Stop Shoving Christianity Down My Throat

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

You made a statement that "God, or belief in God are in no way, shape or form essential components of human morality" Your statement is all inclusive and therefore wrong because belief in God is essential for some people. Do you really believe that no one on the face of the earth believes that God is essential for morality? And since there is, your statement is wrong as it does not apply to them. And what makes your beliefs any more right than theirs? All I was saying is speak for you and not for me and others and I will do the same. Again, my previous statement stands.

Ermm what are you actually trying to say? That belief in God (your god) is essential for morality or that only for some people? But you agree that for most people religious dogma is not required for morality? Is that correct?

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Down your throats? No, I dont think so. Since so much time is spent trying to remove religion from everything it just seems that way. Reason? that is easy. It threatens some people. Why? Cause they want to do what they want to do with no guilt. Morality is prickely......

What utter utter uneducated rubbish,,.,,,,

First you couldn’t be more wrong; even if you tried… it has nothing to do with morality… in fact I tell you what, point me to a study (peer reviewed of course) that shows Atheist and Agnostics behave any less morally the religious believers.. WHERE did I speak of either of these???

Since us Atheist lack any morale compass, then we would just ignore the drowning child, or fallen elderly person!!!!!!Again, I am not speaking of Atheists for Christ sake. Get a grip. I was speaking only of activists in the governement sense. shhheeeesh

Also lets just for a moment ignore the inconvenient fact that religion has led people to commit a long litany of horrendous crimes from God’s command to Moses to slaughter the Midianites, men, women,boys and non-virginal girls, through the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Thirty Years War, innumerable conflicts between Sunni and Shiite moslems, and terrorists who blow themselves up in the confident belief that they are going straight to paradise. Is this the morale code that we should teach our children?? Are you so insecure in your position you have to go into this crap and say things I never spoke of?

Also it is shown that certain elements of morality are universal across all religious belief systems with doctrinal differences, including cultures such as China where philosophical outlooks are more prevalent then religion. One view is that a divine creator handed us the universal bits at the moment of creation. The alternative, consistent with the facts of biology and geology, is that we have evolved, over millions of years, a moral faculty that generates intuitions about right and wrong.While this may be true once again this is not even close to my point

Any way back to the initial point, Religious fanaticism in all its forms leads inevitably to bigotry, hatred, and, too often, violent confrontations. That foremost is the main reason I would like to see it removed. Fanaticism comes from both sides. Is it to that that I speak. Activits use the courts to push thier point of view. Why are they so insecure? Why do they want to change years of tradition? Nothing was evolving the other way now it has turned into those that do believe having to defend themselves from the radicals who want no reference at all. Again, why?

Humanity's next leap will be when we rid ourselves of god, entirely. If Marx is hated, especially today, for anything at all, it may be because he was willing to take the one step toward human intellectual evolution by writing, "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."Oh, now I get it. bye

So I think we all need to ponder for a moment and follow John lennon wise advise…

“Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today”

Oh how painfull can this be... ok keep it simle this time.. you indicated that your belief is that people want to try and get rid of religion because then we will have no morality issues and we can all do what we want. This indicates that you seem to believe morality and religion are somewhat hand in hand... I simple stated and showed you that this is crap... we can all live quite morally without some all seeing skygod watching us.....

Ok, I think we are talking past each other and I see your point. Here is mine more specifically.

Religion is not the issue, morality is. I say this now in the context of the whole church and state debate OK?

My point is, because many equivocate religion and morality they want to get rid of religion. Not because of religion but because of morality. (I am not saying morality is the property of religion here and I never would, and in essence I agree with some of what you were saying)

So, religion is attacked.

Now, morality is part of religious belief and I feel that it is for THAT reason many try to get religion out of any public place and why many are so intimidated by it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[MikeForsythe 0]

Okay, I went and got my granddaughters big crayons... What I am saying is don't make a statement that includes everyone on the face of the earth.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Royd 0]

Isn't it funny that you never have to teach a child to do wrong?

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

So now your saying that morality is taught? Which would mean it has nothing to do with an innate god-given sense of right and wrong? And since it is possible to teach a child right and wrong without recourse to the big guy in the sky, then I am not exactly sure where you think this leaves the rest of your argument?

That's correct, and that's what the Bible teaches. If you're honest, you'll admit that any manners or morality that you possess, came from a higher power, i.e. parents, grandparents, or authority figure of some kind. You didn't figure out all on your own, that it's wrong to eat all of the cookies and leave your brother with none. Just postulating.

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

You made a statement that "God, or belief in God are in no way, shape or form essential components of human morality" Your statement is all inclusive and therefore wrong because belief in God is essential for some people. Do you really believe that no one on the face of the earth believes that God is essential for morality? And since there is, your statement is wrong as it does not apply to them. And what makes your beliefs any more right than theirs? All I was saying is speak for you and not for me and others and I will do the same. Again, my previous statement stands.

No, it doesn't. You really have missed the point.

If belief in God is an essential component of Human morality then (pay attention to the important bit here) no human would be able to be moral without belief in God. I am a human that is (quite often) moral without belief in God. Therefore I do disprove the statement that belief in God is an essential component for Human morality. Now, some individual people somewhere may need belief in God to keep them moral (and personally I would find that a very scary thought) but that still does not change the fact that belief in God is not an essential component of Human morality.

In a nutshell - "Belief in God is essential to Human morality" is a universal statement. The single example of me is enough to disprove that statement. Therefore belief in God is not an essential component of human morality because humans can be moral without belief in God. Doesn't matter if not all humans can be moral without belief, my statement still holds true.

If this was your only objection then I'm sorry, it's your reading that's wrong, not my writing.

Oh, and as an aside - "Do you really believe that no one on the face of the earth believes that God is essential for morality?" - Your sentance (or logic) structure is wrong. Just because other people on earth believe that belief in God is essential to their being moral doesn't mean it actually is essential to their being moral. The two issues (their belief, and the truth) are seperate.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Royd 0]

Quote

Lets not forget probably the most well know Secular charity group The RED CROSS

I guess they could have called it the red dot. Hmmm....

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Isn't it funny that you never have to teach a child to do wrong?

Quote

And God-fearing parents have to teach their children just the same as athiests do.

You just said that some of us don't need the external teaching of good manners. I'd say those people are the execption, and few and far between.

No. That's not what I said. I said some people don't need external "enforcement" of basic good manners. IOW, we don't all need some god setting our limits for us. Sure we learn how to behave as children, and many people internalize what they learn and don't require the fear of god to keep 'em in line or to know what's right and wrong. Morality is not dependent on religious beliefs.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

If you're honest, you'll admit that any manners or morality that you possess, came from a higher power, i.e. parents, grandparents, or authority figure of some kind. You didn't figure out all on your own, that it's wrong to eat all of the cookies and leave your brother with none. Just postulating.

A lot, but not all. Like all animals we were born with some instincts.

Aside from that, though - no, I didn't figure it out all on my own, a lot was taught to me. It was taught to me by people who learned from people who learned from people.

Funny thing though, go back down that chain even 50 years or so and you can bet that what was taught to my parents is not what my parents taught me. When they were adults they used their powers of independent thought to evaluate what they had been taught and to alter and reimplement as they saw fit.

You can see a similar progression in scientific, mathematic, and engineering thought. You can see where adults have thought critically, made advances and then passed those advances down to the next generation. Now - with science, maths, engineering etc we all accept that the totality of our knowledge on the subject has been the product of our ancestors applying critical thinking and coming up with solutions.

Why do you not think that this can have been the case in the evoloution of morality? Why does it seem impossible to you that, starting with our communal ape instincts, humanity gradually developed, through its own collective ingenuity, laws of social conduct and learned moral behaviour that progressed as we developed?

BTW: I was overly aggressive earlier. I'm sorry for that.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Royd 0]

Quote

guilt (and morality) can exist within a person who in no way whatsoever believes in God.

So guilt can exist within a human being without any question of its existance, but faith has to be picked apart and brought to nought?

I believe that is one of the underlying purposes of psychiatry. To remove guilt from the human phsyche.

[rushmc 18]

I would say that morality is not owned by religion but, it IS defined by it........for the most part.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

Quote

guilt (and morality) can exist within a person who in no way whatsoever believes in God.

So guilt can exist within a human being without any question of its existance, but faith has to be picked apart and brought to nought?

People can experience faith, just as people can experience guilt - it's an emotion contained within the mind.

It is the external object of faith (god) that comes into question.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

I would say that morality is not owned by religion but, it IS defined by it........for the most part.

I disagree completely, but no surprise there. Morality is defined by how our actions affect other people. Don't need the guy in the sky to figure out if you're helping or hurting someone.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[MikeForsythe 0]

I highly recommend English 101. As for your statement "Your sentance (or logic) structure is wrong." all I can say is you need to learn what a question is?

My post stands; you do not speak factually for all humanity.

P.S. You might want to learn how to spell sentence before you judge it.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

I would say that morality is not owned by religion but, it IS defined by it........for the most part.

I disagree completely, but no surprise there. Morality is defined by how our actions affect other people. Don't need the guy in the sky to figure out if you're helping or hurting someone.

Didnt say that you did but, In todays world our morality is defined by religion. That is where those rules come from and are defined, whether you like it our not.

Again, I am not saying religion is the owner of morality, but it is defined by it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Don't need the guy in the sky to figure out if you're helping or hurting someone.

So now you are acknowledging a God that you say does not exist? By the way, that was a rhetorical question so please don't bother replying.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[juanesky 0]

Quote

So I think we all need to ponder for a moment and follow John lennon wise advise…

“Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today”

While you ponder about John Lennon, you need to add a couple of lines that he should have included in its original version:

"Imagine a father taking care of all his children,
Unlike I do...."

Do you think for a moment because Lennon was a famous singer-composer-musician, he was actually any moral authority to say how we should do things? A guy that when he makes famous abandons women and children, his own, mind you, and then pretends to be someone of ulterior morality?

Give me a break.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

Lets not forget probably the most well know Secular charity group The RED CROSS

I guess they could have called it the red dot. Hmmm....

When I no nothing about a subject I often find it helpful to do a little research before making a statement, that way I don’t look stupid…

[A]ccording to the American Red Cross website, it was “n honor of the Swiss ... [that] the symbol of a red cross on a white background (the reverse of the Swiss flag) was identified as a protective emblem in conflict areas.” While the cross on the Swiss flag originated in the 1200s from “a symbol of the Christian faith,” according to the Swiss Embassy in the United States, the Red Cross makes no mention of Christianity as a reason for adopting the symbol. .

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[Royd 0]

You can see a similar progression in scientific, mathematic, and engineering thought. You can see where adults have thought criticall, made advances and then passed those advances down to the next generation. Now - with science, maths, engineering etc we all accept that the totality of our knowledge on the subject has been the product of our ancestors applying critical thinking and coming up with solutions.

Quote

Why do you not think that this can have been the case in the evloution of morality? why does it seem imposible to you that, starting with a our communal ape instincts, humanity gradually developed, through its own collective ingenuity, laws of social conduct and learned moral behaviour that progressed as we developed?

By your hypothesis, through the thousands or hundreds of thousands of years that humans have existed, by the law of evolution, we should all be living in a virtual paradise by now.
Sadly, each generation, in order to be kept from turning into a bunch of lawless hoodllums, needs the proverbial parental smackdown. Kind of blows the evolutionary progress of goodness out of the water.

It fits much better with the Biblical formula.

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Didnt say that you did but, In todays world our morality is defined by religion. That is where those rules come from and are defined, whether you like it our not.

Again, I am not saying religion is the owner of morality, but it is defined by it.

So where do animals get there morality from, last time I was at the zoo I didnt notice any of the tigers reading the bible!!

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[Royd 0]

Quote

BTW: I was overly aggressive earlier. I'm sorry for that.

It's OK. Guilt is a wonderful thing.

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

I highly recommend English 101. As for your statement "Your sentance (or logic) structure is wrong." all I can say is you need to learn what a question is?

If you think the question is relevant then your logic really is wrong. The question of "Do I think people believe that God is essential etc." is a non-sequitur. Even if you were right about my original sentence structure indicating that belief in god is essential the question of yours that I queried does not logically follow. It is irrelevant.

Quote

My post stands; you do not speak factually for all humanity.

So? My statement did not indicate that I did. All it takes is for one human to not need belief and be moral for the statement "Belief in god is not essential for human morality" to be true. You have simply not shown this to be otherwise - because you're wrong, and it isn't.

Quote

P.S. You might want to learn how to spell sentence before you judge it.

Well that's the first thing you've got right today.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Didnt say that you did but, In todays world our morality is defined by religion. That is where those rules come from and are defined, whether you like it our not.

Again, I am not saying religion is the owner of morality, but it is defined by it.

So where do animals get there morality from, last time I was at the zoo I didnt notice any of the tigers reading the bible!!

Now animals have morals?????

It over now

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[MikeForsythe 0]

Thank you for making my point.

Off to the next one

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Royd 0]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


guilt (and morality) can exist within a person who in no way whatsoever believes in God.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So guilt can exist within a human being without any question of its existance, but faith has to be picked apart and brought to nought?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

People can experience faith, just as people can experience guilt - it's an emotion contained within the mind.

It is the external object of faith (god) that comes into question.

So you do not deny that faith exists within the human phsyche? You just have a probem with the object of this faith?

My understanding is that science pooh-poohs the idea of faith, as if it's some kind of evolutionary dross.

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

By your hypothesis, through the thousands or hundreds of thousands of years that humans have existed, by the law of evolution, we should all be living in a virtual paradise by now.

Not at all. Just because we have developed great theories of morality doesn't mean we've figured out how to get everyone to live by them. Similarly, although we've developed incredibly complex mathematics, some people still have to stop when they run out of fingers.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?