Religion has a place here at ATS, we need to get over it and let people post with religious content

I have read two threads now complaining of religious people posting content and beliefs on many threads. Here is a link to the two threads.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I thought that rather than complaining about certain beliefs and the frequency with which they appear on ATS. I though maybe we should step back and look at a few ideas as too why we see people posting so much religious content and why many people appear to have a problem with it. I think fundamentally it is a Science v Religion debate. What is wrong with people posting religious content, and why do so many people resist the more obvious or scientific explanations for the topics we discuss here on ATS?

Religion has three dimensions in which it bridges gaps. First, it is a cultural mortar manifesting itself in a spectrum of benevolent and malevolent social influences. Second, religion contains a resonating mystic core, a touch reaching to the depths of every human's inmost self. Third, religion provides a means to explain the great mysteries, from the mechanisms of nature to the purpose of humanity.

www.detwiler.us...
I believe many people come to ATS to explore the many mysteries that occur in life, and as religion plays an important role in helping us explain these it is hardly surprising then that we see people posting from a religious perspective. And as the vast majority of people have some sort of religious influence as opposed to a solid scientific foundation, the frequency and content of these post should hardly be seen as an orchestrated attempt at destroying another point of view or belief.
This quote below is fundamentally why i think we are seeing people getting upset with religious views and beliefs on ATS.

modern acceptance of religion is contingent upon current scientific compatibility. We must therefore evaluate religion on the same basis as science because all belief, including religion and science, must be based on fact to be legitimately believed.

www.detwiler.us...
From what i have read here on ATS it is obvious that many simply cannot do this, as those from the Darwinian/science camp cannot validate the concepts and beliefs put forward by creationist/ID from their materialistic/scientism stand point.
But here is a few examples of those in science that have found a kind of happy medium, perhaps others on ATS can too.

Russell Stannard is now emeritus professor of physics at the Open University....- could be about to explain the whole story of space, time matter and energy without any need for a Creator? "No, because a starting point you can have is: why is there something rather than nothing? Why is there a world? Now I cannot see how science could ever provide an answer," he says.

Tom McLeish is professor of polymer physics at Leeds. "But the questions that arise, and the methods we use to ask them, can be traced back to the religious tradition in which I find myself. Because we find ourselves in this puzzling, extraordinary universe of pain and beauty, we will also find ourselves able to explore it, by adopting the very successful methods of science," he says.

www.guardian.co.uk...
Lets all be honest and admit that many topics and theories that are discussed here fall into the realms of the unexplainable,fantastical and unbelievable and so Religious or scientific beliefs will often clash within these topics, which we see. Even with matters such as 9/11 where events have such a massive impact on the global population and its psyche, you have to allow for the expression of religious beliefs as explanations or part thereof, as the scale of these events are so massive everybody will have an opinion. Especially where there is some much conjecture and misinformation about , which we see with topics like 9-11, many people may only be able to rely on the most basic of beliefs i.e.. religion to help quantify, explain and cope with events like these. So getting upset with these arguments, or trying to debunk them is pointless. Why can people not purely except it for what it is and remain focused on matters relevant to their own beliefs and the purpose to which they visit ATS for.....as that would be the scientific and rational approach would it not. Conversely, religious posters by their very nature, must fall back on the doctrines and moral and ethical structures when confronted with material that strains against the fabric of their faith. Turn the other cheek.
But why do people fail to apply or acknowledge the facts or logic of science within many of the topics here on ATS, resulting in many other users feeling frustrated or annoyed.

the rationality of science is but a partial and highly specialized rationality, concocted for the purpose of gaining only that kind of knowledge for which it was devised, and applicable to only those aspects of the world that can be captured by such abstract notions. The peculiar reason of science is not, nor was meant to be, the natural reason of everyday life and human experience. Neither is it the reason of philosophy or religious thought.

www.manhattan-institute.org...
People don't live there everyday life from a purely scientific perspective, applying cold logic and rationale to life in general, but religion is different here. Many people will practice their activities of daily life from this perspective, and posting on ATS would be no different.

Thus, science does not seek to know beings or their natures, but only the regularities of the changes that they undergo. Science seeks to know only how things work, not what things are and why. Science gives the histories of things, but not their directions, aspirations, or purposes. Science quantifies selected external relations of one object to another, but it can say nothing at all about their inner states of being, not only for human beings but for any living creature. Science can often predict what will happen if certain perturbations occur, but it eschews explanations in terms of causes, especially of ultimate causes.

www.manhattan-institute.org...


[edit on 31-5-2008 by atlasastro]

I think religion and the religious have to take into account that science is, on its own, offering us the best alternative in explaining many facets of our life and existence. And that some issues and topics should be left purely to a science or religious point of view. Perhaps members here could take that approach on board when considering a reply or when actually replying to posts.

In a word, our remarkable science of nature has made enormous progress precisely by its decision to ignore the larger perennial questions about being, cause, purpose, inwardness, hierarchy, and the goodness or badness of things—questions that science happily gave over to philosophy, poetry, and religion.

www.thehumanist.org...
But unfortunately due to some beliefs, such as those below, many are divided into opposing camps due to science failing to acknowledge beliefs that are intrinsically important to many people. So important are these beliefs that people will often refuse to accept science as anything else but an attack a persons spirit or on God himself.

The developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the scientific claims are contested within a society, and will be especially strong if there is a non-scientific alternative that is rooted in common sense and championed by people who are taken as reliable and trustworthy. These clash with intuitive beliefs about the immaterial nature of the soul and the purposeful design of humans and other animals

www.edge.org...
And here is an example of this.

The new scientism not only banishes soul from its account of life. It soullessly neglects the ethical and spiritual aspects of the human animal. For we alone among the animals go in for ethicizing, for concerning ourselves with how to live. We alone among the animals ask not only "What can I know?" but also, "What ought I do?" and "What may I hope?" Science, notwithstanding its great gifts to human life in the form of greater comfort and safety, is utterly unhelpful in satisfying these great longings of the human soul.

www.manhattan-institute.org...

One of the most interesting aspects of our common-sense psychology is dualism, the belief that minds are fundamentally different from brains.
Dualism is mistaken — mental life emerges from physical processes. People resist this astonishing hypothesis in ways that can have considerable social implications. For one thing, debates about the moral status of embryos, fetuses, stem cells, and non-human animals are sometimes framed in terms of whether or not these entities possess immaterial souls. the President's Council described people as follows: "We have both corporeal and noncorporeal aspects. We are embodied spirits and inspirited bodies (or, if you will, embodied minds and minded bodies)."

www.edge.org...
Here is another excellent example of where our beliefs and culture conflicts with science. A widely excepted belief(noncorporeal aspects of the body) endorsed by authority. Adding an acceptance of a belief that may be opposed by science. Which may ultimately result in individuals posing the question, "do i trust science when it is tell me i have no soul?". So if we see these basic conflicts in the fabric of societies beliefs, why are people upset when it appears here at ATS. What can we do besides complaining about it? Or any other posts and threads that generate conflicts of this nature but are neither in the religious forums or Evolution/Ceationist forums. I believe we must accept them and encourage them. As the more they are brought up, so too are the alternatives that others may offer. If my beliefs are tired by the frequency and volume of what others express, is that not my problem? As I believe that is what the thoughts of the two Threads above should acknowledge rather than simply complaining about the source of those beliefs.
Dawkin's, the Evolutionary Champion and Superstar himself says.

What is the basis of this fence that we erect around Homo sapiens — even around a small piece of fetal tissue? (Not a very sound evolutionary idea when you think about it.) When, in our evolutionary descent from our common ancestor with chimpanzees, did the fence suddenly rear itself up?

www.thehumanist.org...
I think Dawkin's makes a great point, not only has religion set man apart from nature but it often has a history of fencing itself off from science, and those that incorporate it into their beliefs, resulting in conflict.

But I would want to deny even the lesser charge of purely verbal zealotry. There is a very, very important difference between feeling strongly, even passionately, about something because we have thought about and examined the evidence for it on the one hand, and feeling strongly about something because it has been internally revealed to us, or internally revealed to somebody else in history and subsequently hallowed by tradition. There's all the difference in the world between a belief that one is prepared to defend by quoting evidence and logic and a belief that is supported by nothing more than tradition, authority, or revelation.

Dawkin's again from the link above.
I think this is a also great quote, it clearly expresses the evolutionary scientific approach to the world and thus the religions it has observed from this all inclusive view. That religion is a by product of humanity, rather than a observable truth validated by the observation of its source which in this case is God, or the divine creator etc. Those posting here at ATS from a religious perspective must concede this point and accept that many ideas and post here fall into a domain that only science can validate or explain(especially when the topics fall outside of the specifically religious orientated categories). So posting religious doctrine or beliefs only offers a slap in the face of those endeavouring to offer real evidence and facts relating to the many topics here on the ATS forum.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by atlasastro]

Not only is this pointless but it does diminish the very nature of the site and so I believe you have a responsibility in choosing where and when you post content of this nature in a way that serves the discussion. Which i think many people would agree with.

Time itself began at a certain moment, and time may end at a certain moment — or it may not. Time may come locally to an end in miniature crunches called black holes. The laws of the universe seem to be true all over the universe. Why is this? Might the laws change in these crunches? To be really speculative, time could begin again with new laws of physics, new physical constants. And it has even been suggested that there could be many universes, each one isolated so completely that, for it, the others don't exist. Then again, there might be a Darwinian selection among universes.

www.thehumanist.org...
Or maybe there is a god or Creator that will decide these questions. The one that has been speculated to exist.
To conclude i will say that this is why people will continue to believe in God, or a divine Being that is responsible for this world, its life and Us in it. This is why Science will always be at logger heads with religious doctrine and why religion will remain a staple source of belief and understanding. This is why ATS will see people arguing, discussing, posting and pleading, boasting and roasting each others thoughts, beliefs and sources of information. And further more this is why we all need to relax on the christian posts and thread bashing, or accusing Darwinism or Science of trying to kill of God, and let people express their beliefs have their say. Just like Mr Dawkin's believes.

It would also be interesting to teach more than one theory of creation. The dominant one in this culture happens to be the Jewish creation myth, which is taken over from the Babylonian creation myth. There are, of course, lots and lots of others, and perhaps they should all be given equal time (except that wouldn't leave much time for studying anything else). I understand that there are Hindus who believe that the world was created in a cosmic butter churn and Nigerian peoples who believe that the world was created by God from the excrement of ants. Surely these stories have as much right to equal time as the Judaeo-Christian myth of Adam and Eve.

www.thehumanist.org...
p.s. Google God=640,000,000
Google Religion=366,000,000 =1,006,000,000
Google Science=877,000,000
Google Evolution=217,000,000=1,094,000,000.......pretty close match for content on the net.
www.google.com...
www.google.com...

I am in total agreement with your main point of respecting others for what they believe, whether it be atheism or deism. What strikes a chord with me is the fact so many people, be them theists or scientists, cannot or will not accept the plausibility of science and God being - dare I say it - complimentary. If there is a God, more specifically, a Creator, then it would stand to reason that science is the pursuit of the knowledge of the workings of His creation. If you want to know how a car works and what it is made of and so on, you can find one, take it apart, and figure it out. You an debate every last nut and bolt and figure out what it does and how it works and what color it is, et al., but to fully understand everything about the car, you would definitely want to include an interview with the manufacturer. The analogy breaks down, of course, as we cannot interview the Creator, but the point is that the scientific method need not be at odds with the belief in a supreme intelligence, and indeed can bring us a clearer understanding of the One who made it all. And if it clearly points away from a Creator, then we must study further and come to the conclusions we are led to, no matter what.

One must start at the beginning. The scientific method must start, before anything, with an open mind. If there are any preconcieved ideas about where the evidence leads in any experiment or study, then it is possible and even likely that any evidence that takes one away from that line of thought will be marginalized or even tossed out. The most honest scientist, whether he/she is theist or atheist, will conclude all the possibilities, form an opinion, and let the community debate the ramifications of any inconclusive pile of information. When the outcome of a study challenges our worldview, we must not shy away from it and cover our eyes and ears, we must study harder and look deeper, because the facts and the truth will speak and stand up to all scrutiny. If someone posts something that strikes a nerve, ask yourself why. And then present solid evidence for why you disagree. Starting threads complaining about "religious" people destroying ATS or bashing atheists is counterproductive to the spirit of this site. The inquisition and Hitler were culminations of extreme beliefs gone horribly bad on both sides of the coin, and those kinds of attitudes here are just an example of how far we all still have to go to reach Unity.

Most of us are skeptics, I will agree. That doesn't mean we must adhere to a strict anti-belief system and pounce like wolves on every person of faith, or more to the point, any person that has a different worldview.

Ok. I am done ranting now.

With that in mind, we must remember that we are all on this ride around the sun together, and though we may disagree, it is vital that we respect each other's opinions and deny ignorance.

Good luck in attempting to get ATSers to "rise above themselves."

If a member cannot come up with a creative, original post, they can always bait someone b/c of religion, and enjoy the flame wars ( and points) that are sure to follow.

That's a heck of a lot easier than doing original research and posting here, only to be ignored (see 2/3 of my threads). Especially conspiracy topics, which can be convoluted and difficult to understand. It's a lot easier just to tell someone that they're an idiot. And it's so emotionally satisfied.

.

reply to post by dr_strangecraft

I know what you mean Dude. Especially with the ease of insulting. I guess it is so much easiear than actually looking with some depth and patience into what any individual is saying or trying to express, especially if it something that is often repeated or debated, I know i have certainly fallen short there. I just thought i would try and add some perspetive and maybe something a little more substantial than calling people "idiots". I am going to read some of your threads. Thx for replying.


[edit on 31-5-2008 by atlasastro]

reply to post by obilesk

You make some great points and draw some good observations about this whole arguement and some of the responsabilities that certain view points must accept. Thx for replying.

I guess there is not alot of interest in trying to foster the acceptance of certain points of views or beliefs. What a shame. Perhaps i should have endeavoured to complain and entertain. Why does it appear that personal opinons are more often placed above all other content. Maybe it is because that is all individuals have to offer, which is not a bad thing.

Hahaha.. The first link is my Thread..
Why so offensive? Did you read and fully comprehend it? I don't think so..
This is not an attack against those who post religious content.. I'm a great supporter of free speech and freedom of Religion.. But when it completely takes over a post with religious dogma when the thread was called... For example.. UFO's, Contaminated food, baby with 3 eyes is an alien etc.....



Are you all afraid of something?

P.S. Couldn't explain things yourself and you had to resort to external information..





[edit on 31-5-2008 by Lantian]

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Lantian]

Originally posted by Lantian
Hahaha.. The first link is my Thread..
Why so offensive? Did you read and fully comprehend it? I don't think so..

I did'nt fail to comprehend your thread. I doubt you even read this one of mine, or the links.

This is not an attack against those who post religious content.. I'm a great supporter of free speech and freedom of Religion.. But when it completely takes over a post with religious dogma when the thread was called... For example.. UFO's, Contaminated food, baby with 3 eyes is an alien etc.....

As i have pointed out in this thread there are very simple reasons why people express religious views in relation to many topics, the fact that you fail to understand this only tells me that you have not read the thread properly or the links. And instead of offering something substantial you rant, accuse and label. Get over it , you bring up discussions on UFO...science is welcome at all those topics, why not religion. Science tells us that alien life is possible, yet has not proven it.....religion says that God exists, but cannot prove it, what is the difference. it is your acceptance of one view over another. If you are a great supporter of free speech, you cannot then place restrictions on its content, frequency or popularity. As that just makes you a great supporter of hypocracy and censorship.

Are you all afraid of something?

P.S. Couldn't explain things yourself and you had to resort to external information..

Are you really thinking when you type. I am afraid that I may not know enough. Unlike you, it seems.. that is why i often look at many sides of an arguement. LOL.....had to resort to external imformation.
maybe you should try it, as you are sounding very religious in the nature of your arguements. Only a moron would suggest that by providing evidence to support a belief or a point of view is the result of a weak mind, and conversly that those that don't support their beliefs can Explain everything for themselves. hmmm....yes very religious traits there.

Your reply is one of the funniest and disturbing replies i have seen. Thanks.



[edit on 1-6-2008 by atlasastro]

reply to post by atlasastro


It's too bad.. You are blind.. Believe what you want to believe.

Originally posted by Lantian
reply to post by atlasastro

 

It's too bad.. You are blind.. Believe what you want to believe.

You sound like one of the religious fanatics you are so fond of complaining about. If you think i am blind, then that is a relief, as if you accused me of sharing your views than i would be in serious trouble. You are not here to further your own knowledge, but stifle others. If you have any valid questions please offer them in relation to the thread. I doubt you have anything else to offer but the same dribble of your last two posts. Thanks.

Religion has a place here at ATS

Yes, there is a forum for "Religious Conspiracies", and "Origins and Creationism Conspiracies".

As far as I can tell, that's it.

Originally posted by vuoto


Yes, there is a forum for "Religious Conspiracies", and "Origins and Creationism Conspiracies".

As far as I can tell, that's it.

Is this a statement about your ability to detect the prescence of religion on ATS. Or are you suggesting that religion posts and content only be found in these forums.

If you read my OP, i believe we may find it impossible to ask people not to be influenced by religion when offering a reply or post. This religious influence is often used to hypothetically explain many facets of life that are unexplainable, why should ATS be any different. Especially when there are many issues of a mysterious or unexplainable nature.

thanks for yor reply.

Yes, I agree. religion should have a part at ATS, and I am happy to see a lot of religious posters here.

In the last days, information will be widespread according to God, our Creator.
All knowledge comes from God, everything that we know is only what God has allowed us to know.

God makes known the mystery of creation through His scriptures, and as such His words should have more impact on mankind than the words of man. God is infallible and He is the Seer of all unseen things, He makes known to us what He wills.

2:255 Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive, the Eternal. Neither slumber nor sleep overtaketh Him. Unto Him belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that intercedeth with Him save by His leave? He knoweth that which is in front of them and that which is behind them, while they encompass nothing of His knowledge save what He will. His throne includeth the heavens and the earth, and He is never weary of preserving them. He is the Sublime, the Tremendous.

Originally posted by vuoto

Religion has a place here at ATS

Yes, there is a forum for "Religious Conspiracies", and "Origins and Creationism Conspiracies".

As far as I can tell, that's it.

Exactly what I was thinking. There are topics that naturally move in a direction that will evoke thoughts and quotes from religious texts just by thier nature, such as Near Death Experiences, Is Venus Lucifer, etc........ But generally speaking it is a website called Above Top Secret and the previously mentioned forums pretty much cover the role of religiousity.

That doesn't mean that when engaging in subjects and a person states thier opinion on such can't or shouldn't be allowed to express thier spiritual take on the subject, but as far as being a forum to discuss and debate religion I really don't see why people would choose this site to do that.

Originally posted by interestedalways

That doesn't mean that when engaging in subjects and a person states thier opinion on such can't or shouldn't be allowed to express thier spiritual take on the subject, but as far as being a forum to discuss and debate religion I really don't see why people would choose this site to do that.

Thank you for replying, i really likeg what your reply and you ask a great question. This is what i have been trying to say. People cannot turn of a switch that on the system by which they percieve, interpret and interact with the world. That is what religion provides people, so to see them communicating on any number of issues from this influence is not surprising. religion is hardly a new phenomena and as more people use the internet we have to assume and accept that this community(ATS) will see the same influence that the rest of the world does. That religion plays a big role in how people operate. Why people choose this site is obvious. Alot of stuff is happening that people are trying to cope with, explain, find meaning in. You can believe in God and think that the GOP was reponsible for 9/11. Conpiracy of the Devil against Humanity is probably older that any other conspiracy....can you see where i am going.

I think what i find disturbing is that people are essentially saying that, If you believe in God, or practice a religion, you cannot talk about those issues unless it is a forum that is provided.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by atlasastro]

Originally posted by atlasastro
Religion has a place here at ATS, we need to get over it and let people post with religious content

Is someone not letting people post with religious content? Have the mods contacted you and said, "No religious content"? Or has someone simply voiced their opinion about it and you want them to shut up?

I have read two threads now complaining of religious people posting content and beliefs on many threads.

And this is a thread complaining about those complaints...

I'm sorry. I have not read your entire post, but I believe that you are allowed to post religious content here, as long as your post is on topic. But there is no protection from people disagreeing with you or voicing THEIR opinion about your post. And it sounds to me like that's what you're asking for.

Just as voicing your religious opinions IS allowed, so is voicing opinions against your opinion. That's the way it works here.

And you are free to complain about it as you have here.

But I haven't seen anyone not "letting" someone post religious content. As long as it's determined by the moderating staff to be on topic. Complaining about something isn't the same as disallowing it. Right?

Op...your posts are WAY too long. Do a short 3 line summary to get your point across in the beginning. I for one was not about to read all that.

But I get the basic question to be about having a forum just for religious topics. I do not see the point as religion is injected into many of the topics as it is, unless of course you thought maybe the fundamentalists would just stay on their own little board. That would be nice, but it isn't going to happen.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I'm sorry. I have not read your entire post,

thanks for replying.Read my entire post. Then ask your questions if they still apply.

Have you read the two threads that i am refering two. I also state that i am not complaining but offering some info as too why people post with religious content. content that people on ATS are cmplaining about. Another thread is calling for these threads to be stopped. Individuals on these threads are saying religious posts should be confined to certain threads. I am simply saying this is impossible and try to explain why. I dont believe anywhere in my post have i attacked any opinion, its expression or its frequancy. Or asked anyone to shut up.
thanks again.

I think you may have jumped to a conclusion. Read my entire post please. And the Links if you have time, there is some very interesting stuff there.





[edit on 1-6-2008 by atlasastro]