I just want to see some other viewpoints on this...

Most of our lives we are taught to respect other people's beliefs and not to criticize them, etc. So this will, of course, conflict with that commonality. But anyway, from a purely scientific, no-bullshit point-of-view, all religion (being man-made) is false.

Now, should we respect the religions of the world when we know, for an absolute fact (technically an immeasurably small probability) that they are false? Should we respect someone who thinks the Earth is flat? Or that lightning is produced by Zeus?

Should religion be respected?

Please excuse any errors in syntax or lexicon due to my being fucked up.

Most of our lives we are taught to respect other people's beliefs and not to criticize them, etc.
We are? I can't remember ever being told to respect Nazism, racism, etc.


Now, should we respect the religions of the world when we know, for an absolute fact (technically an immeasurably small probability) that they are false?
Of course not. Religion doesn't deserve special treatment or automatic respect and beliefs are not automatically worthy of respect.


Should we respect someone who thinks the Earth is flat? Or that lightning is produced by Zeus?
Now you're in a different area. There's a difference between respecting beliefs and respecting people. I respect peoples right to have beliefs, even those that I find wacky, and I even respect people who have some wacky beliefs (for other reasons).

Actually this is a topic thats crossed my mind a lot recently. After spending a lot of time trying to be understanding towards religion... and christ knows its exhausting... i'v decided i don't respect views, i respect people. Certain people who i have massive respect for have beliefs that i think are complete bullshit, and it means nothing cause they are good people.
But yeah, sometimes i believe logic should be allowed a little more free reign over religion. I'm not an animal rights activist by a long way, but the thought of halaal meat shocks me. Truly disgusting. The religious belief that you can only eat a dead animal if it has suffered like fuck in dying. And nurses wearing burkhas when everyone else is forbidden to wear anything other than disinfected stuff. Sometimes a line is crossed and the excuse is religion.
I think the basic rule was perfectly summed up by george carlin though 'Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself'.

And nurses wearing burkhas when everyone else is forbidden to wear anything other than disinfected stuff.
I have plenty of experience in the OR. Nothing worn on the head has been disinfected and Muslim coverings cause no health issues and are probably even more sanitary, as typical hair coverings worn in the OR leave lots of head hair exposed.

Fair enough lol, not exactly what i meant but that was my mistake. I meant that nurses (at least in the NHS) are made to change into their lil outfits in the hospital, so as to lower the risk of outside infection. Whereas the nurses in bhurkas don't have to.
I just want to make clear that this isn't an attack on them, or their belief, but on the way rules are bent for religion in the name of political correctness and 'respecting other religions'.

^

What about all the women who were full burkas, and then go and try to vote. They can't take their burkas off to show who they are with a photo ID.

How do they even get a photo ID if they don't take the head covering off.

Stuff like that is just madness and should not be respected. God (if there is one) wants people to be nice to each other right? What does wearing a fucking hood have anything to do with your capability of being nice to others? Nothing.

^

What about all the women who were full burkas, and then go and try to vote. They can't take their burkas off to show who they are with a photo ID.

How do they even get a photo ID if they don't take the head covering off.

Stuff like that is just madness and should not be respected. God (if there is one) wants people to be nice to each other right? What does wearing a fucking hood have anything to do with your capability of being nice to others? Nothing.

Actually the Supremes are working on that polling ID question now. Is an ID not like a poll tax? Its not individual voting fraud we need to worry about. Also, in regards people pick a la carte in regards to their religion. For example, in almost every painting/depiction of Mary she is wearing a head covering much like the muslim women wear. Anyways, in regards to a la carte, someone my take Genesis at face value and ignore the part about stoning their insolent children at that end of the book. People approach their faith with preconceived notions and hunt and peck to support their cause.

Back to the meat of the talk. Hell no religion shouldn't be respected. Look at the shit the Fundamentalist Mormons are doing out west for example. Religion should not be granted more respect than empirically true things such as science. If you claim your invisible friend told you something I expect proof.

Should religion be respected?



No. But people should be respected. And that means respecting their religious beliefs even if you don't subscribe to them yourself. It works both ways. Religious people should respect the non-religious, in not flamboyantly displaying their religious rituals in a world filled with mixed faiths.


I think the basic rule was perfectly summed up by george carlin though 'Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself'.

George Carlin had it right ^

If the entire world operated by that rule of social etiquette... man, that would absolutely rule.

/pipe dream

just be an asshole like you want to be, and dont rely on a consensus of your internet pals to justify your behavior.

i mean, my god, its obvious thats what youre looking for.

Is an ID not like a poll tax?


A picture ID is a very important thing these days.

I can go to my state Department of Motor Vehicles, and get a non-driving picture ID for $13, with birth certificate and SSN.

$13? Hardly disenfranchisement.

Well first, let's make a distinction, you might respect people whose beliefs you find laughable. What I respect in a person is integrity, honesty, hard work, morals. And in particular I do respect people who have beliefs and have the strength to believe in something beyond themselves. Having faith in anything is something that demands a lot from a person, and I respect that.
Now, to answer your question, why wouldn't I respect someone else's views? I'm saying this because I've rushed into making judgments a few times, only to be proved wrong. I don't think I know enough about anything to go around disrespecting other people's beliefs or even worse, disrespecting people because of them.

I know I'm probably going to get flamed, but just for the purposes of accurate flaming, let me say I don't oppose science. I'm working towards a degree in math so I'm very rigorous in reasoning, etc. I just think matters of faith are by definition outside of the scope of things to which you may apply logic.

To answer the original question, no. People should earn respect, not demand respect merely because of some stupid, piddly little "faith" they have.

No.

(post char limit)

No, it shouldn't. No person of "faith" has ever respected my choice to be an Athiest, so why should I bother to respect these institutions of violence, intolerance, ignorance, paranoia, hypocrisy and hatred.

If you of a mind to need some sort of a belief in the supernatural to get you through the day, well whatever. Just keep it to yourself. I mean, if you think you're in the right, its pretty bad form to run around saying I'm better than you, na nana na na. It's annoying enough when a 5 year old cops that kind of attitude, and downright nauseating to see an adult go all schoolyard.

Should religion be respected?

Absolutely not, IMO. Religion is just a thing, and like any other tool or construct of man, is only as good as we as individuals make it. Respect is something that should be granted on said individual basis... as pointed out elsewhere... earned, not demanded or given at whim.

No.

They don't respect atheism, so their demands for respect should be met with the business end of a firearm.

no.

unless their muslim(if u dont respect they pull a jihad on you :p)

Only within the confines of the law. No making exceptions to the rules just to please them.

Simply, Yes. It should be, in the same way history should be respected, in the same way family customs are respected and in the same way a persons rights should be respected.

Should atheism be respected? I see no inherent difference between those questions.

I just want to see some other viewpoints on this...

Most of our lives we are taught to respect other people's beliefs and not to criticize them, etc. So this will, of course, conflict with that commonality. But anyway, from a purely scientific, no-bullshit point-of-view, all religion (being man-made) is false.

Now, should we respect the religions of the world when we know, for an absolute fact (technically an immeasurably small probability) that they are false? Should we respect someone who thinks the Earth is flat? Or that lightning is produced by Zeus?

Should religion be respected?

Please excuse any errors in syntax or lexicon due to my being fucked up.

We cannot, and do not know that religion is absolutely false. You can state that there is little to no evidence, and draw the conclusion that a higher being behind religion is incredibly unlikely, but you can't just outright say that it is false. Then again I don't beleive that you should ever definitively state that something cannot be done, I know that shit has a way of creeping up on you when you don't think it exists. So from there I would say, let people believe what they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, you never know when you might have to appeal to them in the hope they have a get out of jail/hell free card.

On another point, all beliefs effect how we react and interact with the world, and a religious belief is, in my mind, no differant from a belief in soul mates, inherent human good, human evil or magic. If we accept that beliefs are ideals or thoughts that change the way we act, then even atheism takes the role of a belief, as it effects the way we percive and partcipate in the world around us.

From there the only way one belief would ultimately deserve to be less respected, in my mind, is if it were inherently worse than other views. And the only judge of good or bad is from your own personal belief. So an atheist may judge a religious view as being weaker, but only because their belief is that there is no god, and so no point in religion. On the other handa relgious person will belive an atheist to be delude because their own world view shows them there IS a god.

Man.... I completely forgot where I was going with this....

I need to stop doing that.

Respect that which is respectable.

First of all, there is no "should" about it, that word--to me and mine, anyway--denotes some sort of moral imperative, some sort of need.

To quibble some more, it depends entirely on how one defines "respect." OP seems to be using the first definition I got in the on-line dictionary--"esteem" or "to feel or show deferential regard for." In that way, I think not. I have zero esteem for organized religion and the more oppressive nutcases who practice it.

On the other hand, there is the second definition-- "to avoid interference with." In that regard, I say yes, by all means. If my next-door neighbor wants to worship Satan, make blood sacrifices, or practice ritual cannibalism like the Christians do, I say fine--as long as he does it quietly and doesn't disturb my wa. On the other hand (yeah, I know, that makes three hands--sue me), if my neighbor wants to use ME as a sacrifice, then I will in fact interfere.

Loudly, and with deadly force.

I just want to see some other viewpoints on this...

So this will, of course, conflict with that commonality. But anyway, from a purely scientific, no-bullshit point-of-view, all religion (being man-made) is false.
Should religion be respected?

Please excuse any errors in syntax or lexicon due to my being fucked up.

No proof? You are just too much of an idiot aren't you?

Theres plenty of proof of religion and God.

Dinosaurs are referred to in several Bible books. The book of Job describes two dinosaurs, so theres proof.

The Bible also says that each star is unique.

1 Corinthians 15:41
There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.

All stars look alike to the naked eye. Even when seen through a telescope, they seem to be just points of light. However, analysis of their light spectra reveals that each is unique and different from all others. We understand that people can perceive some slight difference in color and apparent brightness when looking at stars with the naked eye, but we would not expect a person living in the first century A.D. to claim they differ from one another. So theres some proof.

The Bible describes the suspension of the Earth in space.

Job 26:7
He stretches out the north over empty space;
He hangs the earth on nothing.

So theres some proof.

The book of Leviticus (written prior to 1400 BC) describes the value of blood.

Leviticus 17:11
‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’

The blood carries water and nourishment to every cell, maintains the body’s temperature, and removes the waste material of the body’s cells. The blood also carries oxygen from the lungs throughout the body. In 1616, William Harvey discovered that blood circulation is the key factor in physical life—confirming what the Bible revealed 3,000 years earlier. So theres some proof.

You can jsut go fuck yourself and then get some education and then come back to me because YES YOU IGNORANT FUCK YOU HAVE TO RESPECT RELIGION.

But I do respect your right to post this thread.

You're really stretching it there.

Now I remember why I visit this board about once a year.

But anyway, from a purely scientific, no-bullshit point-of-view, all religion (being man-made) is false.

Nope. First off, science is man-made. Yes the phenomena usually being observed by scientists isn't necessarily man-made but the languages, theories, etc used to explore it are. Also, no self-respecting scientist jumps to conclusions and declares things as being one way or the other. Science uses theories, correlations, experiments, observations, etc to make sense of the world. It can often get very detailed and brought down to very basic levels but it's never really fact. The best way I can put this into an example is the science of Archaeology; archaeologists can never be sure if they've found the earliest settlements, or even know the full extent of a society they are studying because the only evidence they are given is what has been preserved and stood the test of time, theft, and destruction. There could be an entire civilization which was isolated, eventually destroyed, and never found or known about. That wouldn't make a scientist say it never existed, but that there isn't any evidence supporting it.

Second of all, not all religions have creation stories, deities, predictions, etc. In fact, there are religions that have a pretty good relationship with science, such as Hinduism and Buddhism (check out the studies on the effects of meditation on the brain). Also, not all religions are supposed to be taken literally.. it's strange how the sense of metaphor is lost on so many people. Allegory can be useful without being true, anthropomorphism can help humans relate to non-human concepts, etc.

Basically what you said is religious itself, you're claiming some divine knowledge that anything concerning the universe and spirituality thought up by man is false.

As for the topic's main question. I think religion should always be respected, but not always tolerated. Societies should protect themselves from harmful religions but retain a religious freedom at least on an individual level. A good example of why such practice is needed, is the Christian expansion. Their often forceful conversions terrorized pagan Europe, destroyed sacred sites, and put Western Civilization as a whole in the wrong direction (look where we are now, mindless consumerism). I think that indigenous religions should be protected. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Christianity should be abolished.. I just think the church shouldn't have been so corrupt (aside from all the conversion, there's the disgusting papacy). Christianity should have it's place in the world, in the middle east.. the home of Semitic cultures. This goes for all the Abrahamic religions, Islam being the biggest threat currently. Any religion which believes it should be followed by every single human is moronic.. eastern religions often speak of universal concepts, but there's very often an acceptance of other religions and not much of a push to convert everyone. In fact, most of the religions I have studied apart from the Abrahamic ones are pretty accepting toward other cultures. Eurasian pagans for instance often blended their different religions together, and learned from each other. A good area to see this in is the Mediterranean, where there was religious ideas being shared amongst Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, and cultures from Asia Minor. These sorts of religions were similar (save for some extreme or exotic cults), yet kept their distinctiveness even when borrowing from one another.

Basically the big problems with religion arise from their organization and misuse. The beliefs themselves are usually alright for their respective culture (ex: Egalitarianism works for Middle Eastern pastoralists and farmers, but not for European nomads). More problems arise when the Real strays further from the Ideal (ex: supposed equality, yet a church hierarchy).

Aside all this, I tend to dislike religions which deny nature, advocate exploitation of the earth, and cling to a belief in the after life (best example being "Heaven".. valhalla and nirvana are much different concepts).

I enjoyed your post zik.

I am an atheist who was raised half by jewish tradition (on my father's side so I'm not Jewish by heritage) and half by christian tradition. I enjoy studying and learning about other religions, shintoism, hinduism, etc and I understand that at one time these beliefs held true 100% to the time period. In the modern day, many of these traditions make little sense and in my mind are just good stories to explain things that no one could understand 1,000 years ago. Respect? Yes, respect would be nice but things that are esoteric by our standards wont get much. Too many cultural differences keep us from accepting and respecting what we dont understand. So respect would be nice but doubtful.

"We cannot, and do not know that religion is absolutely false. You can state that there is little to no evidence, and draw the conclusion that a higher being behind religion is incredibly unlikely, but you can't just outright say that it is false. Then again I don't beleive that you should ever definitively state that something cannot be done, I know that shit has a way of creeping up on you when you don't think it exists. So from there I would say, let people believe what they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, you never know when you might have to appeal to them in the hope they have a get out of jail/hell free card."

So just because somebody reads something in a book and decides "hey, that sounds good" we should respect that belief? Fuck that nonsense. People don't believe in other stupid things because there's no evidence for them either; why should God and all associated crap get a free pass?

It would be nice to just let the idiots to buy into religious garbage go about their business, but they NEVER DO. They always worm their way into government, never stopping until they dominate the society of their choice. Why do you think Christians cry prosecution when they effectively control the government of the United States?

Irrational shitheads DO NOT KEEP TO THEMSELVES. That is a serious problem. They pass their shit onto their children, who grow up believing that using only their fuzzy, ill-defined (and often badly understood) emotions to "understand" the world around them, and humanity as a whole pays the price for that stupidity.

It's the 21st century, we've put men on the fucking moon and heard the radio waves emitted by ignition of the Universe itself, I'll be damned if I'm going to sit here and "respect" some bronze age, goat-herding mythical bullshit just because "well, you can't prove it WRONG can ya?" Fuck that shit, and fuck anybody who can't wrap their pitiful little brains around the idea that THEY have to show US that what they believe has any merit.

I see no reason why religious beliefs should deserve any respect. Why should religious beliefs be held in higher regard than the belief that the earth is flat, or that the earth is the center of the universe?

Any and all ideas and beliefs should be subject to scrutiny. If the genuine facts do not support the belief/idea, the belief should be discarded.

Giving religion undue respect creates an environment for ignorance and intolerance to flourish.

I can concieve of nothing more frightening than a world controlled by those believeing in ancient superstions and a glorious afterlife, being empowered with modern nuclear weapons technology.

Theres plenty of proof of religion and God.


You can jsut go fuck yourself and then get some education and then come back to me because YES YOU IGNORANT FUCK YOU HAVE TO RESPECT RELIGION.

But I do respect your right to post this thread.


Of course there's "proof" of religion. Duh. Religion does exist. No one can deny that it exists. However just because someone says a supernatural entity exists don't make it so.

The so-called proof of god(s) cannot be based on an ad hominum argument.

And as for being an "ignorant fuck", no, I do not HAVE to respect religion, nor do I HAVE to put my left shoe on first.

Such is the typical response by those who believe in the supernatural, everyone HAS to do as they do.

I'll take my karma and run over your dogma.

Of course there's "proof" of religion. Duh. Religion does exist. No one can deny that it exists. However just because someone says a supernatural entity exists don't make it so.

The so-called proof of god(s) cannot be based on an ad hominum argument.

And as for being an "ignorant fuck", no, I do not HAVE to respect religion, nor do I HAVE to put my left shoe on first.

Such is the typical response by those who believe in the supernatural, everyone HAS to do as they do.

I'll take my karma and run over your dogma.

Dogma refers to religious beliefs not to be disputed. I dispute all of my beliefs, so I am not dogmatic. Of course to dispute you cannot simply say "well theres no proof the end" thats not how it works honey. And KARMA is the concept of "action" or "deed" in Indian religions, so I guess you are religious then if you believe in Karma, and if not, then you need to spend some more time making arguments to me, because that bit was pathetic.

""well theres no proof the end" thats not how it works honey."

That is how it works, you witless moron. There is no reason whatsoever to believe in the illogical nonsense that you and your ilk spew. Until you provide something that isn't composed of fallacies or outright falsehoods to back up your viewpoint, it's perfectly valid to call you on your shit.

If you have all this proof, then don't waste your time telling me or anyone else here, go submit your proof to the people who do the Nobel Prizes and become the biggest celebrity in human history. You'll have answered one of the most asked questions of all time.

But, you don't, do you? No, of course not. Because your "proof" isn't actually proof, it's the same bullshit every other religious fucknut has been blubbering about for 10,000 years. Guess what? We don't need that crap anymore. Humans have learned how to figure things out about the universe using reason and we shouldn't be making shit up anymore, like a 5 year old child starved for attention.

Grow up, you little bitch.

Should religion... should religion be re...
...
...
Fuck you.

But, you don't, do you? No, of course not. Because your "proof" isn't actually proof, it's the same bullshit every other religious fucknut has been blubbering about for 10,000 years. Guess what? We don't need that crap anymore. Humans have learned how to figure things out about the universe using reason and we shouldn't be making shit up anymore, like a 5 year old child starved for attention.

Grow up, you little bitch.

Oh, so I guess that you can explain how we came into existence then? Why there was nothing and then for no reason everything just went BANG for no apparent reason whatsoever and we came into existence? You can explain that?

I didn't think so. Shut the fuck up and go back to your parents basement.

Oh, so I guess that you can explain how we came into existence then? Why there was nothing and then for no reason everything just went BANG for no apparent reason whatsoever and we came into existence? You can explain that?

So I guess that you can explain how God came into existence then? And why he just went "poof" and made everything in the universe?

So I guess that you can explain how God came into existence then? And why he just went "poof" and made everything in the universe?

Nope. But as long as you can't prove GOD doesn't exist, then you can't prove GOD doesn't exist. Its that simple.

Even though I find religion bothersome as they almost always have something over them like: we are the chosen ones, or: our religion is the only true/right one.
Furthermore, I find religion annoying as it's usually limiting people's power to invent and think for themselves. That makes being human rather boring, it all depends on the guy above you.
Then religion is usually intolerant, it usually preaches hate against minorities.
All this surely doesn't make for a neat society.
As for the matter whether we should respect it, I think we should to some extent. Anyone is free to do and act as he/she wants as long as his/her actions don't hurt anyone else. Hurt is in this context anything unpleasant. I do think that we should be able to ridicule everything in life every now and then, so no exception for religions there. In Holland we have Hans Teeuwen, who is a comedian, and he put it as follows:"Everything must be ridiculed every now and then, as when you can't you'll get censorship and dictatorship which are all creepy. That religions (especially the islam) react so violently is ridiculous, for we live in a society with freedom of speech and every now and then you get insulted, but you get a thicker skin for that. And insults and riciculisations are not always untrue, they are very often too just truths one does not want to hear."

Concluding:
Religion should be respected as long as it does not hurt anybody else, and we should be able to ridicule it every now and then so that we keep this society free from censorship and tensions between religions and people.

Nope. But as long as you can't prove GOD doesn't exist, then you can't prove GOD doesn't exist. Its that simple.

What the fuck?
As long as you can't prove GOD exists, then you can't prove GOD exists. It's really that simple.

Occam's razor, bitch. If all of the knowledge and experiences we have collected throughout human history can be explained without the necessity of some god figure, then why should we believe in god? Without proof, evidence-- hell, even a logical argument to back it up-- you're just floating in the middle of the ocean and trying to persuade others to waste their intellectual processes by treading water with you.

"Oh, so I guess that you can explain how we came into existence then?"

I can't, you can't and nobody else can either. The big difference is that I'm perfectly comfortable going "Well, I don't know" whereas you see the need to make shit up about it. If anyone ever does figure out how and why the universe exists, it'll be because they reasoned their way to that point, not because they just "believed" their way there. Faith is not a tool for learning, it's a hindrance.

"Why there was nothing and then for no reason everything just went BANG for no apparent reason whatsoever and we came into existence? You can explain that?"

And you can? With your piddly little fairy tale bullshit from the Bronze Age? You've got a lot of nerve asking that question when all you can do is pull stories out of your ass in response.

"I didn't think so. Shut the fuck up and go back to your parents basement."

You're a pathetic little bitch that thinks he knows the answers to the universe's greatest mysteries, when in reality all you know is what somebody made up about it. Fiction, asshole. Pure fiction.

Of course believing in god leads to another question: how did god come into existence? As long as you can't answer that question religion is at least as implausible as the ID theory (which is complete and utter bullshit too) or the evolution theory. The latter at least has arguments as to how we came into existence.
So far religion only leads to more questions so believing in it means a lack of confidence in yourself, I don't mind, but don't start that shit that God created the earth and us (why would he? Why did he create us? All that sort of things are nice questions and no believer who could answer it).

Who created god, who created that which created god, who created that which created that which created god.



What created the big bang, what created that which created the big bang, what created that which created what created the big bang?


What is everything build of?
Atoms.

What are atoms made of? What are that which atoms are made of, made of?

etc etc etc...

Which also leads to perhaps a just as interesting question, why do we want to know?

I don' think it should be. If people beleive in something and I don't beleive in it they won't respect me so why should I respect them? Mostly all beleifs are flawed as it is and common sense rules them out.

I don' think it should be. If people believe in something and I don't beleive in it they won't respect me so why should I respect them? Mostly all beliefs are flawed as it is and common sense rules them out.

Good job generalizing that everyone who believes in something doesn't have any respect for anything else. Why don't you just go ahead and let your government rule your every move, and while your at it start buying up large amounts of Enron stock since your making such good choices and decisions today.

Ignorance is the cancer thats killing TOTSE.

You're a pathetic little bitch that thinks he knows the answers to the universe's greatest mysteries, when in reality all you know is what somebody made up about it. Fiction, asshole. Pure fiction.

Oh, so I guess blood being the essential life of the body is fiction? I guess that the fact that the Earth is suspended in space due to gravity of the sun is fiction? I guess that you like to curse at people because you think it makes you the WINNAR

The fact is that Religion exists because people are smart enough, at least most people are smart enough to ask "why?" and then, when they ask "Why?" they begin to search. They begin to ask questions. They begin to look for answers instead of just believing officer Bob and Mr. Joe the science teacher, who tell them to pay their taxes and wash peoples cars on Sunday and to do what the Government says because they're always right. They look for the answers to questions that can't be answered by man alone.

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO CONDEMN ANYTHING

What the fuck?
As long as you can't prove GOD exists, then you can't prove GOD exists. It's really that simple.

Occam's razor, bitch. If all of the knowledge and experiences we have collected throughout human history can be explained without the necessity of some god figure, then why should we believe in god? Without proof, evidence-- hell, even a logical argument to back it up-- you're just floating in the middle of the ocean and trying to persuade others to waste their intellectual processes by treading water with you.

It seems you can't see that it is a two way road. Read what I have already posted for truth. Read what I have already posted for evidence. You can read, can't you?

I don't think people actually respect religion.
They merely tolerate it.

No, it isn't a two way road. Until there is some form of evidence that leads me to believe there is a God-figure that has any interaction with our universe (the existence of a God that has no interaction in any way with our universe is obviously outside of the realm of evidence and logical discusson), I will continue to believe there is no God. If you can't see the stupidity in believing something solely based on faith--without even a kernel of evidence to suggest that there is even a question of question of its lack of existence-- than you are sorely in need of a kick in the ass.

you cant respect a religion if you dont believe it

Oh, so I guess blood being the essential life of the body is fiction?"

No, of course not. Invisible, omniscient omnipresent and all loving beings that created the universe are clearly fiction, because such a thing is self-contradictory and physically impossible.

"I guess that the fact that the Earth is suspended in space due to gravity of the sun is fiction?"

You like pointing out well established scientific facts, and then try to make it look like I'm disputing them; I don't know why you think that's a valid argument, because it's not. The fact that things exist and events happen also doesn't indicate that any god, much less yours, exists.

"I guess that you like to curse at people because you think it makes you the WINNAR"

I like colourful metaphors.

"The fact is that Religion exists because people are smart enough, at least most people are smart enough to ask "why?" and then, when they ask "Why?" they begin to search."

The only way that search has proven fruitful in any way is through the pursuit of the scientific method, which has provided more understanding of our universe than any previous system.

Pointing to ancient mythological texts and proclaiming them to be truth accomplishes nothing.

"They begin to ask questions. They begin to look for answers instead of just believing officer Bob and Mr. Joe the science teacher, who tell them to pay their taxes and wash peoples cars on Sunday and to do what the Government says because they're always right."

A healthy distrust of authority is always a good one, but there is no massive conspiracy by the scientific community to "keep you down." Indeed, throughout history the more that reason and science became accepted, the more the quality of life has improved.

"They look for the answers to questions that can't be answered by man alone."

You assert that this god thing exists without any solid evidence, and then you assert that it provides you with "answers." Logic (the thing that lets us understand shit) suggests that you're making it all up, consciously or not. There is no reason to believe that fairy tales are reality, and vague emotions, the product of chemical reactions in an imperfect creature's brain, do not count.


"YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO CONDEMN ANYTHING"

Religious irrationalism is undoubtedly one of the biggest propagators of needless suffering in human history, one needs only crack open a history textbook or even the Bible to see that. We don't need that kind of crap, quite simply, and the people that hang on to it (like you) exist solely as hurdles on the way to a better future, one free of irrational bigotry and a poor understanding of our world.

No, it isn't a two way road. Until there is some form of evidence that leads me to believe there is a God-figure that has any interaction with our universe (the existence of a God that has no interaction in any way with our universe is obviously outside of the realm of evidence and logical discusson), I will continue to believe there is no God. If you can't see the stupidity in believing something solely based on faith--without even a kernel of evidence to suggest that there is even a question of question of its lack of existence-- than you are sorely in need of a kick in the ass.

You didn't even read through this thread did you. Just taking something and not taking it for a whole is ignorance. I respect atheism, but I don't believe in it. Likewise, I know atheists who respect religion, so you can just continue living with a chip on your shoulder if you want, the world will keep on spinning.

No, of course not. Invisible, omniscient omnipresent and all loving beings that created the universe are clearly fiction, because such a thing is self-contradictory and physically impossible.
You like pointing out well established scientific facts, and then try to make it look like I'm disputing them; I don't know why you think that's a valid argument, because it's not. The fact that things exist and events happen also doesn't indicate that any god, much less yours, exists.
I like colourful metaphors.
The only way that search has proven fruitful in any way is through the pursuit of the scientific method, which has provided more understanding of our universe than any previous system.
Pointing to ancient mythological texts and proclaiming them to be truth accomplishes nothing.
A healthy distrust of authority is always a good one, but there is no massive conspiracy by the scientific community to "keep you down." Indeed, throughout history the more that reason and science became accepted, the more the quality of life has improved.
You assert that this god thing exists without any solid evidence, and then you assert that it provides you with "answers." Logic (the thing that lets us understand shit) suggests that you're making it all up, consciously or not. There is no reason to believe that fairy tales are reality, and vague emotions, the product of chemical reactions in an imperfect creature's brain, do not count.
Religious irrationalism is undoubtedly one of the biggest propagators of needless suffering in human history, one needs only crack open a history textbook or even the Bible to see that. We don't need that kind of crap, quite simply, and the people that hang on to it (like you) exist solely as hurdles on the way to a better future, one free of irrational bigotry and a poor understanding of our world.

Science has not improved the quality of life, science has lengthened life. The quality of life hasn't changed for thousands of years. People still work during a majority of the day, eat, then sleep. All that the "quality" you refer to is the population boom that has hit the planet, causing us growth and living space problems and the like.
I don't just point to mythological texts and proclaim them to be true. I read study and decide for myself. I don't proclaim. I don't decide that since I can't physically and tangibly prove something that it isn't true. Religion doesn't take faith, life does.

"Science has not improved the quality of life, science has lengthened life."

Every time someone comes up with a new mattress to make your sleep more comfortable, that's science. Every time someone comes up with a new painkiller to deal with your sinus headache, that's science. Every time someone designs a faster, more capable computer so you can communicate and learn throughout the world without leaving your chair, that's science. Every time someone designs a more reliable engine so you can drive, not walk to the store to grab a 24 of beer in the dead of winter safely, that's science.

Science has definitely improved the quality of life, and will continue to do so. Yes, our lives have also lengthened, but that's not always a bad thing.

"The quality of life hasn't changed for thousands of years."

I don't have to work myself every day herding sheep, and then freeze my ass off in a wooden shack at night. The quality of life is considerably higher than it was a thousand years ago. To say otherwise is completely absurd.

"People still work during a majority of the day, eat, then sleep."

Eating and sleeping aren't bad things, and of course there will always be room for improvement. Striving to make life better will always be a human cause.

"All that the "quality" you refer to is the population boom that has hit the planet, causing us growth and living space problems and the like."

So because people had more babies, we have central air in 40 degree heat during summer. That is clearly not the case.

Indeed, overpopulation is a serious problem in many parts of the word... a problem that only logic and reason (political bullshit not withstanding, sadly) has a chance of correcting. This is not counting the continuous interference of the Catholic Church with it's repeated attempts to shout down birth control and responsible sex.

"I don't just point to mythological texts and proclaim them to be true. I read study and decide for myself."

I can study various episodes of Star Trek all I like too, and that won't make them come true.

"I don't proclaim."

That's all you've been doing in this thread.

"I don't decide that since I can't physically and tangibly prove something that it isn't true."

You then go on to ignore the various evidence that something is totally fictional, however. Good game!

"Religion doesn't take faith, life does."

religion clearly does require faith, and your quaint little sound bite is so vague as to be meaningless. Again, you offer nothing of any value.

if there was proof of god then religion would not merely be religion. it would also be science. science is just that which is

no 'proof' of god's existence given in this thread (which amounts to pointing out three passages in the bible that - interpreted generously - correlate with scientific fact) is actual proof

this debate has been going on for thousands of years and you have not uncovered anything new. ask yourself if a scientist would be happy with your proof. and to say that something can not be proven or does not require proof is just a cop out. everything that is can be verified and if there is doubt as to the facts then proof is required

proof is a funny looking word

Every time someone comes up with a new mattress to make your sleep more comfortable, that's science. Every time someone comes up with a new painkiller to deal with your sinus headache, that's science. Every time someone designs a faster, more capable computer so you can communicate and learn throughout the world without leaving your chair, that's science. Every time someone designs a more reliable engine so you can drive, not walk to the store to grab a 24 of beer in the dead of winter safely, that's science.

Science has definitely improved the quality of life, and will continue to do so. Yes, our lives have also lengthened, but that's not always a bad thing.



I don't have to work myself every day herding sheep, and then freeze my ass off in a wooden shack at night. The quality of life is considerably higher than it was a thousand years ago. To say otherwise is completely absurd.



Eating and sleeping aren't bad things, and of course there will always be room for improvement. Striving to make life better will always be a human cause.



So because people had more babies, we have central air in 40 degree heat during summer. That is clearly not the case.

Indeed, overpopulation is a serious problem in many parts of the word... a problem that only logic and reason (political bullshit not withstanding, sadly) has a chance of correcting. This is not counting the continuous interference of the Catholic Church with it's repeated attempts to shout down birth control and responsible sex.



I can study various episodes of Star Trek all I like too, and that won't make them come true.



That's all you've been doing in this thread.



You then go on to ignore the various evidence that something is totally fictional, however. Good game!



religion clearly does require faith, and your quaint little sound bite is so vague as to be meaningless. Again, you offer nothing of any value.

none of that is science. All of that is engineering, which isn't science, its the act of abusing science for being lazy or having someone invade you. Nothing has changed in the last thousands of years. By your logic, Science as you say gave us the motor vehicle, and all that has done is made you move further to go to work. Science has given us vacuum cleaners, washing machines, dryers, and dishwashers. Well, housewives still spend most of the day cleaning houses. Like I said, it hasn't made the quality better, only the quantity.

Not that science is some monster, but you can't attribute science to making life good. That like saying the government is one person. MAN, as in people, have changed life. Not just through science. It is not the only part of the world, much as the hand is not the only part of the body. And you can't attribute it to life. Theres nothing absurd about it.

I see no evidence that religion is fictional. So far, no one has put any evidence in this thread to refute Religion. At all.

...I see no evidence that religion is fictional. So far, no one has put any evidence in this thread to refute Religion. At all.


OK. You want evidence that religion is fictional? Which religion would you prefer to have placed under the microscope of reason? It doesn't matter which one you choose to begin with, as they are all equally rediculous in their claims.

I think the basic rule was perfectly summed up by george carlin though 'Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself'.

Until this happens I will have to be a disrespectful prick to every single religious nut job out there who is offended by profane words and the naked human body.

none of that is science.
Really? Science isn't responsible for new painkillers, fast computers, the technology to mass market mattresses and come up with new materials that they're constructed of, etc?


Nothing has changed in the last thousands of years.
This might be the most idiotic thing ever said on this board. We've done away with diseases that killed and maimed millions of people. We can fly across the world in hours. We don't have to suffer with an infection of the root canal because a dentist can relatively painlessly take care of it. We don't have to go through the pain and agony of rabies because a quick trip to the emergency room and the infection is gone. A man who falls out of a tree and is going through the agonizing pain of having a broken femur can get a painkiller that works quickly and effectively, and then get a rod put in his leg to replace his shattered bone and have his life pretty much go back to normal which wouldn't be the case without modern medicine. I could go on all night. If anyone thinks that science isn't responsible for improving our quality of life, they're idiots in the first degree!



By your logic, Science as you say gave us the motor vehicle, and all that has done is made you move further to go to work.
Or getting a burn victim quickly to a hospital with a very specialized burn unit, etc. etc. etc.


Science has given us vacuum cleaners, washing machines, dryers, and dishwashers. Well, housewives still spend most of the day cleaning houses.
No, they don't. Try washing and drying your clothes without those devices and then tell me it took just as long.


I see no evidence that religion is fictional. So far, no one has put any evidence in this thread to refute Religion. At all.
And it's no one's job to do that. It's the one who makes the extraordinary claim that the burden of proof lies on. No one has disproved leprechauns or fairies either, but that's not a good reason to believe they exist.

Until this happens I will have to be a disrespectful prick to every single religious nut job out there who is offended by profane words and the naked human body.

HEY, I enjoy curse words and naked women. Just not as much on the Sabbath.

Really? Science isn't responsible for new painkillers, fast computers, the technology to mass market mattresses and come up with new materials that they're constructed of, etc?



This might be the most idiotic thing ever said on this board. We've done away with diseases that killed and maimed millions of people. We can fly across the world in hours. We don't have to suffer with an infection of the root canal because a dentist can relatively painlessly take care of it. We don't have to go through the pain and agony of rabies because a quick trip to the emergency room and the infection is gone. A man who falls out of a tree and is going through the agonizing pain of having a broken femur can get a painkiller that works quickly and effectively, and then get a rod put in his leg to replace his shattered bone and have his life pretty much go back to normal which wouldn't be the case without modern medicine. I could go on all night. If anyone thinks that science isn't responsible for improving our quality of life, they're idiots in the first degree!




Or getting a burn victim quickly to a hospital with a very specialized burn unit, etc. etc. etc.



No, they don't. Try washing and drying your clothes without those devices and then tell me it took just as long.





I like the fact that your taking what I have been saying out of context. I said that everything you described was not only thanks to science. Good of you to take that bit out of the quote.

And how do you figure that changes have occurred between now and the dawn of civilization? Yes, we have flying machines and they didn't, yes we have breakthroughs in medicine that they did not posses, BUT, just as it was way back when, we still work 8 to 10 to 12 hours a day. we still carry on the tradition of monetary units, taxes, ect. ect. We still do that today. Houskeeping still takes all day, cooking, cleaning, and the like, just as it did in the past. And in THAT ASPECT, nothing has changed.

But go ahead, chop up my words and see what you want to see.

And that bit about
And it's no one's job to do that. It's the one who makes the extraordinary claim that the burden of proof lies on. No one has disproved leprechauns or fairies either, but that's not a good reason to believe they exist.

well you did say


You then go on to ignore the various evidence that something is totally fictional, however.

Hm. Well isn't this funny. There's various evidence proving religion is false, something you apparently strongly believe in, and yet you don't want to bring to the table because you shouldn't have to? The IS a religious forum or lack thereof, isn't it? And with no sarcasm I am open to any information you have to share.

I like the fact that your taking what I have been saying out of context. I said that everything you described was not only thanks to science. Good of you to take that bit out of the quote.
Oh, cut your bullshit. You said that ""Science has not improved the quality of life", you said that painkillers and computers are engineering and not science and nothing has changed in the last thousands of years.

And how do you figure thatchanges have occurred between now and the dawn of civilization?
I think I explained that.


Yes, we have flying machines and they didn't, yes we have breakthroughs in medicine that they did not posses, BUT, just as it was way back when, we still work 8 to 10 to 12 hours a day.
So? You come up with something that supposedly hasn't changed as evidence that nothing has changed? You really think that flies?


we still carry on the tradition of monetary units, taxes, ect. ect. We still do that today.
Irrelevant. That does not wash away the great strides we've made in science. We use money and pay taxes because it's a system that works.




Houskeeping still takes all day, cooking, cleaning, and the like, just as it did in the past. And in THAT ASPECT, nothing has changed.
Bullshit! Meat is pre-butchered. Foods are kept fresh in refrigerators and with preserving methods. Washing clothes takes no physical effort. Stoves and ovens light instantly. Microwaves heat food quickly. Sanitized running water at the turn of a knob makes things a cinch. Funny how you are now saying "in THAT ASPECT, nothing has changed". Some things are similar. So what? Claiming that "Science has not improved the quality of life" is beyond idiotic. Try breaking your femur and seeing if modern science doesn't improve your quality of life. Get a fucking clue!



well you did say


Hm. Well isn't this funny.
You're quoting me on something someone else said, dumbass.

Oh, cut your bullshit. You said that ""Science has not improved the quality of life", you said that painkillers and computers are engineering and not science and nothing has changed in the last thousands of years.


I think I explained that.



So? You come up with something that supposedly hasn't changed as evidence that nothing has changed? You really think that flies?



Irrelevant. That does not wash away the great strides we've made in science. We use money and pay taxes because it's a system that works.





Bullshit! Meat is pre-butchered. Foods are kept fresh in refrigerators and with preserving methods. Washing clothes takes no physical effort. Stoves and ovens light instantly. Microwaves heat food quickly. Sanitized running water at the turn of a knob makes things a cinch. Funny how you are now saying "in THAT ASPECT, nothing has changed". Some things are similar. So what? Claiming that "Science has not improved the quality of life" is beyond idiotic. Try breaking your femur and seeing if modern science doesn't improve your quality of life. Get a fucking clue!



You're quoting me on something someone else said, dumbass.

Well lets keep going around the marry go round.
You need to take a chill pill friend. Your getting all uptight and its for no good reason except that your frustrated that I am not agreeing with you. Get over it. I could rebuttal with the fact that you just said the same thing to the same thing that I said to what you said previously, which would be true and faster then me typing a reply to everything that you just said in reply to what I said about what you said to what I said, and then you would reply to what I said about the rebuttal you made to the reply I made about what you said to what I said. And then the thread would be seen as a farce and probably get closed.

But, I know what I said and I know there are those who would agree with me here. Likewise you know what you said and that there are those who would agree with you here. And now we are only arguing over semantics and we have deviated from the topic which is "should religion be respected" And I say yes it should.

He is getting uptight b/c you made a bold and completely foolish, ultimatly wrong statement that you still seem to stand by. You said science is not responsible for an improved quality of life.

I will warn you. If you make such obviously wrong statements and stick by them without any semblance of proof you make an athiests argument for him regarding the folly that is the religious mind.

Again, in regards to respecting religion, I will respect those religions that respect my right as a secular humanist. This includes, not telling me watching porn is evil, not preaching about the evils fags, telling me I will rot in hell, or fucking up a perfectly good movie on comedy central by censoring those profane words.

I know this post has already been responded to by others (and they did a fantastic job), but I'm somewhat bored and feeling like refuting the stupid.

"none of that is science. All of that is engineering, which isn't science, its the act of abusing science for being lazy or having someone invade you."

Not only is that factually incorrect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering) but the rest of that sentence doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

"Nothing has changed in the last thousands of years."

I suggest you pick up a history book and start reading. Lots and LOTS of stuff has changed in the past couple thousand years.

"By your logic, Science as you say gave us the motor vehicle, and all that has done is made you move further to go to work."

Yes, science gave us the motor vehicle, which does one hell of a lot more than make us "move further to go to work." It lets us build ambulances to save lives, and power medical equipment, and spend days out in the countryside when before such a trip would have been impossible inside of a day.

"Science has given us vacuum cleaners, washing machines, dryers, and dishwashers. Well, housewives still spend most of the day cleaning houses."

Um, no. Unless you live in a huge house it won't take all day to clean up if you don't leave shit everywhere. Thanks to dishwashers and washing machines, we can go off and do other things while our plates and clothes are cleaned, whereas before that would have been hours and hours wasted. I don't think you understand just how good we have it now thanks to the advances of technology.

"Like I said, it hasn't made the quality better, only the quantity."

Hey, guess what? I'd be dead if it weren't for medical science. Science we didn't have a thousand years ago. I'd say that's a significant improvement. I also get to recover without significant physical pain thanks to that same science.

"Not that science is some monster, but you can't attribute science to making life good. That like saying the government is one person. MAN, as in people, have changed life."

Much of that change has come about because someone figured out how to do something better (and thusly make life easier) through science.

"Not just through science. It is not the only part of the world, much as the hand is not the only part of the body. And you can't attribute it to life. Theres nothing absurd about it."

Everything you've said is completely absurd, as myself and others have completely refuted each and every one of your idiotic points.

"I see no evidence that religion is fictional. So far, no one has put any evidence in this thread to refute Religion. At all."

Burden of proof, you idiot. You're the one claiming that you childish nonsense is real; you have to prove that to US and so far all you've managed to do is make yourself look like an idiot.

God is supposedly omniscient, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent. However, there is needless suffering in the world. Either God does not possess one or more of these qualities (so why call him God?) or he's not there. End, motherfucker.

I know this post has already been responded to by others (and they did a fantastic job), but I'm somewhat bored and feeling like refuting the stupid.
Not only is that factually incorrect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering) but the rest of that sentence doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
I suggest you pick up a history book and start reading. Lots and LOTS of stuff has changed in the past couple thousand years.
Yes, science gave us the motor vehicle, which does one hell of a lot more than make us "move further to go to work." It lets us build ambulances to save lives, and power medical equipment, and spend days out in the countryside when before such a trip would have been impossible inside of a day
Um, no. Unless you live in a huge house it won't take all day to clean up if you don't leave shit everywhere. Thanks to dishwashers and washing machines, we can go off and do other things while our plates and clothes are cleaned, whereas before that would have been hours and hours wasted. I don't think you understand just how good we have it now thanks to the advances of technolog
Hey, guess what? I'd be dead if it weren't for medical science. Science we didn't have a thousand years ago. I'd say that's a significant improvement. I also get to recover without significant physical pain thanks to that same science.
Much of that change has come about because someone figured out how to do something better (and thusly make life easier) through science.
Everything you've said is completely absurd, as myself and others have completely refuted each and every one of your idiotic points.
Burden of proof, you idiot. You're the one claiming that you childish nonsense is real; you have to prove that to US and so far all you've managed to do is make yourself look like an idiot.
God is supposedly omniscient, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent. However, there is needless suffering in the world. Either God does not possess one or more of these qualities (so why call him God?) or he's not there. End, motherfucker.

YOU need to stop focusing on all of the small things that happened to the world in these thousands of years and look at the big picture, which none of you self-righteous ignorant people can see. If we were to really be considered advanced, we would have no money, no taxing, no need for government, or people to corrupt the government, and then no people to overthrow the corrupted government. Yet throughout history that has been the cycle. Someone takes control, they take a wrong turn, everyone gets pissed, someone overthrows them, and so on and so fourth. Either that or some mass catastrophic event.


Your looking at the advances in technology and nothing else, cars and medicines and such. OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES. Ignore what relatively insignificant changes there are and look at what stays the same. We still work just as we did thousands of years ago. It doesn't matter how, it doesn't matter that there are machines to do the work, because who has to design the machines? People. Who has to spend time creating the hardware? People. The software? People. Who has to run the factories that make the machines? People. Who ships them? People. All that technology you seem to think makes the world so much drastically different changes almost nothing because people still have to work to make it happen. science doesn't make life easier, it makes it more complicated. Haven't you ever heard of entropy, one of the very bits of science you so unhesitatingly blab about. the second law of thermodynamics says that all energy is growing increasingly kinetic and spontaneously tends to flow only from being concentrated in one place to becoming diffused or dispersed and spread out. It is increasing and increasing and increasing. That is the only change.

If you thought about any of this before opening your mouth to make a premature rebuttle, most likely you would get an aneurysm and blood would spurt from your nose, but I'll say more anyway. I believe and do not force upon anyone that does not force anything upon me, and I live by that we deserve what we have. The joys and the sorrows. The life and the rot and all that that encompasses. so before you go again and get worked up over your little self crisis, try to show some fucking decency.