I am so sick of religious people

a reply to: Raggedyman

Why get upset by all this evil, why is it evil., why do you value stardust and starwater, why do you say religion is wrong, what gives you the power to dictate what's bad.

Awareness, logic, low level understanding on how suffering propagates thru creation?

a reply to: DumpMaster

I hope your disgust with religion inspires one of your children to become a preacher.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

Except
Darwin said we are all higher forms of a virus

Why shouldn't that virus be wiped out, or parts of that virus that we dislike be wiped out.
A YouTube link does not answer the question

It just says we can answer the moral question, doesn't make it a valid answer

What gives an atheist the authority to choose what is acceptable and unacceptable. Stalin chose as did Mao and pol pot. The op has a very simplistic, unreasoned argument
Akin to saying, the religios are wrong for killing, yet atheistic beliefs teach humanity are a virus. Coupled with the death toll from atheistic politics.
No true Scotsman arguments aside. Atheism has no rules, except those they choose for themselves, those they can change on a whim

I am so sick of atheists like the op, just wanting to shift the blame from himself to justify his own view, his own view is deeply flawed, his view of his fellow atheists is also flawed.
Hates religion but is happy to buddy up to Mao, Stalin, pol pot, it's crazy

Killing unborn baby's is obscene, yet atheism justifys it, according to many people, the unborn are not human, not alive

Morals?
I don't think so

a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer

Doesn't the fact that morality and sin differ from culture to culture in fact prove its a consensus. I mean we are talking serious differences and opposites .

I think intellectually through reason there is a form of ethics. But it still relies on logic not supernatural aspects of a creator.

I respect your opinion as well even if we differ. It's actually a thing Atheists and theists should try from time time. It elevated everyone's beliefs to have honest discourse not based on reaction. If you have ever seen my posts I am constantly called a Christian apologist. Usually by people who don't know what one is. It's because I make a point to try and damp down the angry arguements Atheists sometimes make because of scarring of their religious background. Kind of like I don't think Dawkins is a good philosophers but I do think Harris and Craig are. Even though they are opposites.

a reply to: eluryh22

Whenever people say that I have to wonder if they feel it focuses on negativity and guilt for one of two reasons:

1.) They don't really know much about it, only what they've been told about it. And it's easier to believe what you hear and want to believe than it is to actually find out directly if it's true.

2.) Or they felt it was that way because some of the things that are talked about as sins happened to be things that were very important to the person in question, so they did feel guilty about it because now they're being told it's wrong.

a reply to: luthier

And yet there are some rules that hold true across pretty much every culture.

There is a reason it's called the Golden Rule. It's pretty near universal across almost every culture.

a reply to: luthier

Intelectualy through reason there is a form of ethics, except

The current regime in North Korea
Atheist?

The issue is not as simple as you would like to make it unfortunately, at times in human history, the elite, the greedy, the selfish, the powerful grow in power.
Can the simple argument, the survival of the fittest be denied outright, we are no more than animals to some, cattle

For the common good is generally used to support an individual's own position.

If logic can be relied on, then exterminating Jews in camps was logical, maybe not to us but to many it was
Let's not forget, Jews were a sub human group according to the political party that decided the ethics of the time

Some religions have a supernatural creator who stated, we are all human, all equal and all equally valued, you can't argue that simple statement without a secular ethic.
If you do argue that statement, you devalue humanity and life.

a reply to: ketsuko

There are because it makes sense for a social contract to make an agreement with people to benefit your survival.

The religious dogma however is not so. For instance Hawain Kings married relatives. They were polyamourous. The mothers brother was the father simply because they had so much sex they didn't know who the father actually was. Those were all sins to abrahamics.

I can give you thousands of examples.

a reply to: luthier

And I think we'll always see serious differences and opposites. It's seems to be a trait of humans beings...disagreement.

But I do think that to deduce that there is no objective morality based on competing ideas of what it is would be folly. I just don't think it can be derived from the minds of men precisely because of your first point. It would, necessarily, need to transcend the subjective opinions of humans whether they acknowledge it or not.

Now this is not 'proof'. I aim to prove nothing nor do I believe the transcendent can ever be proved(or disproved). This is just my thinking.

"I think intellectually through reason there is a form of ethics. But it still relies on logic not supernatural aspects of a creator."

I can agree with this to an extent. Ethics can be derived without the transcendent via logic and reason. But can those ethics be defended intellectually when the society that produced them comes up against another society with a differing view? Why would the produced ethics of society A be correct and society B's incorrect? This is simply relativism. Why was the laws and ethics of The Third Reich wrong and those of the Allied Powers righteous? This, in turn, relates to a comment I made in one of my first posts. In the absence of objective morality good and evil cease to exist. All we are left with is legal and illegal and government as God.

I really like your last paragraph. It's far too rare that civility reigns when differing worldviews are discussed, especially in this day and age. I appreciate you and enjoy reading what you have to say. I think it's important for us to be able to have these discussions and be able to hear people out who have competing ideas without devolving into personal attacks nor vitriolic language. It shouldn't be something that causes strife but, knowing human beings, usually does. I agree, Dawkins is a poor philosopher. I certainly enjoy the other two.

All the best.

a reply to: DumpMaster

You do realize without religions, there would be chaos. The little chaos that religions bring is nothing compare to the chaos without it would bring. I am not religious btw, but I see the need for religions. It controls people who cannot be control by laws.

Religion can certainly provide someone with an axe to grind a cause to be stupid in the name of.
However there are asshats everywhere in the world, religious or not.
There are great people in the were who are religious.

a reply to: Raggedyman

The current regime being atheist has no bearing on this arguement at all. The same reason I don't hold all Christians accountable for genocides, rape of children, and the Inquisition. The spanish raped woman so it would be easier to convert thete chuldren to christianity. Atheism has no organization or method other than a lack of beliefs in God. Soft atheism saying I don't believe but I can't prove it and hard atheism saying there is definitely no God.

That first arguement is a poor one for either Atheists or Theists. Neither side has a valid arguement. You could say some religions actually promote violence in their scripture. That would be true. But no atheist scripture exists. And just like All Capone believed in a creator neither example of theist or atheist prove their is a morality.

The constitution of this country was based on Roseua's social contract and Locke's Two Treaties of Government for the most part. Secular divised from reason and not religious.

I think the moral law arguement for God is by far the weakest. Teleological I have trouble argueing against. Cosmological my arguement is every bit as speculative as the religious one and ontological is confusing and not really valid lMO.

a reply to: dogstar23

Dude, Jim Jones was a Religious Cult Leader NOT an Atheist.

He founded the Peoples Temple of the Disciples of Christ!!

You need to check out that list.

a reply to: TheOnlyAnswer

I am saying ethics is a thing made by man through reason. A lot of it has to do with a social contract for survival. However there may be universal truths or social math if you will. I think freedom is one. The more free a society the more mankind will be able to expand their knowledge without the dogma holding them back.

I believe religion was completely necessary to learn how to organize socially and create an imparitive that would allow people to come out of nature and form society. I just don't and most likely never believe in a man-made scripture or God. I leave open the possibility and do lean Diest and pantheist but the scripture part other than the universal wisdoms (which there are many) personally I don't believe.

I do however respect other people's reight to believe and don't find any need to condesend them unless I am attacked personally. I still try to keep my insults on their arguements rather than the fact they believe. I do hold beliefs about certain religious people (I live in the South) but I don't feel the need to verbally bash them other than a simple passing comment like I just made.

Again thank for the debating. I wish God debates could be civil. No matter what you believe it does require you to think and expand your mind about origins and designs (or random arrangement if that's your thing)

a reply to: luthier

We could argue, for the most part I would agree with what you have said
My issue was with the op and also I wanted too highlight the atheism and its belief humanity is no different to cattle

I would tend to agree with zazzafrazz, for the most part

a reply to: Raggedyman

Right on. I had an issue with the OP as well even with my lack of beliefs in religion. I don't think argueing that way is a productive way to elevate understanding.

I am for the most part considered an atheist. I don't really call myself one other than to explain my position on theism. I still every so often think about the diest world view and definitely believe pantheism and spinozaism have a lot for me to think about. But I don't think of people as sheep or cattle at all. In fact I do a lot with after school programs (wrestling, judo, and music). I feel deeply for humanity and many Atheists do.

a reply to: DumpMaster

Example being when horrible things happen they just say pray. Yesterday it was #prayforcity I forget the city name. Today it's #prayfortheworld. How about actually doing something instead of nothing - which is what praying is.

Personally, I can't stand hashtags in general. Same goes for all the generic "type amen" memes on social media.

That notwithstanding, why do you think that praying for victims/survivors of fill-in-the-blank and performing physical action are mutually exclusive? My parish is not alone in that whenever any catastrophe happens anywhere, whether it be an earthquake on another part of the globe or a house fire down the road, parishioners immediately begin to offer whatever aid they can. If geographically possible, people with the appropriate skills offer direct assistance. If not, people gather food, clothing and all other supplies/necessities to send to ravaged areas.

I would also like to point out that my parish is not alone in that the church provides a whole host of other services such as people volunteering to teach people how to speak/write/read English. There is also a food bank that people keep stocked all year long. In fall of each year, there are winter coat drives that directly help people not only in our community but people in surrounding areas as well. There are also regular blood drives hosted by the church (in our case in the school associated with the church for logistical reasons).

The church also provides what I would consider emergency services in some instances. Before our son was old enough to attend nursery school, my wife would take him to a play group at our local library. There, my wife befriended another mother. Almost like out of a movie, the woman started showing up with odd scratches and bruises that she would explain away... until she finally confided in my wife that her husband beats the stuffing out of her from time to time. She was too scared to run off to a relatives house because he could easily find her. As in many places across the nation, the shelters around here are (apparently) no place for a woman with a two year old son to be. My wife took her to our Parish Outreach office and they immediately took her and her son in and provided them with food and shelter until she was able to find a job and a decent place to stay. (For the record, this woman is not Catholic and nor did anyone try to convert her).

Quite frankly, I find that the church, in many cases, in many areas are often much better and more efficient at aiding those in need of help than governments and municipalities could ever dream of being.

You stating that "all religious people do is pray" shows that you are a bit ignorant regarding what religious people actually do. I would only suggest that you do a little research that goes beyond the fantastical headlines of the media.

a reply to: eluryh22

Personally, I can't stand hashtags in general. Same goes for all the generic "type amen" memes on social media. 

Yep.
Deformed, suffering child photo.... type 'Amen'.
I hope that I don't see any more of those, ever.
Who posts things like that?
I don't get it.

I understand your reasoning behind and it is sickening how people can murder and kill in the name of their God.

But I think what is really going on is people so full of hate and lust for violence use religion as an excuse to act out.

Christianity is about following the teachings of Christ and loving one another.

John 13:34-35
34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

Matthew 15:8
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

Matthew 22:37-40
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Unfortunately a lot of people claim to be Christian, but they need to remember what it really means to be a follower of Jesus.

i grew up catholic. i was confirmed at the age of 18. A lot of my friends fought in the war in Iraq. These were people that were confirmed catholic with me.

The army PREY's on the ignorant and poor.

I am very against religion at this point in my life. None of my friends are religious anymore and all of them think fighting in the war is the dumbest thing anyone could do.

There is for sure a correlation between religion, ignorance, and war.

I am also very sick of religious people, especially when their religions are all based off the ancient Sun and Saturn worshipping cults. Grow up, do some actually research where your God came from and stop being a close minded fearful idiot!