. But men and women do think differently. WOMEN are, in my view, victimized by followers of God, any God. As God IS A CONTROL THING,HE/SHE HELPS some men control women. Walking behind men, try it with most and wait your punishment. It will not be hundreds or thousands of years before religion is a minor belief for most. But the influences bad and good may take longer to leave in the caves. Posted by Belly, Monday, 19 November 2012 4:22:05 AM
| |
Dear Belly,
<<WOMEN are, in my view, victimized by followers of God, any God.>> What evidence have you that those people follow God? Just because they say so? <<As God IS A CONTROL THING,HE/SHE HELPS some men control women.>> Wrong. God is not a control thing and has nothing to do with it - it's only people who abuse God's name for their selfish agenda who do such things. <<But was refused abortion because of a law based on religion>> Wrong again. The law in question is based on the social ideas of a particular religious order, not on religion. <<IRELAND! a land torn for a century by two sides fighting for the SAME GOD!>> Wrong again, although both claimed that they were fighting for God, they were in fact fighting for political domination of their respective religious orders. Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 19 November 2012 4:47:59 AM
| |
suseonline>> Gee, that sounds exactly like what happened to the Australian Aborigines, Native Americans, and Native Africans.... Only it wasn't Islam there was it?<<
Yes Suse the irony in your comment is appreciated because it is correct. But without defending the previous crimes and genocide, my only caveat is that we are now living in the 21st century and first world society has evolved. That is why the Caucasians in the first world have a break even birth rate. Posted by sonofgloin, Monday, 19 November 2012 6:37:34 AM
| |
Maybe, Yuyutsu. But then again, maybe not.
>>Etymologically however, the word "religion" comes from Latin "Re-Ligare" = "to bind [with God]".<< The OED is deliberately equivocal on this matter. The Latin root, according to Cicero, was relegere, to read again. "Later authors", says the OED, connected it with religare - to bind again - "the latter view has usually been favoured by modern writers in explaining the force of the word by its supposed etymological meaning". Note the gentle admonition in the use of "supposed", pointing out that the favoured meaning was retrospectively applied. A convenient manipulation of history, one that religions everywhere seem to be unable to resist. Incidentally, I'm not at all sure that you are on the same page as the rest of us. To the vast majority of people, a) a deity is just another word for a god, b) religion consists of a form of worship of a particular deity and c) belief is what separates atheists from religionists. Arguing against each of these in such an absolute and tendentious manner places you, as I see it, firmly outside the discussion, not within it. Just repeating stuff like "wrong" and "wrong again" is definitely getting your own personal message across. But unfortunately, because it has no contact points with what the rest are talking about here, it is just unnecessary noise. Posted by Pericles, Monday, 19 November 2012 9:12:26 AM
| |
When I see 20 youth off the Street decide to come into our Church youth service deliberately to creat trouble, and leave initially changed I can ignore the question,"do we need religon?" Youth having problems with their families, personal relationships, the Law, and struggling with self worth. Atheists have no organised set up to deal with these problems where youth attend.
Posted by Josephus, Monday, 19 November 2012 9:51:00 AM
|
You are perfectly right.
We are talking here about 3 different concepts:
1) Belief in God.
2) Religion.
3) Being a good person.
There is some correlation between those three, but they are all different and one can find people with any combination of the above.
Dear Pete,
Our current society places too much emphasis on existence.
Knowing what exists and what doesn't is not such a big deal.
Yes, science may find out about it, including the beginning and the end (if we don't destroy ourselves earlier).
So what? I see nothing profound about it because existence itself is superficial.
I don't know whether deities exist - you would probably need to define "deity" pretty well before we can give an intelligent answer.
Personally however, I don't find this question interesting enough.
But just to remove any doubt, God is not a deity.
Yes, I am aware that there are quite a few people who believe that God is a deity - they are mistaken, but if it helps them to come closer to God, then so be it, good for them.
As I explained to Suse, belief in God is just one possible technique out of many to come close to Him. Belief is a mental activity - it helps some, but can hinder others.
For the next subject, click on "Forum Main Page".