Folks are beginning to figure out the religion confidence game--and the wizzard has taken flight

Many folks are beginning to learn there is a lot of Confidence Artistry in the game of religion, and many don't take the bait these days. There is a long standing formula for their Con Game, and it works better on the less learned, the gullible, and the lost in society.

Many Priest have taken advantage of the gullible kids and the real deal of the church being out of control and nothing more than a power game over others is beginning to show up in the news.

Power always gets abused and espcially when the people are so slow to pick up on old issues that don't ring true, and those wielding the power can't resist but step well over boundaries to test the limits of how they can use and abuse the people.

www.jamesrobertwatson.com...

Religion: The oldest con game in the world
By Jane Everhart

Phony Promises
And then there are the phony promises, hyped up schemes and bogus tales that religion tries to peddle to us:

THE CONCEPT OF “SOUL.” The soul is an invisible part of you that, spirit-like, lives on and goes to heaven after you die. Nobody has ever seen a soul, there is no tangible evidence that a soul exists and a soul should not be confused with personality or emotions. Your brain is composed of neurons and synapses that cease to function when you die and so your personality dies with you. When a priest or minister says he wants to “save your soul,” watch out, because he likely wants money or another follower to increase his power.

“JESUS LOVES YOU.” “Look,” I say to the one anointing me with this Jesus-loves-you phrase, “Jesus doesn’t even know who I am. So stop trying to get me to feel that someone up there has the warm fuzzies for me. It’s just another ploy to separate me from my discretionary income because, of course, you’re counting on the fact that I wouldn’t want to have this guy stop loving me.”

FORGIVENESS OF SINS. Here’s a scam that has got to be the world’s most effective producer of guilt-fees on the planet. You can kill, steal or torture dumb animals but if you go to the confessional and own up to it, the priest is duty bound to not only not mention it to the cops, but to expiate your sins and send you to heaven clean as a newborn babe. For that, the priest demands loyalty, of course, plus the usual ten Hail Marys, and a promise to sin no more.

VIRGIN BIRTH. Mary gave birth to Jesus, the alleged son of God, without being inseminated vaginally by a human male. She is deified for this, sanctified, and held up as a virtuous ideal. But what about the rest of us, we women who were unlucky enough to get pregnant the old-fashioned way? The church has dubbed sexual intercourse “sinful” and “dirty” for 2,000 years. Sex can only be engaged in under the rules of the church, and that means standing up in front of a priest and promising to love, honor and obey till death do you part, which means being bound to another person for the rest of your life even if he (or she) turns out to be Jack the Ripper.

HEAVEN AND HELL. This has to be the all-time most profitable moneymaking scheme in the history of the church. Imagine a punishment that is there for any religious infraction - but you can’t see the punishment or experience it until you are dead. The church doesn’t have to administer the punishment; all it needs to do is say that it will happen.

------

Religion Can Be Dangerous
By Bill Maher

My personal savior is common sense. And as far as God goes, I prefer to believe in one that would want me to use the excellent brain he gave me.

Does anyone even need a Holy Man from the corrupt church that has embellish old stories to the point of their becoming myths. Most intelligent folks can easily make rules to live by and seek benevolence and good stewardship methods withou all the faked up concepts of god from primitive con men.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Like I've been saying for years now. Be spiritual all you want, but for Pete's sake, leave religion out of it. Spirituality I believe is in most people....not in me...but most people. Religion is man made. It's a tool. It's tool to have controle over the mass'. To devide and heard the weak minded from the strong willed. It's much harder to controle a person whichs views the world with an open mind.

At the end of the day all that doesnt matter its only now, this generation that is slowly starting to wake up and not believe everything there told like the last generation did.

It is very slowly but i'd say next generation will cut out religion by 15 - 20% and so on, the world probly wont get much better but its truth that matters.

Edit. i say its truth that matters but thing is the truth we do not know but fairy tales is the thing we're leaving behind.

It used to be that Mothers were trained to make their kids go to church, but that is changing to a large extent as the corruption and silly ideas of the churches are more and more being exposed.

Now, mothers and fathers often don't look at the churches as the moral leadership, or even the area of simple truths. Churches are being shown to be Confidence Operations that use many of the old superstition concepts from the ages.

These days, parents often show their kids the truth and let them make wiser decisions. Like how not to became the alter boy to be used by the church sex pervert. They are even beginning to wake up to the sex perverts seeking out sports as their way to get close to males and females in great shape. Case in point is the sports religion of Penn. State that shows they covered up using the same tricks as the Churches Confidence games. The problems seem to be taught in the churches and spread, as others employ the same tricks.

www.sullivan-county.com...

Religious Confidence Games
Excerpts from: Essays on Religion, by Albert D. Warshauer, M.D., 1991

Starting the religious confidence games
Ordinarily, the first task in any confidence game is to win the confidence of the participants. In religious confidence games, this means that the religious leaders must convince the prospects that they (leaders and present members) have a special relationship to a personal God. As proof, the religious leaders claim:
(a) their religion possesses a Sacred Book from God, and
(b) many members believe in this relationship.

From the standpoint of a scientist, the claims are flawed because, first, there are no sacred books, and, second, although many members do believe in this special relationship, beliefs alone do not make something true.

Before Columbus sailed west and reached America, many people believed that the world was flat, but it was round nevertheless. Facts and evidence are more important than the number of believers. There are no reliable facts and evidence which support the claimed special relationship with God.

Religious confidence games
By persuading the members that their leaders can personally communicate with a supernatural God, the religious institution has laid the foundation for a nearly ideal confidence game. An excellent method of persuading the members that past leaders have had this ability is by praising a Sacred Book, which can be shown as convincing evidence of communication with God. Even better, the Sacred Book itself can present the proposed benefits of the confidence game. The benefits can consist of miracles in the past and rewards after death.
Briefly, the doctrine of a personal God supports: (a) perfect (infallible) leaders, (b) perfect (inerrant) sacred books, (c) perfect (marvelous) miracles, and (d) perfect (eternal happiness) posthumous rewards. The first two beliefs link God to the particular religious institution. God employs the leaders to transmit the sacred writings to the religious group. The last two beliefs show interventions by God on behalf of the members during life and posthumously. Together, the four beliefs can be called the "religious confidence quad." From the standpoint of a scientist, the confidence quad resembles pure bunk.

..........

So, now parents are aware that churches are not the moral leadeship of the country, and more like the leadership of moral debauchery that teaches faked up fantasy derived from old superstitions of primitive peoples.

Remember always that money corrupts absolutely and that is the main game of the Churches Confidence Games. It isn't about truth seeking, as you are limited to one book to read and repeat only that. It isn't about freedom as the tactics are indoctrination methods and keeping the persons only in a small controlled group think that becomes like a drug of approval that builds the seeds for cultism.

Religion has been and continues to be a dangerous thing, because it isn't something based upon reality and truth.

OP, thanks for the link... I liked the second part of the page -- Bill Maher's speech was worth a read.

Originally posted by CharterZZ
At the end of the day all that doesnt matter its only now, this generation that is slowly starting to wake up and not believe everything there told like the last generation did.

It is very slowly but i'd say next generation will cut out religion by 15 - 20% and so on, the world probly wont get much better but its truth that matters.

Edit. i say its truth that matters but thing is the truth we do not know but fairy tales is the thing we're leaving behind.

edit on 3-7-2012 by CharterZZ because: (no reason given)

I could not agree more. Religion will take generations to root out, but it has started with the information age. Internet and free information, and the ability to connect to others around the world and share opinions freely has been and will be the biggest enemy of indoctrination.

Religion will no longer be able to keep a close and tight grasp on small communities as the communities have been opened up to the world, and especially so to the youngest generation. As they grow up, no longer sheltered, their view of the world will undoubtedly open up as well. It will be harder to sell the lie.

I think religion should be treated like smoking or rather like second hand smoke -- keep it out of public places and enjoy it freely in your home. And of course, keep it away from children.


Khar

Yes, Bill Mahr has always been well read and not afraid to speak to what he thinks. He is likely in the realm of Thomas Jefferson in his thinking and intentions on reality. We need a lot more straight speakers in high places to take the lead of America.

The Masons have dug around in this religion mess for centuries and come up with the correct thinking that sorts out all the embellishments and mistranslations and metaphore used back in the old days and those issues being used in these latter days to distort the real story from the old days. They tend to do it in secret, so not enough of the real story comes to light.

I do think what makes what they call Athiesm, these days, is simply the honest man's refusal to buy into these mistranslations and games to forge concepts in religion that turns the whole thing into a myth. I don't think Athiesm has problems with nature and the natural order, they just don't buy faked up diety. All the faked up Diety is mostly handed down from the Abramic issues from the Sumerian Days.

The Athiesm folks appear to call a spade a spade with regard to calling most of religion as a scam:

www.atheists.org...

Is All Religion a SCAM?

SCAM:

1. A ploy by a shyster to raise money.

2., A fraudulent business scheme. To scam means to victimize: deprive of by deceit; \He swindled me out of my inheritance\; \She defrauded the customers who trusted her\; \the cashier gypped me when he gave me too little change\

3. A confidence trick, confidence game, or con for short (also known as a scam) is an attempt to intentionally mislead a person or persons (known as the mark) usually with the goal of financial or other gain. The confidence trickster, con man, scam artist or con artist often works with an accomplice called the shill, who tries to encourage the mark by pretending to believe the trickster.

------

American Atheists doesn't think religion deserves respect for lying or scamming people. Religion is a major conduit of wealth and power in this country, and this all comes at the expense of well-meaning intelligent victims of the greatest con-job ever. We urge you to get off your knees, keep you money, and regain your dignity.

I personally think what is good for America, or any country for that matter, is to cut to the chase on support of truth and cut out the fantasy games of any religion that supports story telling fantasy scamming, and then that degree of Con Game methods being used to mislead Govt. and common sense thinking into toleration of huge lies.

It is way past time for serious changes in religion that will expose the lies and deceit that are taught as truths, which is defined as scamming, Confidence Games, and Money grubbing fraud.

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
It used to be that Mothers were trained to make their kids go to church, but that is changing to a large extent as the corruption and silly ideas of the churches are more and more being exposed.

Now, mothers and fathers often don't look at the churches as the moral leadership, or even the area of simple truths. Churches are being shown to be Confidence Operations that use many of the old superstition concepts from the ages.

Meanwhile, as you cheer on the decline of the church, you might take note of the simultaneous increases in child abuse (Source), US crime rates (Source), binge drinking and alcoholism (Source) and other signs of a culture in distress. Of course, there are other factors, as well, but claiming that a society becomes more moral by dismissing morality is irrational, and the statistics demonstrate that it certainly hasn't happened.

Meanwhile, in one of the most secular countries in the world, Sweden, your non-violent and highly moral society has failed to appear, what with child rape (Source), cannibalism (Source) and hospital brawls (Source,) and that's just from the past couple of days.

I'll save you the time of your reply: "None of that was done in the NAME of atheism, so it is irrelevant."

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
Yes, Bill Mahr has always been well read and not afraid to speak to what he thinks. He is likely in the realm of Thomas Jefferson in his thinking and intentions on reality. We need a lot more straight speakers in high places to take the lead of America.

Congratulations on being the second person (at least) to misrepresent Jefferson today on ATS. Jefferson was a deist, not an atheist (meaning that he believed in God, just not the God of Christianity,) he relies on the existence of God as a basis for the Declaration of Independence, and at the time of the writing of the Constitution, "Separation of Church and State" meant something radically different than people perceive it to mean today.

And though it is a supposition on my part, I'm fairly confident that Jefferson would be repulsed by Bill Maher, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the cesspool that political discourse has degenerated into in the past thirty years.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
Yes, Bill Mahr has always been well read and not afraid to speak to what he thinks. He is likely in the realm of Thomas Jefferson in his thinking and intentions on reality. We need a lot more straight speakers in high places to take the lead of America.

Congratulations on being the second person (at least) to misrepresent Jefferson today on ATS. Jefferson was a deist, not an atheist (meaning that he believed in God, just not the God of Christianity,) he relies on the existence of God as a basis for the Declaration of Independence, and at the time of the writing of the Constitution, "Separation of Church and State" meant something radically different than people perceive it to mean today.

And though it is a supposition on my part, I'm fairly confident that Jefferson would be repulsed by Bill Maher, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the cesspool that political discourse has degenerated into in the past thirty years.

I am sure you read all the Bill Maher comments before you made your extraneous comment. Perhaps not, else you might take note of Maher's Deist realm of discussion. So, to call your attention to the his words and the Deist defintion:

Bill Maher speaks:

www.jamesrobertwatson.com...

And as far as God goes, I prefer to believe in one that would want me to use the excellent brain he gave me.

Then one has to recall the Defintions of Deism

en.wikipedia.org...

Constructive elements of deist thought included:

God exists, created and governs the universe.
God gave humans the ability to reason.

Thus, I do believe the comment of Bill Maher being in the realm of Thomas Jefferson on Deism is well supported and your complaint dismissed as off base.

The comment was made before the concept of Athiesm was introduced and was sticking with the theme for religion as a confidence game. The latter part of the posting did associate that athiesm was much similar to the Deism principle for rejecting the embellished religion stories.

en.wikipedia.org...

Critical elements of deist thought included:

Rejection of all religions based on books that claim to contain the revealed word of God.
Rejection of all religious dogma and demagogy.
Rejection of reports of miracles, prophecies and religious "mysteries".

Thus, the issue for the Atheism Religion is a Scam fit these Deist beliefs that dismiss things like Jesus is god, god hears prayers, that god pays any attention to human kind, and so forth. But that nobody can deny nature.


Thus, I do believe all your misplaced associations that I termed Thomas Jefferson was made only in your mind, as what was written nowhere tells that Thomas Jefferson was an Athiest as you try to claim. It appears you didn't read the Bill Maher piece, that you don't know the meaning for Deism, and that you don't understand the logic of Deism was also contained in the Religion is a Scam piece that also fits the Religion is a Confidence Game theme.

Perhaps you should really do what Bill Maher exclaims and what is the basis for Deism.

Originally posted by adjensen

Meanwhile, as you cheer on the decline of the church, you might take note of the simultaneous increases in child abuse (Source), US crime rates (Source), binge drinking and alcoholism (Source) and other signs of a culture in distress. Of course, there are other factors, as well, but claiming that a society becomes more moral by dismissing morality is irrational, and the statistics demonstrate that it certainly hasn't happened.

Meanwhile, in one of the most secular countries in the world, Sweden, your non-violent and highly moral society has failed to appear, what with child rape (Source), cannibalism (Source) and hospital brawls (Source,) and that's just from the past couple of days.

I'll save you the time of your reply: "None of that was done in the NAME of atheism, so it is irrelevant."

The Decline of the churches is based upon the better knowledge of religion folks gain via using their intelligence to discover issues like the Sumerian Creator gods and how Abrahamic religion came from that experience. One does tend to celebrate the rise of intelligence, pushing forward the truth, and the decline of scams.

It appears the church started the issue of "a lie repeated often enough becomes truth", which everyone from Hitler, to Lenin, to Goebels all took note. It was made with respect to the propaganda theme, but was derived from taking note of religion's lies. But eventually the lies become exposed and many are disillusioned. Some find out the big lies of the Church on god and Jesus become suicidal. Which came first, the lie that caused the suicidal issue because the person discovered they were lied to and deceived or a well balanced person exposed to logic and truth.

You appear to be in a rant mode and somehow bring in Sweden with poorly documented to no association to religion. In order to work up some associations for child rape, cannibalism, and such one has to know if these cases involved religion or not. You provide zero logical associations for this.

It appears Sweden has lots of religion:

en.wikipedia.org...

(78%) of the population belongs to the Church of Sweden, the Lutheran church that separated from the state in 2000.

One also has to include issues for religion being associated with child abuse via the Catholic examples. One also has to include a good many Catholics are alcoholics, especially in Europe.

Over here in America we have people in Florida eating people's faces, so maybe you need to include America.

The issue that religion tells fairy tails does tend to set up mental disorders from folks being lied to constantly, and that is also considered child abuse. So, just on that one issue, one can claim religion is abuse and the source of much more problems than your rant on Sweden.

reply to post by adjensen


But does it correlate to the decline of the various churches?? That id the real question. It is easy to show that crime is increasing. So is the population. I think there is more correlation between the rise of crime and abuse to the failure of economies than to the decline of the church. I have never read a study that stated in a given population of secularists the crime rate was higher than in a given population of the religious. If one exists I would like to see it. There are however, numerous studies available that show the correlation between crime and poverty.
Not sure how to link a source but there are studies available in abundance. What am not seeing is the study that states that a religious society is a peaceful one. In fact I am seeing just the opposite. Just look at the catholic church, Fred Phelps, Dwight York, Warren Jeffs, Tony Alamo, to name a few. They ae or were very religious figures who perpetrated horrible crimes.

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
Yes, Bill Mahr has always been well read and not afraid to speak to what he thinks. He is likely in the realm of Thomas Jefferson in his thinking and intentions on reality. We need a lot more straight speakers in high places to take the lead of America.

Congratulations on being the second person (at least) to misrepresent Jefferson today on ATS. Jefferson was a deist, not an atheist (meaning that he believed in God, just not the God of Christianity,) he relies on the existence of God as a basis for the Declaration of Independence, and at the time of the writing of the Constitution, "Separation of Church and State" meant something radically different than people perceive it to mean today.

And though it is a supposition on my part, I'm fairly confident that Jefferson would be repulsed by Bill Maher, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the cesspool that political discourse has degenerated into in the past thirty years.

I am sure you read all the Bill Maher comments before you made your extraneous comment. Perhaps not, else you might take note of Maher's Deist realm of discussion. So, to call your attention to the his words and the Deist defintion:

Actually, I have little interest in reading the words of someone I don't think much of, so, no, I didn't read it. I suspect Mr Maher would take exception to you saying that he believes in a "magic man in the sky" -- he's a pretty dyed in the wool atheist, by his own claim. And I'm pretty sure that the Atheist Alliance doesn't give the "Richard Dawkins Award" to deists, though this guy takes issue with Maher getting it, mostly because he thinks he's a chump, lol.

It appears Sweden has lots of religion:

Actually, it appears that you're unfamiliar with Northern European State Churches. The reason that the "membership" of the Church of Sweden is so high is that, until fairly recently, everyone born in the country who had one parent in the church was automatically made a member. In other words, unless both parents renounced the church (or became Mormons or something) every kid was a member, and unless they renounced it, their kids would be members, and so on.

However, if you look at church attendance, a more accurate indicator of religious adherence, you will find the numbers in Sweden at around 5% of the population, one of the lowest numbers in the world.

And yet the outstanding moral behaviour continues

Originally posted by Hawkmoon1972
reply to post by adjensen

 

It is easy to show that crime is increasing. So is the population.

Crime rates are generally calculated on the per-capita basis, so increases in population are not relevant.

I think there is more correlation between the rise of crime and abuse to the failure of economies than to the decline of the church. I have never read a study that stated in a given population of secularists the crime rate was higher than in a given population of the religious. If one exists I would like to see it.

I'm not going to go dig out the info for you, but take a look at crime rates in the Soviet Union, particularly in the pre-NEP years (1917-1921) to the same years in the US, UK or Canada, and I think you'll find one example.

Just look at the catholic church, Fred Phelps, Dwight York, Warren Jeffs, Tony Alamo, to name a few. They ae or were very religious figures who perpetrated horrible crimes.

A handful of miscreants hardly justifies damning the whole system. How many people do you believe looked at Warren Jeffs and said "Polygamy? Heck yeah!"

Just look at the Catholic Church? Okay, but instead of looking at the reprehensible behaviour of a few members, how about we look at something like this? Campaign to Reduce Poverty in America In 2010, Catholic Charities USA spent over $15.5 million helping others. Don't like them? How about the United Methodist Committee on Relief, a "first responder" on many of the huge disasters you seen on tv and a lot more that you don't see on tv.

Originally posted by adjensen

Actually, I have little interest in reading the words of someone I don't think much of, so, no, I didn't read it. I suspect Mr Maher would take exception to you saying that he believes in a "magic man in the sky" -- he's a pretty dyed in the wool atheist, by his own claim. And I'm pretty sure that the Atheist Alliance doesn't give the "Richard Dawkins Award" to deists, though this guy takes issue with Maher getting it, mostly because he thinks he's a chump, lol.

If we take a close look at what Maher says, it appears you may misunderstand his stance on religion. Or perhaps, more specifically, a huge mental block to reading things he says.

Maher, like many, take exception to the embellishment games of the religion texts that go well beyond reasonable thinking. Religion speak is a lot of metaphore embellishment and some issues with bad translations, that takes the writing well beyond literal truth.

Thomas Jefferson took exception to the Bibles embellishments also and cut out all the big claims to miracles and Jesus being god, and the work is called the Jefferson Bible.

Perhaps you should take Maher's issues, who appears to have grown up in the Catholic Church, as both your failing and the churches failing to introduce Bill Maher to Jesus or perhaps to god, so that the world of science and the world can agree. But the best you can muster is a book of embellished words and not a drop of scientific proof that Jesus was god. Thus, where is your proof of a walking talking god walking around that anyone can see?

You don't have such a hard line proof, just a bunch of jumbled words that you buy, but Bill Maher does not. We can read from your own source that Maher is not different than Deism really. Maher just doesn't believe in the trumped up nonsense that is organized relgion and neither did Thomas Jefferson.

Such games have made Jesus into a myth, rather than an accurate presentation of him in history.

Maher calls you to task to show me just as Jefferson did with Deism.
.

scienceblogs.com...

We did a show last night about God and religion with Dave Foley, who I love, and we were arguing against this one woman who had a book called I Like Being Catholic. Someone said, “Oh, boy, a lot of atheists on this panel.” I said, “I’m not an atheist. There’s a really big difference between an atheist and someone who just doesn’t believe in religion. Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I don’t need. But I’m not an atheist, no.” I believe there’s some force. If you want to call it God… I don’t believe God is a single parent who writes books. I think that the people who think God wrote a book called The Bible are just childish. Religion is so childish. What they’re fighting about in the Middle East, it’s so childish. These myths, these silly little stories that they believe in fundamentally, that they take over this little space in Jerusalem where one guy flew up to heaven–no, no, this guy performed a sacrifice here a thousand million years ago. It’s like, “Who cares? What does that have to do with spirituality, where you’re really trying to get, as a human being and as a soul moving in the universe?” But I do believe in a God, yes.

---------

You can’t be a rational person six days a week…and on one day of the week, go to a building, and think you’re drinking the blood of a two thousand year old space god.

So, now the issue appears to be that your issues of god can't be shown to the scientific mind. Thus, the same order of evidence needed to define sciences is not present in your games of relgion and what is god.

Bill Maher often cuts to the chase, so show us the blood of Jesus is grape juice, or that god is a space alien. Or just admit that the metaphore styled writings don't represent realitty.


You might get close if you go back to the Old Sumerian Texts, which tell of the space aliens that created modern man. But they left and have not restarted a residence on Earth or other contact with modern human kind, so there still exists no hard proof.

You also might get a little closer by showing Bill Maher that grapes were the product of the Vinyard of the gods at Mt. Carmel and the issue there is Boron in the soils that promotes grapes to grow and also have good health benefit for man and his higher thinking.

But such rational and reason will typically never cross the minds of those that rubber stamp the group think of the worlds of a book that have no proof that Jesus was god.

Yet, you like most Christians, have to toss dirt on Bill Maher for asking for the hard proofs that you can't show him and it makes you and the others look like a Confidence Game and a Scam on the world.


It appears Bill Maher and Thomas Jefferson have a lot in common.


And you have not answered Maher's questions on show me, and that does not mean snow me with tons of metaphorical writing that isn't allowed in the realm for science.

Originally posted by adjensen

Actually, it appears that you're unfamiliar with Northern European State Churches. The reason that the "membership" of the Church of Sweden is so high is that, until fairly recently, everyone born in the country who had one parent in the church was automatically made a member. In other words, unless both parents renounced the church (or became Mormons or something) every kid was a member, and unless they renounced it, their kids would be members, and so on.

However, if you look at church attendance, a more accurate indicator of religious adherence, you will find the numbers in Sweden at around 5% of the population, one of the lowest numbers in the world.

And yet the outstanding moral behaviour continues

If you really applied something called science to this issue of Sweden and religion it would require some data. Like what is the rate of various crimes per capita for Sweden Vs. various other country's rates.

One needs that sort of data to show any correlation effects to religion or absence of religion.

Next, one needs the criminal person's history to see if they were exposed to religion and in what ways, but you don't provide any of that sort of scientic thinking that then yeilds to some intelligent discussion. One needs to know the psychological profile and apply some of the criminal analysis issues of psychology. There will be much more involved than religion not being there.


Every society appears to have criminal elements, and these few crimes you quote are not much different than what happens in the US. All you have is hand waving that says look this country doesn't have religion thus all the crimes of man are the direct result of that.

Just like with the issue that you can't show Bill Maher the science proof that Jesus is god, you appear to think that the same level of non-science approach to analysis of crime rates associated with religion defines criminal issues in Sweden. All you are doing is cherry picking news and avoiding real methods of analysis.

Proof goes well beyond what your opinion thinks, so show the analysis of crime rates for various crimes in Sweden and compare those to more religious countries so some figure of merit can be attained.

Right now, all you have is your conjecture based on the sort of news that we see in the US as to criminal behaviors that we see here. Such lack of critical thinking seems to be prevelent in the religious mindset, but not in the mindset of critical thinkers like Thomas Jefferson and Bill Maher that do insist on intelligent presentation of facts using the methods of science.

I think the US is known to have more people in jail than any country in the world, so where did you account for that issue?

Do the science, show the numbers and comparisions. Otherwise, the conjecture isn't significant.

Originally posted by adjensen

Just look at the Catholic Church? Okay, but instead of looking at the reprehensible behaviour of a few members, how about we look at something like this? Campaign to Reduce Poverty in America In 2010, Catholic Charities USA spent over $15.5 million helping others. Don't like them? How about the United Methodist Committee on Relief, a "first responder" on many of the huge disasters you seen on tv and a lot more that you don't see on tv.

I thnk we get the message. The Robin Hood principle, it is OK to steal if we use the money to help others.

I think we see similar in organized crime where they help the widows and orphans of those killed in their criminal activity, and that is considered a good thing and overrides the bad things of the group.

So, by that like reasoning, the churches should be excused from telling the truth of religion history because they use some of the money they scammed from others to help with poverty and disasters. Perhaps that comprensates for their guilt in having huge amounts of property and money in the banks to give up a tiny percent to others so they can claim they do good, yet really more enrich themselves.

Ever looked at the wealth and holdings of the Catholic churches, how much they have invested in weapons businesses and such. That must be good also to support wars and weapons.


Most of us ask does telling a group of lies to scam money from the illiterates really justify the end, when it promotes that telling the truth and being honest is not a requirement for religion. It isn't a requirement for the Mafia Either. It isn't a requirement for the criminal or sociopath.

I think we see what you support.

If we take a close look at what Maher says, it appears you may misunderstand his stance on religion. Or perhaps, more specifically, a huge mental block to reading things he says.

So, do you think that Maher is a flip-flopper, or he just likes talking out of both sides of his mouth?

"Neither me nor my girl believe in God or marriage, so there's not gonna be a big church wedding... I always say I don't know. Even Richard Dawkins a man whose name has become synonymous with atheism says he puts a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being absolute certain there is a god and 7 being absolutely certain there isn't, and he says even he's a 6.9. Because no one knows for sure what's out there. He says yes there could be a god and there could be a spaghetti monster out there, but it doesn't look like it. To me it was always great fodder for comedy. There isn't a week that goes by that there isn't something hysterically funny if it's not tragic, having to do with religion. My recent favorite example was at the Michael Jackson Memorial Stevie Wonder said 'we needed Michael but God needed him more.' And I thought really God needs people, God needs singers, God is up there saying 'Jesus, nothing on, get that Michael Jackson up here.'

Imus then asks if Hitchens is a 7. Bill Maher responds "he may be, I think we're just talking semantics at some point, we are all atheists (referring to Dawkins, Hitchens, and himself), which means we don't believe in a deity, we don't believe in a magic spaceman, and we think people that do, have a neurological disorder and they need help."

(Source -- and that's an atheist source, not a theist)

So if you're claiming that Maher believes in a deity, I guess you're saying that, by his own words, he has a neurological disorder and needs help, so why should anyone take anything he says seriously?

Every society appears to have criminal elements, and these few crimes you quote are not much different than what happens in the US. All you have is hand waving that says look this country doesn't have religion thus all the crimes of man are the direct result of that.

Of course that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that people (well, some of them) are the problem and Sweden stands as an example that ditching religion doesn't change that. As you don't seem to agree with the ethics that the church espouses, you are welcome to establish your own, but it is irrational to state that removing a source of moral teaching makes a society more moral. It may result in a society more conforming to what YOU think is moral, but then the onus is on you to demonstrate that your view of morality is more proper than another.

I thnk we get the message. The Robin Hood principle, it is OK to steal if we use the money to help others.

Where is your evidence that Catholic Charities or the United Methodist Committee on Relief is committing theft? If you want to keep your money to yourself, and I want to give to UMCOR to help people in Haiti that I can't otherwise help, what is your beef with that?

reply to post by Kharron

I could not agree more. Religion will take generations to root out, but it has started with the information age. Internet and free information, and the ability to connect to others around the world and share opinions freely has been and will be the biggest enemy of indoctrination.

And I could not agree more with you. Religion does still have a firm grip on children and the old, and some intelligent adults, if you can believe it, and it will take a long time for it to fully fall away from people's ways and practices. The Computer is a window into the biggest library in the world, in every known language, and people are using it to gain information on everything and anything, especially those cherished beliefs handed down from generations before them.

Religion will no longer be able to keep a close and tight grasp on small communities as the communities have been opened up to the world, and especially so to the youngest generation. As they grow up, no longer sheltered, their view of the world will undoubtedly open up as well. It will be harder to sell the lie.

Kids today, just like in years gone by, and simply looking for something new, something better. They quickly tire of old and stale lip service Christianity served up on a plate of fear, and they don't like being told things they like to do is a Sin either. If a kid rebels against a parent, and this will happen eventually, the first thing they rebel against is the religion of the parent.

I think religion should be treated like smoking or rather like second hand smoke -- keep it out of public places and enjoy it freely in your home. And of course, keep it away from children.

I too think religion is dangerous, especially for those with mental deficiencies, or those with anger issues, or are sexual predators, or have an axe to grind. The Bible should have a warning label, and a disclaimer included. Instead of just pushing it into the hands of a child and telling them it is all literally true, and that if they do not toe a certain line, they will go to a terrible place forever. This is child abuse, plain and simple, and yes, it happened to me. Thankfully, I was smart enough to research it all out, and find out for myself.

Originally posted by adjensen

Of course that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that people (well, some of them) are the problem and Sweden stands as an example that ditching religion doesn't change that. As you don't seem to agree with the ethics that the church espouses, you are welcome to establish your own, but it is irrational to state that removing a source of moral teaching makes a society more moral. It may result in a society more conforming to what YOU think is moral, but then the onus is on you to demonstrate that your view of morality is more proper than another.

I thnk we get the message. The Robin Hood principle, it is OK to steal if we use the money to help others.

Where is your evidence that Catholic Charities or the United Methodist Committee on Relief is committing theft? If you want to keep your money to yourself, and I want to give to UMCOR to help people in Haiti that I can't otherwise help, what is your beef with that?

I always prefer things that are not some extended story that sounds more like a pan handler caught in some story to get money. When someone has to tell some big extended story that doesn't make sense, it is basically telling a big lie to gain some money. Such I call as dishonest.

The Organized Church first tells all that Jesus is god. Opps, then they have them drink some wine and eat some bread and tell them that are the blood and body of Jesus. Oh, Wow!

But, Then they get in real trouble making all the congregation into god with that tale. Then, Jesus is supposed to be god, but he can't really fix anything without your money to get the job done.

It is a real pan handlers yarn, and I usually roll my eyes and think of folks telling me a line of nonsense. Getting money via pushing big tales isn't honesty, it looks like a sordid trail for deception.

I don't give money to nonsense peddlers. I prefer the straight talkers without a ton of excuses to attempt to tell that Jesus isn't god and he isn't around anymore, except you can play Jesus. You can pretend you are god and toss you money to folks that can't talk straight.


Bill Maher's thing is that he is talking about the organized church, which he doesn't buy into their god be it Jesus of yahweh. Which is what the US defines as god. But, Maher and others are noticing this religion is a sordid tale that involves the deal of Abraham with the Annunaki and Enlil, which is the yahweh theme. Jesus Father god theme is EnKi, which still isn't really god except in the primitive sense of those that marveled over the Annunaki sciences.

Intelligent people, like Maher, just don't have the time to be led down the Yellow Brick road to find their isn't god in any of the organized churches games with yahweh or Jesus. Maher doesn't cut their whole organized churches god game any respect and one can't really blame him.

Most of us will work on making Government work and have equity of protection for the people, not just for those willing to compromise their ethics for truth from the organized church. The organized churches are still in the mode of the flat earth society, and they are just as crackpot a story now as when they tried to kill people for telling the world was not flat. imho

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
Most of us will work on making Government work and have equity of protection for the people, not just for those willing to compromise their ethics for truth from the organized church. The organized churches are still in the mode of the flat earth society, and they are just as crackpot a story as when they tried to kill people for telling the world was not flat. imho

When did that happen?

Oh, right, another myth that you've latched onto as the truth (Source).

So you think that the government is going to save the day? Wow, and you call Christians delusional, lol.