|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197
A study using census data from nine countries shows that religion there is set for extinction, say researchers.
The study found a steady rise in those claiming no religious affiliation.
The team's mathematical model attempts to account for the interplay between the number of religious respondents and the social motives behind being one.
The result, reported at the American Physical Society meeting in Dallas, US, indicates that religion will all but die out altogether in those countries.
The team took census data stretching back as far as a century from countries in which the census queried religious affiliation: Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Switzerland.
Nonlinear dynamics is invoked to explain a wide range of physical phenomena in which a number of factors play a part.
One of the team, Daniel Abrams of Northwestern University, put forth a similar model in 2003 to put a numerical basis behind the decline of lesser-spoken world languages.
At its heart is the competition between speakers of different languages, and the "utility" of speaking one instead of another.
"The idea is pretty simple," said Richard Wiener of the Research Corporation for Science Advancement, and the University of Arizona.
"It posits that social groups that have more members are going to be more attractive to join, and it posits that social groups have a social status or utility.
"For example in languages, there can be greater utility or status in speaking Spanish instead of [the dying language] Quechuan in Peru, and similarly there's some kind of status or utility in being a member of a religion or not."
Some of the census data the team used date from the 19th century
Dr Wiener continued: "In a large number of modern secular democracies, there's been a trend that folk are identifying themselves as non-affiliated with religion; in the Netherlands the number was 40%, and the highest we saw was in the Czech Republic, where the number was 60%."
The team then applied their nonlinear dynamics model, adjusting parameters for the relative social and utilitarian merits of membership of the "non-religious" category.
They found, in a study published online, that those parameters were similar across all the countries studied, suggesting that similar behaviour drives the mathematics in all of them.
And in all the countries, the indications were that religion was headed toward extinction.
However, Dr Wiener told the conference that the team was working to update the model with a "network structure" more representative of the one at work in the world.
"Obviously we don't really believe this is the network structure of a modern society, where each person is influenced equally by all the other people in society," he said.
However, he told BBC News that he thought it was "a suggestive result".
"It's interesting that a fairly simple model captures the data, and if those simple ideas are correct, it suggests where this might be going.
"Obviously much more complicated things are going on with any one individual, but maybe a lot of that averages out."
I just wanted post yay! and end it there. But I'm truly glad that Australia was included in that list. Frankly I'm suprised that such a list can actually exist. Will religion ever disappear? Probably not, but small steps towards something cannot be a bad thing.
What do you guys think? How do you feel about your country being/not being listed? Religion is a touchy subject but it is one the definitely needs to be discussed.
|
Hmm, I'm not suprised Canada is on that list.
Personally I think it's a good thing, in the modern world I just don't feel it plays such an important role. It will lower religious conflicts and I just believe it's not something necessary anymore.
Crazy to think that 500 years ago religion controlled much of the world - and now it's turning into this.
|
This thread cant go well.
|
^ Same, as a canadian, here's to hoping. (Though religion threads will usually get shut down)
|
On March 23 2011 10:28 Skillz_Man wrote:
Hmm, I'm not suprised Canada is on that list.
Personally I think it's a good thing, in the modern world I just don't feel it plays such an important role. It will lower religious conflicts and I just believe it's not something necessary anymore.
Crazy to think that 500 years ago religion controlled much of the world - and now it's turning into this.
I'm kind of wondering why Canada would be there and not the US with its "separation of church and state". I guess it's more a cultural thing than legal.
|
Hyrule19014 Posts
Religion is a scourge and I'm glad it's suggested it's going to die out (as this is only a suggestion). The US is full of nutjobs, and a lot of those nutjubs also tend to be religious. Coincidence? Probably. But nobody has ever let that stop them from using such an argument.
|
I wish my country were listed (the united states) but certain people here would gladly welcome a theocracy. Just recently we had legislation being run through the house of reps to confirm the "Under God" portion of the pledge of allegiance.
On March 23 2011 10:30 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:28 Skillz_Man wrote:
Hmm, I'm not suprised Canada is on that list.
Personally I think it's a good thing, in the modern world I just don't feel it plays such an important role. It will lower religious conflicts and I just believe it's not something necessary anymore.
Crazy to think that 500 years ago religion controlled much of the world - and now it's turning into this. I'm kind of wondering why Canada would be there and not the US with its "separation of church and state". I guess it's more a cultural thing than legal.
The US is easily one of the most religious western nations. It isn't about separation of church and state it about separation of church and mind.
|
I'm really happy to see Finland on the list, as in my opinion religion doesn't really belong to a modern, civilized society.
|
On March 23 2011 10:29 TheRhox wrote:
This thread cant go well.
I'll be interested to see some of these comments.
|
On March 23 2011 10:24 TMStarcraft wrote:
I just wanted post yay! and end it there. But I'm truly glad that Australia was included in that list. Frankly I'm suprised that such a list can actually exist. Will religion ever disappear? Probably not, but small steps towards something cannot be a bad thing.
What do you guys think? How do you feel about your country being/not being listed? Religion is a touchy subject but it is one the definitely needs to be discussed.
While you certainly have the right to your opinion, the rhetoric used here seems like it will start a flame war.
After all, we're not here to bash religion, are we?
On the article, horribly worded. Religion will never go extinct. It may have gone down in certain regions. Will it lower its prevalance in, say, the middle east? Or a large portion of America? Probably not. Beliefs are passed down from generation to generation, and in these regions, not being religiously affiliated makes one a pariah to an extent.
Btw, I'm lutheran, and won't renounce my beliefs. Ever.
Also, I'm expecting a lot of red text in this thread in a few moments.
|
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth.
|
Congratulations to those countries 
I wonder if it's becoming less religious here in America too. I'm pretty sure that the number of non-theists (agnostics, atheists, etc.) has been increasing, although we have a loooong way to go before we're truly a secularist country, let alone rid of religion entirely.
|
"God is dead" -Nietzsche, 1882
"Hell, it's about time" -Starcraft 2, 2010
|
On March 23 2011 10:24 TMStarcraft wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197Show nested quote +A study using census data from nine countries shows that religion there is set for extinction, say researchers.
The study found a steady rise in those claiming no religious affiliation.
The team's mathematical model attempts to account for the interplay between the number of religious respondents and the social motives behind being one.
The result, reported at the American Physical Society meeting in Dallas, US, indicates that religion will all but die out altogether in those countries.
The team took census data stretching back as far as a century from countries in which the census queried religious affiliation: Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Switzerland.
Nonlinear dynamics is invoked to explain a wide range of physical phenomena in which a number of factors play a part.
One of the team, Daniel Abrams of Northwestern University, put forth a similar model in 2003 to put a numerical basis behind the decline of lesser-spoken world languages.
At its heart is the competition between speakers of different languages, and the "utility" of speaking one instead of another.
"The idea is pretty simple," said Richard Wiener of the Research Corporation for Science Advancement, and the University of Arizona.
"It posits that social groups that have more members are going to be more attractive to join, and it posits that social groups have a social status or utility.
"For example in languages, there can be greater utility or status in speaking Spanish instead of [the dying language] Quechuan in Peru, and similarly there's some kind of status or utility in being a member of a religion or not."
Some of the census data the team used date from the 19th century
Dr Wiener continued: "In a large number of modern secular democracies, there's been a trend that folk are identifying themselves as non-affiliated with religion; in the Netherlands the number was 40%, and the highest we saw was in the Czech Republic, where the number was 60%."
The team then applied their nonlinear dynamics model, adjusting parameters for the relative social and utilitarian merits of membership of the "non-religious" category.
They found, in a study published online, that those parameters were similar across all the countries studied, suggesting that similar behaviour drives the mathematics in all of them.
And in all the countries, the indications were that religion was headed toward extinction.
However, Dr Wiener told the conference that the team was working to update the model with a "network structure" more representative of the one at work in the world.
"Obviously we don't really believe this is the network structure of a modern society, where each person is influenced equally by all the other people in society," he said.
However, he told BBC News that he thought it was "a suggestive result".
"It's interesting that a fairly simple model captures the data, and if those simple ideas are correct, it suggests where this might be going.
"Obviously much more complicated things are going on with any one individual, but maybe a lot of that averages out."
I just wanted post yay! and end it there. But I'm truly glad that Australia was included in that list. Frankly I'm suprised that such a list can actually exist. Will religion ever disappear? Probably not, but small steps towards something cannot be a bad thing. What do you guys think? How do you feel about your country being/not being listed? Religion is a touchy subject but it is one the definitely needs to be discussed.
You just wanted to post yay that religion is becoming extinct? Really? I think everyone deserves their own opinions but I would not post something like this... If something is going to offend people, why make a thread on it and start a flame war?
|
This is totally going to get shut down, but I'm pretty happy that it'll die out. There's alot of issues that religion causes nowadays that far outweigh any benefits that it provides. It served it's purpose getting us to where we are, though.
|
On March 23 2011 10:31 Nothingtosay wrote:
I wish my country were listed (the united states) but certain people here would gladly welcome a theocracy. Just recently we had legislation being run through the house of reps to confirm the "Under God" portion of the pledge of allegiance.
Fun Fact: The phrase "Under God" was not in the original pledge, but rather was added in the 40's or early 50's. It was basically a little jab at the soviet union. The USSR strongly denied any and all religion, and adding "Under God" to the pledge was just another way to rile up the populace with anti-soviet sentiment.
|
i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/byAG0.jpg)
|
"religion today is the descendant of the explanation for lightning."-me, just now.
as an agnostic, i believe that if religion helps see someone trough their life, and guides them an helps them be a better person, then they can just keep on believing, an good for them.
|
One less thing for people to find different about each other. I'm sure those in power will find something to replace it though.
|
I'm liking the trend. The study is just based on a mathematical trend though. As for real world factors, the Catholic Church's curious habit of molesting children has left a lot of Europeans disillusioned with Catholicism.
Eh, but here's hoping that increased standards of living and universal education will eradicate religion eventually.
|
Religion will never go extinct. Even if by some miracle people all over the world suddenly had an epiphany about atheism, there would still be those people who have been religious all their life, or use it as a safety net to make them feel good. As long as such people can breed, their children will likely follow. So, yea, unless you plan on killing a lot of people...
|
On March 23 2011 10:35 Consolidate wrote:
I'm liking the trend. The study is just based on a mathematical trend though. As for real world factors, the Catholic Church's curious habit of molesting children has left a lot of Europeans disillusioned with Catholicism.
Eh, but here's hoping that increased standards of living and universal education will eradicate religion eventually.
in the year 1950 almost 90% of people from the netherlands were catholic (or protestant-catholic)
at the beginning of the 2000's only 10% were catholic so it has nothing to do with the child molesting.
|
religion down, spirituality up??? I'm all for having your own beliefs about life, but I find it hard to associate with a religion with such a hateful history (the purposely hidden paedophilia doesn't help). I like to pick and choose the good bits from a bunch of religions for my own patchwork belief system.
|
On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth.
You aren't going to be around forever.
Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors.
The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology.
|
How quaint, an Atheist support group.
On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology.
Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs?
|
I'm glad.
That said, to call religion "a scourge" in a blanket statement is quite possibly as ignorant as whatever fundamentalist extremism ticked you off in the first place.
I don't think the world needs religion. Religion is NOT required for a working, ordered and moral society. You can't tell the difference between the faithful and the atheist until you ask.
|
"It posits that social groups that have more members are going to be more attractive to join, and it posits that social groups have a social status or utility."
So right off the bat we know this study is wack. Most religious people I know aren't religious for the social status. They admit that the model is bad, but if it were correct it would suggest "where things are going".
Sensationalist reporting wins page hits yet again.
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest + Show Spoiler +
That's definitely outdated (or just plain wrong), because there are far more than 3% non-theists in America.
Here's a source from 2009 that says between 9 and 11%: http://www.iheu.org/secularism-usa
There are many others that show around that number too.
|
Thanks but I already knew that Under God was added in response to the USSR. Also people think that every dynasty will never fall (thats what religions are, ideological dynasties) every religion before the modern ones has died out or become significantly reduced. In the future atheist and agnostics WILL be the majority.
|
On March 23 2011 10:38 Warf wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:35 Consolidate wrote:
I'm liking the trend. The study is just based on a mathematical trend though. As for real world factors, the Catholic Church's curious habit of molesting children has left a lot of Europeans disillusioned with Catholicism.
Eh, but here's hoping that increased standards of living and universal education will eradicate religion eventually. in the year 1950 almost 90% of people from the netherlands were catholic (or protestant-catholic) at the beginning of the 2000's only 10% were catholic so it has nothing to do with the child molesting.
Nail in the coffin, or icing on the cake I guess.
I had Ireland in mind.
|
On March 23 2011 10:36 shinosai wrote:
Religion will never go extinct. Even if by some miracle people all over the world suddenly had an epiphany about atheism, there would still be those people who have been religious all their life, or use it as a safety net to make them feel good. As long as such people can breed, their children will likely follow. So, yea, unless you plan on killing a lot of people...
Well, here's the thing; the older generations (Let's say 60+) generally went to church, and believed in god (in canada). But, their children, while they went to church, generally stopped once they became old enough to do what they wanted. The amount of people who attend churches in the 30-40 age bracket is considerably lower than the 60+ population. And, the people who are the children of that age group have no affinity towards religion whatsoever. I would actually have a hard time finding someone in my town, in the age bracket of 15-29 that actually cares about religion.
Just because the older generation believes in it, doesn't cause the progeny to believe it as their ancestors did.
And while I have no solid statistics on this, I've been all over canada in my life, and that's my general experience. There are outlyers (I have met devout christians who were young), but on the whole, it's definately a lower percentage than before.
|
"It posits that social groups that have more members are going to be more attractive to join, and it posits that social groups have a social status or utility.
"For example in languages, there can be greater utility or status in speaking Spanish instead of [the dying language] Quechuan in Peru, and similarly there's some kind of status or utility in being a member of a religion or not."
Too bad religion doesn't work the same way. You only need a few adherents to keep a religion alive (or have "utility) whereas you need an entire society using a certain language to keep its "utility." Pretty flawed study, and I doubt religion is going anywhere (at least for the long run).
As a side note, as an atheist/agnostic I really don't have any qualms with religion. Non-belief isn't superior to belief nor vice versa so long as a person is generally educated at the same time. It's not the belief that corrupts people, but the underlying educational defect in the individual that causes societal problems. Religion has nothing to do with the problems of society so no need to flame about that. It just happens to be that the more educated populous tends to forgoe religion while the less rely upon it. And this problem is pervasive with atheists as well who argue against an existence of "God." Some of the shit that comes out of their mouth is almost as ignorant as extreme religious nuts. Again, religion has nothing to do with intelligence imo. They are two distinct ideas that can coexist without problem.
|
On March 23 2011 10:41 goiflin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:36 shinosai wrote:
Religion will never go extinct. Even if by some miracle people all over the world suddenly had an epiphany about atheism, there would still be those people who have been religious all their life, or use it as a safety net to make them feel good. As long as such people can breed, their children will likely follow. So, yea, unless you plan on killing a lot of people... Well, here's the thing; the older generations (Let's say 60+) generally went to church, and believed in god (in canada). But, their children, while they went to church, generally stopped once they became old enough to do what they wanted. The amount of people who attend churches in the 30-40 age bracket is considerably lower than the 60+ population. And, the people who are the children of that age group have no affinity towards religion whatsoever. I would actually have a hard time finding someone in my town, in the age bracket of 15-29 that actually cares about religion. Just because the older generation believes in it, doesn't cause the progeny to believe it as their ancestors did.
Why do the Amish still exist?
|
On March 23 2011 10:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:That's definitely outdated (or just plain wrong), because there are far more than 3% non-theists in America. Here's a source from 2009 that says between 9 and 11%: http://www.iheu.org/secularism-usaThere are many others that show around that number too.
the list i linked was from the beginning off 2010 but most research are mostly done under 10,000-100,000 so all results would be different
example if you researched Catholicism in western USA you would maybe get 5% and in eastern USA you might get 10% atheists, its not like they ask all people in every country just a small sample
|
religion in of itself was a science used to explain the physical world, albeit in a retarded way. Religion has guided our evolution and history 100% so whether you like it or not it is inherent to you as a human being. Science is a relatively new concept so no, even though Science >>>>>>>>>>>> Religion, if you think religion isn't here to stay you're delusional. You're also ignorant (and probably 12) if you think religion doesn't do a lot of good to balance out the bad that it does
all that said i'm agnostic with a bachelors in molecular biology&biochem. I think religion and atheism are annoying concepts and I could never see myself believing in either (atheism being the worse of the two FYI)
|
I think this trend is exciting, yet worrisome. Without religion, many people are void of morals, it sets guidelines for the less intelligent and caring of us to follow. Some people just can't process the idea that you have to consider other people in your actions as well as yourself, which is why religion is useful, it uses the "If you're good, you go to heaven!!!!!!!" motivation to persuade totally self-centered individuals to do good for others. I'm completely atheist btw, but I am also a functionalist ^^.
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest + Show Spoiler +
Agnostics aren't non-believers.
And no, the disapperance of religion isn't exclusively a good thing. There is a reason why it has been a major part of every society all over the world. I don't think religion will ever completely disappear; I've met my fair share of non-believers who when falling terminally ill (I've spent 6 months on an heamatology department - leukemia is a cruel thing) find some consolation in religion.
Sure, society would probably be best off with a complete seperation of religion, but I think that part of the increased incidens of depressions and stress can be contributed to the void the lack of religion leaves.
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest + Show Spoiler +
Anything with north korea in it is full of shit.
User was warned for this post
|
On March 23 2011 10:42 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:41 goiflin wrote:On March 23 2011 10:36 shinosai wrote:
Religion will never go extinct. Even if by some miracle people all over the world suddenly had an epiphany about atheism, there would still be those people who have been religious all their life, or use it as a safety net to make them feel good. As long as such people can breed, their children will likely follow. So, yea, unless you plan on killing a lot of people... Well, here's the thing; the older generations (Let's say 60+) generally went to church, and believed in god (in canada). But, their children, while they went to church, generally stopped once they became old enough to do what they wanted. The amount of people who attend churches in the 30-40 age bracket is considerably lower than the 60+ population. And, the people who are the children of that age group have no affinity towards religion whatsoever. I would actually have a hard time finding someone in my town, in the age bracket of 15-29 that actually cares about religion. Just because the older generation believes in it, doesn't cause the progeny to believe it as their ancestors did. Why do the Amish still exist?
On any notable level? They don't exist in canada.
I don't know. You tell me, since the country in which they exist is not cited as being one of the countries at risk of having religion become extinct. Maybe it has something to do with their social structure?
Christians =! Amish. I doubt the report actually thinks that religion will become extinct, it might just end up like the amish though. Few and far between.
Ninja edit; realized you weren't necessarily american.
|
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here.
|
On March 23 2011 10:39 Fasterfood wrote:
"It posits that social groups that have more members are going to be more attractive to join, and it posits that social groups have a social status or utility."
So right off the bat we know this study is wack. Most religious people I know aren't religious for the social status. They admit that the model is bad, but if it were correct it would suggest "where things are going".
Sensationalist reporting wins page hits yet again.
That's sort of an anecdotal piece of evidence though...From what I've learned in practical reasoning you don't have the grounds to qualify the study as "wack" from that alone. It may bear to know many psychological and neurological bonuses to being a part of a group just for the sake of it. In fact I remember watching Hitchens on MSNBC and the host admitted his mother went to church merely for the company instead of the belief system.
|
On March 23 2011 10:44 hugedong wrote:Anything with north korea in it is full of shit.
north korea samples are given by the government itself and are mostly full of untrue stuff yes but how else to find out right? not like the researchers could walk in and ask them about it
|
Problem with this is that people like me who ascribe to a deist approach get automatically lumped together with non-believers, which is highly inaccurate since I DO think there's a God.
|
On March 23 2011 10:44 Ghostcom wrote:Agnostics aren't non-believers. And no, the disapperance of religion isn't exclusively a good thing. There is a reason why it has been a major part of every society all over the world. I don't think religion will ever completely disappear; I've met my fair share of non-believers who when falling terminally ill (I've spent 6 months on an heamatology department - leukemia is a cruel thing) find some consolation in religion. Sure, society would probably be best off with a complete seperation of religion, but I think that part of the increased incidens of depressions and stress can be contributed to the void the lack of religion leaves.
Its just that most people cant cope with the thought of being completely helpless, or that they wont be apart of some magical afterlife.
Personally its something that doesnt really bother me, and I accept it. Once people begin to accept Atheism they will realize how ridiculous things look from the other side.
|
People are starting to realize that doctors and medicine heal your ailments, whatever it may be, "god" doesn't.
|
On March 23 2011 10:43 Teivospy wrote:
You're also ignorant (and probably 12) if you think religion doesn't do a lot of good to balance out the bad that it does
I'm not 12 and I generally don't consider myself ignorant, but could you name a single good thing that religion has done for humanity that couldn't be (or hasn't already been) accomplished by secular means?
Morality? No.
Happiness? No.
Charity? No.
Knowledge? No.
Technology? No.
Medicine? No.
Honestly, I don't see a function for religion, other than to act as a defense mechanism (a crutch) for those who need its irrationality. And there exist many other (healthier) alternatives than what religion offers.
Feel free to PM me (anyone) if you'd like to delve in to this more though, as I'm sure we don't want to start a flame war!
|
It's no surprise that I find that posts in this thread are highly disrespectful to those who actually do believe in religion. There's no way this thread is gonna bode well considering the history of TL religion discussion threads.
|
On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs?
naturalist thinking doesn't promote evolutionary standards, and to posit such is a very tired attack on secularism.
Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins. The only people I ever hear use this argument are creationists who attempt to use it as some kind of appeal to emotion or fear as in "This is what we think belief in evolution leads to, so therefore evolution needs to be false."
I'm not going to go so far to say that religion needs to be eradicated (I do believe in freedom of choice so far as you're not harming others), but I am skeptical of how much respect religious dogma is given even in secular circles. I think that if secular people constantly challenged absurd dogmatic claims, the world would be a better place for both sides.
|
On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here.
Well, you do have to wonder if we'll merely make more religions and they somehow become very popular. Don't forget how popular Greek, Norse, and Egyptian religion was at the time, yet now they are known as mythology.
|
On March 23 2011 10:47 Warf wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:44 hugedong wrote:On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest + Show Spoiler + Anything with north korea in it is full of shit. north korea samples are given by the government itself and are mostly full of untrue stuff yes but how else to find out right? not like the researchers could walk in and ask them about it
Why cite false data? It looks bad, just as if guiness world records put down kim jong il's hole-in-one record in his first round of golf as a legitimate world record.
|
Such depressing numbers :[[
|
On March 23 2011 10:49 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:47 Warf wrote:On March 23 2011 10:44 hugedong wrote:On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest + Show Spoiler + Anything with north korea in it is full of shit. north korea samples are given by the government itself and are mostly full of untrue stuff yes but how else to find out right? not like the researchers could walk in and ask them about it Why cite false data? It looks bad, just as if guiness world records put down kim jong il's hole-in-one record in his first round of golf as a legitimate world record.
i dont have anything to do with the list some researchers in dallas made it i just posted it here
|
i think it needs to be removed.
|
Any "extinction" data about humans inevitably reminds me of Idiocracy.
And I giggled at Dr Weiner, and I am not going to make a wall of text post to hide it.
|
On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here.
What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion...
Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex.
|
Nice thread, I as well am happy in the decrease of religious believers.
|
On March 23 2011 10:47 Kimaker wrote:
Problem with this is that people like me who ascribe to a deist approach get automatically lumped together with non-believers, which is highly inaccurate since I DO think there's a God.
Yeah but your god is just the universe so it isn't what most people think of as a God.
|
On March 23 2011 10:44 Disciple7 wrote:
I think this trend is exciting, yet worrisome. Without religion, many people are void of morals, it sets guidelines for the less intelligent and caring of us to follow. Some people just can't process the idea that you have to consider other people in your actions as well as yourself, which is why religion is useful, it uses the "If you're good, you go to heaven!!!!!!!" motivation to persuade totally self-centered individuals to do good for others. I'm completely atheist btw, but I am also a functionalist ^^.
Golden Rule > Anything religion has to say.
|
Bad science, making a clam ignoring population size, The 2 highest populated country in this planet India and China weights 10 tons more than Vietnam and Japan if they are trying to make the claim of extinction of religion. This is an example of a research that looks for an pre-determined result, miss representing and miss leading with their data in order to feature the result they wanted.
|
Hooraaaaaaaaaay.
At least it's on the rise. Anything closer to lessening the effect that Religion has on the world sits well with me.
Thanks for the link
|
On March 23 2011 10:51 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here. What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion... Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex.
Yes but a moral codex that is out-dated, and is unable to change due to peoples belief that there is some magical being that handed it down to them.
|
On March 23 2011 10:48 adeezy wrote:
It's no surprise that I find that posts in this thread are highly disrespectful to those who actually do believe in religion. There's no way this thread is gonna bode well considering the history of TL religion discussion threads.
To my memory, there's only 1 religious discussion on TL that hasn't been closed due to a flame war. http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=198525
And by the looks of this thread, it will remain the sole survivor. 
|
On March 23 2011 10:53 rei wrote:
Bad science, making a clam ignoring population size, The 2 highest populated country in this planet India and China weights 10 tons more than Vietnam and Japan if they are trying to make the claim of extinction of religion. This is an example of a research that looks for an pre-determined result, miss representing and miss leading with their data in order to feature the result they wanted.
the research was about percentage of the population not the amount
|
On March 23 2011 10:51 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here. What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion... Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex.
It's not just religion vs science. Look at Eastern cultures if you want an example of a moral system without religion.
Humanity creates its own values. Nothing is written in the stars.
|
On March 23 2011 10:51 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here. What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion... Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex.
I'm going to agree with what stalefish said. Science are religion aren't the only two options here.
What about science and philosophy? I'll take modern philosophical morals any day over religious ones.
There's an interesting book by Sam Harris called The Moral Landscape that attempts to argue that morals can even be scientifically understood, if morality is re-defined in terms of human suffering. I'm not sure I completely agree with him, but my point is that religion is far from the only source of morality.
|
On March 23 2011 10:54 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:48 adeezy wrote:
It's no surprise that I find that posts in this thread are highly disrespectful to those who actually do believe in religion. There's no way this thread is gonna bode well considering the history of TL religion discussion threads. To my memory, there's only 1 religious discussion on TL that hasn't been closed due to a flame war. http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=198525And by the looks of this thread, it will remain the sole survivor.
All we need now is one zealot to post here, and the thread will explode.
|
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die.
|
On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die.
You're assuming that the gospel story is true.
|
On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .]
That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion.
Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways.
|
On March 23 2011 10:51 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here. What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion... Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex.
I'm pretty sure the scientists within the CC's were not there on their own merit, Hitler had his own agenda with the CC's and I'm pretty damn sure scientific progress was not on the top of his list, rather it was more religion fueled if I'm not mistaken.
Science does not leave humanity behind, I can't even fathom how you think that is true or makes any sense for that matter, science is the thing that's pushed humanity forward all these years and will continue to do so. Religion is one of the major reasons why scientific/medical progress has been slowed so significantly, see: stem cell research.
|
interesting study, although you have to take into account the sample.
it does not take into account the explosive growth in Africa and Asia (China in particular) and the fact that Africa is set to overtake the US and Europe as nations with the most Christians in it.
http://vimeo.com/8357071
the video is meant for christians, but its good to watch anyways. fyi urbana is an annual global missions conference gathering over 20,000 university Christians in St. Louis, Missouri from all over the world to see God's vision for the nations.
|
This is a slippery slope. You take out religion and next thing you know: gay rights, cures for life-threatening ailment through stem cell research, fewer genocides, less war and terrorism. The human race is going to be so boring afterward :/
|
On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die.
I agree with Statement 1.
I agree with Statement 2.
I think 3 is a non-sequitur, because... well, the onus is on you to prove the gospel to be true. lol.
|
On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die.
You cant really say that. I mean, there are many small religions. Everyone, and obviously this includes you, THINKS their religion is right? Is any one religion right? Maybe, is it yours? maybe. Can you prove it? no.
EVERYONE in the world who has a religious belief thinks their gospel is correct, not false, better than everyone else. And we will all kill over who is right and wrong. Its silly to make a blind statement such as this.
There have been plenty of religions that die out because the believers population was killed off completely, not because they all suddenly went oh hey you know what, now i realize this doesnt make sense. Although sometimes i wish people would do that.
Also i dont trust the report as-well, for reasons already stated. There is just too many people who believe or dont believe, and too many people who believe different things. Population comes into play with the percentage its just not precise enough to make any bold statements.
|
On March 23 2011 10:59 Igakusei wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. You're assuming that the gospel story is true.
i think he means that as many christians say you cant proof he does not exist!
and that is actually true and to disprove the gospel story you need evidence and there is none
and the religious defense is because its in the bible and or koran depending on the religion and that is enough evidence. never ending story
|
On March 23 2011 10:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:43 Teivospy wrote:
You're also ignorant (and probably 12) if you think religion doesn't do a lot of good to balance out the bad that it does I'm not 12 and I generally don't consider myself ignorant, but could you name a single good thing that religion has done for humanity that couldn't be (or hasn't already been) accomplished by secular means? Morality? No. Happiness? No. Charity? No. Knowledge? No. Technology? No. Medicine? No. Honestly, I don't see a function for religion, other than to act as a defense mechanism (a crutch) for those who need its irrationality. And there exist many other (healthier) alternatives than what religion offers. Feel free to PM me (anyone) if you'd like to delve in to this more though, as I'm sure we don't want to start a flame war!
Standards of morality around the world are deeply ingrained on different religious beliefs. Things have been evolving out of it at varying paces, depending on the region, but they will never be completely separated.
|
On March 23 2011 10:44 Ghostcom wrote:Agnostics aren't non-believers.
They aren't necessarily nonbelievers, but most people who identify themselves as agnostics are.
|
On March 23 2011 11:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. I agree with Statement 1. I agree with Statement 2. I think 3 is a non-sequitur, because... well, the onus is on you to prove the gospel to be true. lol.
Actually you would have to disprove something to make it false. If something is a commonly held belief then it is considered to be true, when people thought the Earth was the center of the universe... It was a common belief, and had to be disproved.
|
On March 23 2011 10:54 Warf wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:53 rei wrote:
Bad science, making a clam ignoring population size, The 2 highest populated country in this planet India and China weights 10 tons more than Vietnam and Japan if they are trying to make the claim of extinction of religion. This is an example of a research that looks for an pre-determined result, miss representing and miss leading with their data in order to feature the result they wanted. the research was about percentage of the population not the amount
% of small population positively suggest the result is religion extinction.
% of a large population negative suggest the result is religion extinction.
Ignores large population's negative correlation, and make a claim based on the % in the small population that positively supported their claim.
Fail at science.
|
On March 23 2011 11:01 hejakev wrote:
This is a slippery slope. You take out religion and next thing you know: gay rights, cures for life-threatening ailment through stem cell research, fewer genocides, less war and terrorism. The human race is going to be so boring afterward :/
When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide.
If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong?
Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen.
|
I'm not sure if any one had the chance to actually browse the study but(tl;dr) it's a trend of 85 countries/regions(secular) and how people find less utility and therefore less interest in religion as time goes on. Whether this is good or not only time will tell.
With that said I think this is a good thing. Organized religion seems to be at odds with how people actually live their lives. In general people try to be logical or at least reasonable however religious beliefs seem to be the opposite of that. Creation beliefs just seem ridiculous when we have such adequate scientific theories and we use them in our every day life.
You can condemn someone for making a terrible argument and trying to support it with false and/or no evidence but you can't call them out for believing in what amounts to a complex fairy tail?
|
On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways.
You don't seem very educated with regard to secular philosophy.
The way things are does not imply how they ought to be. Just because someone's arm is broken doesn't mean it should stay broken, and just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that natural selection is the way we should continue to grow.
|
This garbage needs to be closed. Threads like this only serve to divide us as a community and inspire unnecessary hatred among fellow starcraft fans..
|
never going to happen. there will always be a place for faith in everyones heart. i would actually say this is impossable. athiest propaganda, they are just trying to get more fanatics to become atheist.
|
On March 23 2011 11:01 Asshat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 23 2011 10:43 Teivospy wrote:
You're also ignorant (and probably 12) if you think religion doesn't do a lot of good to balance out the bad that it does I'm not 12 and I generally don't consider myself ignorant, but could you name a single good thing that religion has done for humanity that couldn't be (or hasn't already been) accomplished by secular means? Morality? No. Happiness? No. Charity? No. Knowledge? No. Technology? No. Medicine? No. Honestly, I don't see a function for religion, other than to act as a defense mechanism (a crutch) for those who need its irrationality. And there exist many other (healthier) alternatives than what religion offers. Feel free to PM me (anyone) if you'd like to delve in to this more though, as I'm sure we don't want to start a flame war! Standards of morality around the world are deeply ingrained on different religious beliefs. Things have been evolving out of it at varying paces, depending on the region, but they will never be completely separated.
Except morality has been around longer than religion has.
Similarly, non-religious people have no trouble having a moral compass.
Also, secularist governments are able to create constitutions designed to treat their citizens with respect and fairness apart from any religious notions or predispositions.
Therefore, religion can be completely unnecessary if one is looking for morality.
|
On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways.
Naturalism is not the same as eugenics. Just because someone believes in evolution does not mean they think human society should be governed by "survival of the fittest." We can have standards of morality without religion and it's not like there is one standard set of morality even within religions because of various interpretations.
That said I don't agree with the way the OP treated the article, you can think it's good for religion to disappear, but you don't have to gloat.
|
On March 23 2011 11:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. I agree with Statement 1. I agree with Statement 2. I think 3 is a non-sequitur, because... well, the onus is on you to prove the gospel to be true. lol.
I fail to see how premise 1 and 2 lead to that conc. regardless of beliefs.
Best leave issues in logic like this to people like decartes, spinoza or leibniz....
|
On March 23 2011 11:04 rei wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:54 Warf wrote:On March 23 2011 10:53 rei wrote:
Bad science, making a clam ignoring population size, The 2 highest populated country in this planet India and China weights 10 tons more than Vietnam and Japan if they are trying to make the claim of extinction of religion. This is an example of a research that looks for an pre-determined result, miss representing and miss leading with their data in order to feature the result they wanted. the research was about percentage of the population not the amount % of small population positively suggest the result is religion extinction. % of a large population negative suggest the result is religion extinction. Ignores large population's negative correlation, and make a claim based on the % in the small population that positively supported their claim. Fail at science.
ok you make a research asking everybody in a country what they think about religion
like almost ALL researches they are based upon a small sample of a country and not all people that are living there
|
I think if you want this thread to continue on, it needs to be a scholarly discussion since religion is a core belief of many people. If you talk badly/sarcastically about someone's core beliefs, then it's just going to degrade the discussion.
It is interesting though, I thought US would have a higher percentage considering it's on the rise. It's kind of interesting how engraved in our society it is. I suppose that's what happens when a country is founded on religious freedom and, despite "separation of church and state", it's practically built into the top of our political structure. Could you imagine a candidate for President say they don't believe in god?
|
On March 23 2011 11:01 actionbastrd wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. You cant really say that. I mean, there are many small religions. Everyone, and obviously this includes you, THINKS their religion is right? Is any one religion right? Maybe, is it yours? maybe. Can you prove it? no. EVERYONE in the world who has a religious belief thinks their gospel is correct, not false, better than everyone else. And we will all kill over who is right and wrong. Its silly to make a blind statement such as this. There have been plenty of religions that die out because the believers population was killed off completely, not because they all suddenly went oh hey you know what, now i realize this doesnt make sense. Although sometimes i wish people would do that.
Lol, of course he can. This isn't about thinking one belief is right over another, he's referring to the gospel, which is [from] the Bible, which is grounded in historical accuracy, high manuscript counts (e.g. 400 000 partials of the New Testament alone), the shortest time between original and first copy, etc. so yes, he can confidently say that.
|
On March 23 2011 10:30 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:28 Skillz_Man wrote:
Hmm, I'm not suprised Canada is on that list.
Personally I think it's a good thing, in the modern world I just don't feel it plays such an important role. It will lower religious conflicts and I just believe it's not something necessary anymore.
Crazy to think that 500 years ago religion controlled much of the world - and now it's turning into this. I'm kind of wondering why Canada would be there and not the US with its "separation of church and state". I guess it's more a cultural thing than legal.
Separation of church and state means separation of the government and religion; it doesn't imply anything involving the religion of its people. There are some people who argue that separation of church and state was more specifically aimed at the actual Church, since in Europe at the time the Church and government went hand in hand.
|
The OP study is flatout statistical extrapolation, so the conclusion of "extinction" is invalid.
A brief note on "no point to religion" and whatnot: at its very heart, religion is the effort to seek the higher being labeled God(s). Most definitions posit these as omniscient, omnipotent, or simply "beyond." As such, religion ultimately stems from the human phenomenon of the pivotal question: why can humanity imagine something greater than can exist? Why can we think of perfect ideals when by their nature they are unattainable? What does it mean to have a concept of an infinity, of a God? I feel that the question of religion is intrinsically linked to the base philosophical questions of why we can have any normativity and system of values, so its extinction can never really happen.
|
On March 23 2011 11:08 Chromyne wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 actionbastrd wrote:On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. You cant really say that. I mean, there are many small religions. Everyone, and obviously this includes you, THINKS their religion is right? Is any one religion right? Maybe, is it yours? maybe. Can you prove it? no. EVERYONE in the world who has a religious belief thinks their gospel is correct, not false, better than everyone else. And we will all kill over who is right and wrong. Its silly to make a blind statement such as this. There have been plenty of religions that die out because the believers population was killed off completely, not because they all suddenly went oh hey you know what, now i realize this doesnt make sense. Although sometimes i wish people would do that. Lol, of course he can. This isn't about thinking one belief is right over another, he's referring to the gospel, which is [from] the Bible, which is grounded in historical accuracy, high manuscript counts (e.g. 400 000 partials of the New Testament alone), the shortest time between original and first copy, etc. so yes, he can confidently say that.
All you told me is that he can prove the bible was written around the time it was said to be written... that doesn't prove anything in it is accurate. And what about the old testament? --; I can write a novel, and in 2k years someone might pick it up and go hey this thing actually happened! Did it? well 2k years from now, who knows.
|
On March 23 2011 11:03 GreEny K wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. I agree with Statement 1. I agree with Statement 2. I think 3 is a non-sequitur, because... well, the onus is on you to prove the gospel to be true. lol. Actually you would have to disprove something to make it false. If something is a commonly held belief then it is considered to be true, when people thought the Earth was the center of the universe... It was a common belief, and had to be disproved.
I don't have to make it false, because something is assumed to be false unless it is proven true. The onus is on any person making an affirmative claim to provide their own evidence. He is making the claim. Therefore, it is his job to defend it, not my job to disprove him.
For example, atheism is the null hypothesis. Any theist claiming that a deity exists must provide evidence for their god. It doesn't matter how many more theists there are than atheists.
Here's another good depiction of it: http://topicagnostic.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/religious_logic.jpg
And another one:
If I told you I could fly, that doesn't mean that I can fly until you disprove it. I have to prove it to you.
|
|
|
maybe its just me, however, i really don't get these religion/gay threads.
the general trend is:
liberals talk about how religion is too [insert reason] etc etc etc
conservatives talk about how people shouldn't be homosexual due to [insert reason] etc etc etc
honestly, who cares?
i don't care if the person on one side of me is homosexual and completely liberal and on the other side is a conservative bible thumping christian. Why can't people hold their values to themselves and not try to shove them down other's throat. chances are, you're just going to annoy someone and not even convey a coherent and well thought message.
just my thoughts
so in otherwords idc what people do as long as they don't infringe upon my personal liberties.
edit: just so we're clear everything i said applies to everyone but: scientologists, westboro baptist church and i'm sure some other groups i forgot.
|
Hurray! "Extinction of religion" is music to my ears.
Religion is truly ridiculous in modern times. People living to 900? Resurrection? The universe is only 8000 years old? To the ears of this generation, it sounds like a terribly written children's book. And yes, the bible is the worst book I've ever read.
These countries are destined for success.
Less war, less quagmired politics, less unwarranted hatred.
Many of the mistakes that America makes are based on biased, religiously-affiliated opinions.
Very good. I'm considering moving to Austrailia now... kangaroos sweeten the deal.
|
The problem is not he RELIGION itself, its the christianity which has characterized the common image of religion. Religion is a way different thing than praying to god and sacrificing a cow for god.
Overall its a really unclear and not 100% characterized word. Believing in something is not Religion. For Schleiermacher, one of the most important theologists and philosophists of the protestant church, Religion is the view of the infinite and needs no god, but can have a god. Thats just one example to picture the diversity even within christianity as he accepts even polytheistic religions and natural religions as ways, which can be way more religious than a priest of the protestant church. Another important point of him is that Morals and Science are NOT part of religion.
For Example: When the pope says people shouldnt use condoms, because of religion, he abuses the word religion and puts moral aspects in it, which are NOT religious and have nothin in common with religion => the statement has nothing to do with religion.
So people need to change their image of religion, most importantly those fanatics who try to connect everything they do and dont do with religioues "rules", which are nothing more than moral dogmas
|
god is in your soul if anywhere, it's the bloom in the eyes
i'm atheist and wish people who believe in abstract helping figureheads to be able to do so unhindered...
religion extinct? who you kidding, religion will still be around after you've sadly past away...
"religion" is the opium of the masses (someone smarter than us said that)
added 
|
On March 23 2011 11:05 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 hejakev wrote:
This is a slippery slope. You take out religion and next thing you know: gay rights, cures for life-threatening ailment through stem cell research, fewer genocides, less war and terrorism. The human race is going to be so boring afterward :/ When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide. If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong? Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen.
Why would moral codes die without religion? Please explain that to me because your magical storybook character has nothing to do with why I forgive people.
It's stupid to think otherwise, everyone is different, forgiveness is down to the indivdual and how they were raised, nothing more, nothing less.
|
if anyone is legitimately interested in dialogue regarding religion, and christianity in particular - I'd suggest some honest research on both sides. quite a few of you might be surprised by the resurgence of Christianity in academic philosophy circles, especially with the approach of reformed epistemology. just a plug-in to return to the heart of the new atheist movement (and avoid militant atheism) - skepticism and pursuit of truth.
a organization called "Reasonable Faith" is run by a philosopher/theologian who does legitimate debates between upper echelon atheist scholars, e.g. quentin smith (none of that richard dawkins, christopher harris, stuff) i just recommend checking out some of their articles, here are some of the topics from Q&A from his viewers (christians and atheists)
Is a Beginningless Past Actually Infinite?, Design Inferences and Familiarity, Divine Eternity and Intra-Trinitarian Relations, Misconceptions about Middle Knowledge, Is the Islamic Conception of God Morally Inadequate? , Penal Theory of the Atonement, Fine-Tuning and Improbability, Marriage Advice, God and Mind/Body Dualism, God's Necessity, Objections to the Causal Principle, Can Kagan Deliver Objective Moral Values and Duties?, Santa Claus, Tooth Fairies, and God, Is God Morally Praiseworthy?
|
On March 23 2011 11:07 BlackMagister wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways. Naturalism is not the same as eugenics. Just because someone believes in evolution does not mean they think human society should be governed by "survival of the fittest." We can have standards of morality without religion and it's not like there is one standard set of morality even within religions because of various interpretations.
But why bother? you are only held accountable to people, and there is no grand scheme, so why not do whatever you want? I find it interesting, By the way, that so very many renowned Atheist celebrities would agree with my school of thought.
|
When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide.
If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong?
Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen.
That is the most ignorant statement I have EVER read in my life.
So, without religion people have no morality?
Then you are narcissistic enough to state "After all, Why should we forgive is Jesus was wrong?
What fucking fundamentalist sect are you from?
This isn't a thread about Jesus its a thread about RELIGION which you probably don't know the definition to being that you probably devolved into a sheep without thumbs. It is about statistics and demographics.
Go post your fucking propaganda elsewhere.
User was warned for this post
|
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
On March 23 2011 11:13 inamorato wrote:Show nested quote +When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide.
If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong?
Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen. That is the most ignorant statement I have EVER read in my life. So, without religion people have no morality? Then you are narcissistic enough to state "After all, Why should we forgive is Jesus was wrong? What fucking fundamentalist sect are you from? This isn't a thread about Jesus its a thread about RELIGION which you probably don't know the definition to being that you probably devolved into a sheep without thumbs. It is about statistics and demographics. Go post your fucking propaganda elsewhere.
Actually, this topic is about people becoming less religious in certain regions of the world. Unfortunately, this thread has devolved into a debate over the validity of religion.
Also, since when was Jesus not an integral part of christianity which is a religious belief?
Chill bro.
|
On March 23 2011 11:07 Warf wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:04 rei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:54 Warf wrote:On March 23 2011 10:53 rei wrote:
Bad science, making a clam ignoring population size, The 2 highest populated country in this planet India and China weights 10 tons more than Vietnam and Japan if they are trying to make the claim of extinction of religion. This is an example of a research that looks for an pre-determined result, miss representing and miss leading with their data in order to feature the result they wanted. the research was about percentage of the population not the amount % of small population positively suggest the result is religion extinction. % of a large population negative suggest the result is religion extinction. Ignores large population's negative correlation, and make a claim based on the % in the small population that positively supported their claim. Fail at science. ok you make a research asking everybody in a country what they think about religion like almost ALL researches they are based upon a small sample of a country and not all people that are living there
They based upon a small sample of all the countries including japan, inida, china, vietnam,
japan and vietnam's sample size suggest religion extinction, Inida and china suggest deeply religious.
The only claim they can make is regional religion extinction in Japan and vietnam, which is localize. They can't make the same claim for china and Inida.
Oh by the way on your post about the evidence against the stories in the bible, the burden of proof is on the ppl who claim the bibble is truth. In logic it sounds something like this, you say god exist? proof it. That's a positive proof the claimers have to make in order to proof god exist. It is never the other way around in any legit logical debate.
|
On March 23 2011 11:07 AdamBanks wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. I agree with Statement 1. I agree with Statement 2. I think 3 is a non-sequitur, because... well, the onus is on you to prove the gospel to be true. lol. I fail to see how premise 1 and 2 lead to that conc. regardless of beliefs. Best leave issues in logic like this to people like decartes, spinoza or leibniz....
That's exactly what I said...
Non-sequitur means that it doesn't logically follow lol.
|
I like to beleive that im not killing/doing bad things to people, because i think its wrong, not because i think im gunna be punished for it
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest
lol at US being only 3%, either way i believe religion will most likely go extinct as many people now a days are spiritual but not religious. and i don't see anything wrong with that as long as one attempts to lead a good life.
|
On March 23 2011 11:08 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:
The OP study is flatout statistical extrapolation, so the conclusion of "extinction" is invalid.
A brief note on "no point to religion" and whatnot: at its very heart, religion is the effort to seek the higher being labeled God(s). Most definitions posit these as omniscient, omnipotent, or simply "beyond." As such, religion ultimately stems from the human phenomenon of the pivotal question: why can humanity imagine something greater than can exist? Why can we think of perfect ideals when by their nature they are unattainable? What does it mean to have a concept of an infinity, of a God? I feel that the question of religion is intrinsically linked to the base philosophical questions of why we can have any normativity and system of values, so its extinction can never really happen.
Yes but a system of values and normativity can easily be achieved without religion, in a way that is logical and is not merely blindly followed due to tradition.
Why do people need god to understand in life the idea of just being a good person.
|
People will always subscribe to nonsensical beliefs. Marginalized sure, but not extinct. Some people still believe world is flat and lochness monsters exists. Religion to me is on the last on the list threatened to go away among those. Even if you think religion is stupid, it won't go away before those do and theyre not in anytime going away soon. and its much easier to show someone why their beliefs are wrong on things that are provable than something elusive as religion.
|
Nah, I don't think that it's going to end in the next 30 years. There's still to many catholics, christians and muslims in the world.
Also, I get my ass bashed when I talk about agnostic friends of mine why do I associate myself with them :/
Well, that's here but I don't know in the rest of the world. Vietnam seems to be the highest since they're belief is in the Buddhism system.
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 inamorato wrote:Show nested quote +When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide.
If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong?
Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen. That is the most ignorant statement I have EVER read in my life. So, without religion people have no morality? Then you are narcissistic enough to state "After all, Why should we forgive is Jesus was wrong? What fucking fundamentalist sect are you from? This isn't a thread about Jesus its a thread about RELIGION which you probably don't know the definition to being that you probably devolved into a sheep without thumbs. It is about statistics and demographics. Go post your fucking propaganda elsewhere.
The real question is, why are you so angry, you can disagree with him withut saying the word "fuck" whenever you can.
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest
How old is that chart?
I remember looking at a recent statistic showing that the U.S. is at approx 15% atheist/agnostic/non-believer. I would say its certainly growing exponentially in the U.S. or at least in California.
|
On March 23 2011 11:14 Kojak21 wrote:
I like to beleive that im not killing/doing bad things to people, because i think its wrong, not because i think im gunna be punished for it
This is my point above^ exactly
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest
Meh, Flip this graph around and you'll see that most of these countries have 50%+ believers so it really is saying to me that there are a huge percentage of religious people on the majority of these countries.
Plus my own travel experience and people I've met through 10 years of backpacking leads me to believe religion is growing strongly in certain parts of the world such as China as they discover Christianity,
sounds like an amateurish piece of media at first glance.
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
Christianity thought otherwise with the crusade's killing muslims for the holy lands (jerusalem) back in the medievals and when christianity got a hold of the city the muslims went back in and out a endless religious war. eliminating religion goes hand in hand with forcing your own if you have one
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
What's that law called? The one that states that the longer a conversation goes on for, the greater likelyhood there is for someone to make a nazi comparison?
Anyway, that's flawed. They didn't actively eradicate christians. Their objectives weren't eliminating religion, it was eliminating a religion.
|
No wonder these countries are getting farther ahead of the US in terms of intelligence.
|
On March 23 2011 10:32 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:24 TMStarcraft wrote:
I just wanted post yay! and end it there. But I'm truly glad that Australia was included in that list. Frankly I'm suprised that such a list can actually exist. Will religion ever disappear? Probably not, but small steps towards something cannot be a bad thing.
What do you guys think? How do you feel about your country being/not being listed? Religion is a touchy subject but it is one the definitely needs to be discussed. While you certainly have the right to your opinion, the rhetoric used here seems like it will start a flame war. After all, we're not here to bash religion, are we? On the article, horribly worded. Religion will never go extinct. It may have gone down in certain regions. Will it lower its prevalance in, say, the middle east? Or a large portion of America? Probably not. Beliefs are passed down from generation to generation, and in these regions, not being religiously affiliated makes one a pariah to an extent. Btw, I'm lutheran, and won't renounce my beliefs. Ever.Also, I'm expecting a lot of red text in this thread in a few moments.
Closed mindedness is a big part of the problem. With sufficient evidence you should be open to changing your opinion on anything.
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
Yes, it will. Because the older generations will die and every new generation will be further and further away from an outdated concept as religion.
It might take one hundred years, it might take a thousand, but religion as we know it will dissapear, as long as the human civilization keeps advancing in it's knowledge of the universe.
|
On March 23 2011 11:16 aka_star wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest Meh, Flip this graph around and you'll see that most of these countries have 50%+ believers so it really is saying to me that there are a huge percentage of religious people on the majority of these countries. Plus my own travel experience and people I've met through 10 years of backpacking leads me to believe religion is growing strongly in certain parts of the world such as China as they discover Christianity, sounds like an amateurish piece of media at first glance.
Wait wait wait. China 8% non-believers? I call bullshit. Unless you count ancestor worship or Confucianism or something.
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
Why not? Because obviously your way is right and its right just because it is. disregard proof and logic.
And the study is not trying to achieve the extermination of those who are religious, its merely showing a reason as to why people think religion will become extinct.
|
On March 23 2011 11:18 Kenderson wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:32 101toss wrote:On March 23 2011 10:24 TMStarcraft wrote:
I just wanted post yay! and end it there. But I'm truly glad that Australia was included in that list. Frankly I'm suprised that such a list can actually exist. Will religion ever disappear? Probably not, but small steps towards something cannot be a bad thing.
What do you guys think? How do you feel about your country being/not being listed? Religion is a touchy subject but it is one the definitely needs to be discussed. While you certainly have the right to your opinion, the rhetoric used here seems like it will start a flame war. After all, we're not here to bash religion, are we? On the article, horribly worded. Religion will never go extinct. It may have gone down in certain regions. Will it lower its prevalance in, say, the middle east? Or a large portion of America? Probably not. Beliefs are passed down from generation to generation, and in these regions, not being religiously affiliated makes one a pariah to an extent. Btw, I'm lutheran, and won't renounce my beliefs. Ever.Also, I'm expecting a lot of red text in this thread in a few moments. Closed mindedness is a big part of the problem. With sufficient evidence you should be open to changing your opinion on anything.
Well, you can't fiat everyone to change their mindset as you please, can you? :/
|
On March 23 2011 11:18 Redmark wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:16 aka_star wrote:On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest Meh, Flip this graph around and you'll see that most of these countries have 50%+ believers so it really is saying to me that there are a huge percentage of religious people on the majority of these countries. Plus my own travel experience and people I've met through 10 years of backpacking leads me to believe religion is growing strongly in certain parts of the world such as China as they discover Christianity, sounds like an amateurish piece of media at first glance. Wait wait wait. China 8% non-believers? I call bullshit. Unless you count ancestor worship or Confucianism or something.
Buddism/islam/worshipping of minor gods, all count
china is a heavily religious country with MANY religions
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 whiteguycash wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:07 BlackMagister wrote:On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways. Naturalism is not the same as eugenics. Just because someone believes in evolution does not mean they think human society should be governed by "survival of the fittest." We can have standards of morality without religion and it's not like there is one standard set of morality even within religions because of various interpretations. But why bother? you are only held accountable to people, and there is no grand scheme, so why not do whatever you want? I find it interesting, By the way, that so very many renowned Atheist celebrities would agree with my school of thought.
Because you don't want other people to do the same to you. It's just common sense, there doesn't need to be any mysticism involved. And I find it interesting that you state, 'so very many renowned Atheist celebrities would agree with my school of thought' without saying who they are. Why even put that out there?
I'm making a leap here but it sounds to me like if you didn't believe in religion or didn't have religion in your life you'd go around breaking laws and causing havoc. Is that correct?
|
On March 23 2011 11:14 Kojak21 wrote:
I like to beleive that im not killing/doing bad things to people, because i think its wrong, not because i think im gunna be punished for it
actually biblically, God calls his believers to obey out of joy because of what Jesus has done for us. If we go to "heaven" by our works, the bible says no one goes to be with God - and Christianity is exactly the same as every other religion. That is, if you're good, you'll receive good. Christianity says that if God is good (and you believe that God showed it through Jesus on the cross), you'll receive good. So i would definitely agree with you.
|
This article is silly. Most people who find religion abhorrent have no fair basis to judge the beauty it brings to the lives of those who believe.
Hypocrisy is not religion. Please stop confusing the two. Hypocrisy is the main cause of the world's problems, not religion.
|
On March 23 2011 11:14 Kojak21 wrote:
I like to beleive that im not killing/doing bad things to people, because i think its wrong, not because i think im gunna be punished for it
Damn striaght.
|
On March 23 2011 11:05 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 hejakev wrote:
This is a slippery slope. You take out religion and next thing you know: gay rights, cures for life-threatening ailment through stem cell research, fewer genocides, less war and terrorism. The human race is going to be so boring afterward :/ When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide. If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong? Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen.
Morality and religion are 2 WAY different things, sir. I guess, since you are american and protestant, you should read Friedrich Schleiermacher to get a grip of the seperation between religion, metaphysics(science) and morality.
|
On March 23 2011 11:17 goiflin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
What's that law called? The one that states that the longer a conversation goes on for, the greater likelyhood there is for someone to make a nazi comparison? Anyway, that's flawed. They didn't actively eradicate christians. Their objectives weren't eliminating religion, it was eliminating a religion.
The internet law is Godwin's law. Although the usage here actually has some relevance to the issue at hand.
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 whiteguycash wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:07 BlackMagister wrote:On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways. Naturalism is not the same as eugenics. Just because someone believes in evolution does not mean they think human society should be governed by "survival of the fittest." We can have standards of morality without religion and it's not like there is one standard set of morality even within religions because of various interpretations. But why bother? you are only held accountable to people, and there is no grand scheme, so why not do whatever you want? I find it interesting, By the way, that so very many renowned Atheist celebrities would agree with my school of thought.
Who? Like Sam Harris?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Landscape
The moral relativism thing is pretty silly. There are societies where most people do not believe in God, but they don't go around killing and raping each other. Life even without Heave and Hell, God/Jesus and The Devil still has meaning. I treat people kindly because I know my actions have consequences and I want to live in a world where we can get along. I know some people do exploit others and want to correct that. Some thiests claim without God they would kill, but of course they wouldn't. Even without God there are things to care about, there are consequences to actions even if you're just held to them by other humans and not something supernatural.
|
One can only hope this trend is correct. Religion is one of the largest dividing forces in our world. I think we would be much more peaceful and unified without it.
|
On March 23 2011 10:32 Malgrif wrote:
"God is dead" -Nietzsche, 1882
"Hell, it's about time" -Starcraft 2, 2010
"Nietzsche is dead" - God, 1900
|
On March 23 2011 11:20 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:17 goiflin wrote:On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
What's that law called? The one that states that the longer a conversation goes on for, the greater likelyhood there is for someone to make a nazi comparison? Anyway, that's flawed. They didn't actively eradicate christians. Their objectives weren't eliminating religion, it was eliminating a religion. The internet law is Godwin's law. Although the usage here actually has some relevance to the issue at hand.
People who Godwin threads always think that.
|
On March 23 2011 11:20 0neder wrote:
This article is silly. Most people who find religion abhorrent have no fair basis to judge the beauty it brings to the lives of those who believe.
Hypocrisy is not religion. Please stop confusing the two. Hypocrisy is the main cause of the world's problems, not religion.
Religion is hypocritcal inherently though, god loves all its children except for the homosexual ones etc
|
On March 23 2011 11:18 stalefish wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
Why not? Because obviously your way is right and its right just because it is. disregard proof and logic. And the study is not trying to achieve the extermination of those who are religious, its merely showing a reason as to why people think religion will become extinct.
lol so true
|
On March 23 2011 11:13 whiteguycash wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:07 BlackMagister wrote:On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways. Naturalism is not the same as eugenics. Just because someone believes in evolution does not mean they think human society should be governed by "survival of the fittest." We can have standards of morality without religion and it's not like there is one standard set of morality even within religions because of various interpretations. But why bother? you are only held accountable to people, and there is no grand scheme, so why not do whatever you want? I find it interesting, By the way, that so very many renowned Atheist celebrities would agree with my school of thought.
As an atheist who has absolutely no logical reason to believe in an afterlife, I absolutely want to make the best out of this life that I can.
That being said, that's a bit different than me doing "whatever I want".
I have specific passions.
I love to play tennis, so I play tennis when I get the chance.
I love math and I love to educate people, so I'm going to be a math teacher. That also allows me to make a difference in future generations, so I can leave my impression (however small that will be) on some people.
I can't wait to have a family, because I want to keep my genes going and spread the love that I received as a kid.
I choose not to do drugs, because that would endanger (possibly shorten) my lifespan.
I don't do illegal things, because I could end up in jail and waste part of my life.
I treat others with respect, and so I'm treated with respect.
I make relatively healthy and intelligent choices overall.
Why do I need to believe in a grand scheme or a deity? Because they would be cool ideas? Perhaps (or perhaps not), but I'd rather believe in facts that I know will directly affect me anyway.
|
On March 23 2011 11:03 GreEny K wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 23 2011 10:58 danl9rm wrote:
I'm assuming Christianity is a religion according to this thread.
For religion to completely die out, the gospel would have to be false.
Religion, therefore, will never die. I agree with Statement 1. I agree with Statement 2. I think 3 is a non-sequitur, because... well, the onus is on you to prove the gospel to be true. lol. Actually you would have to disprove something to make it false. If something is a commonly held belief then it is considered to be true, when people thought the Earth was the center of the universe... It was a common belief, and had to be disproved.
1) Something that is a commonly held belief does not make it true. Whenever you make a claim, you have to prove it. On both sides. A lot of people thought the Earth was the center of the universe. We now know this is not true. However, if you go back in time a few thousand years, you wouldn't go back to thinking the wrong thing just because everyone else did.
Whoever makes a claim has to prove it. Galileo made a claim, and he proved it. Then everyone realized that he was right. Oops I mean the church made him throw away his work and not support it. When he stood up to them, they put him on house arrest for the rest of his life.
In fact, geocentricity was disproven long before Galileo by ancient astronomers, but that was probably against some people's best interest.
On March 23 2011 11:05 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:01 hejakev wrote:
This is a slippery slope. You take out religion and next thing you know: gay rights, cures for life-threatening ailment through stem cell research, fewer genocides, less war and terrorism. The human race is going to be so boring afterward :/ When you try to take out religion, you'll be the victim of terrorism, war and genocide. If religion dies, moral code dies with it. After all, why should we forgive if Jesus was wrong? Of course, only in utopia/dystopia will religion completely die. In other words it will never happen.
Do you only forgive based on the fact that you are not letting Jesus die in vein? If the answer is yes,
1) You are not a very good person morally, even if you are religious
2) Your moral code dies if religion dies.
For other people, they are nice, honest, etc. for the sake of being a good person, without being threatened with hell for endless eternity and promised rewards of heaven. For these people, religion dying will do nothing to their morality. In fact, I would much trust people with morality based on strictly the want of being a good person than the ones who base their morality on consequence.
|
On March 23 2011 11:18 stalefish wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
Why not? Because obviously your way is right and its right just because it is. disregard proof and logic. And the study is not trying to achieve the extermination of those who are religious, its merely showing a reason as to why people think religion will become extinct.
I never posited my ideas as absolute truths. These are merely my views and opinions (and are certainly biased to an extent), and you have your freedom to refute my thought as you please.
And yes, the study has nothing to do with killing religion. It's merely statistical data. However, a majority of the posters here suggest that killing religion outright would be the best thing for the world. Thus, the thread devolved from discussing the data into discussing the validity of religion.
|
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play
|
The thread title is really misleading. Most people already know Canada, Australia and Finland are ultra-secular countries. The point of the study seems to be to show how social groups grow on the basis of their established attractiveness, and if religious numbers within a country shrink low enough, it could die out. Big doh.
Why people insist on using sociological studies done by academics to create random and pointless hyperbolic debates in the interweb is beyond me, but I guess I should be used to it by now.
|
On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest
Why did you bother posting this? It's got no source or anything and is CLEARLY outdated/wrong. Now all the gullible/ignorant people are going to be citing it. =[[[[[[[[[[[
|
On March 23 2011 11:24 jimmyjingle wrote:
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play
Atheism is the lack of one particular belief. You can't not play.
|
On March 23 2011 11:24 jimmyjingle wrote:
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play
Atheism is exactly not playing.
|
|
|
On March 23 2011 11:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:24 jimmyjingle wrote:
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play Atheism is exactly not playing.
Agnosticism is not playing. Atheism is playing for the other team.
|
To any religious people reading this I suggest you check out some of the atheist youtube channels such as Thunderf00t and TheThinkingAtheist so you can see how well thought out the other side of the story is, unlike religion. In modern times like this with the knowledge we have at our fingertips, committing to any specific religion is just silly and illogical.
|
On March 23 2011 10:28 Skillz_Man wrote:
Hmm, I'm not suprised Canada is on that list.
Personally I think it's a good thing, in the modern world I just don't feel it plays such an important role. It will lower religious conflicts and I just believe it's not something necessary anymore.
Crazy to think that 500 years ago religion controlled much of the world - and now it's turning into this.
Of course non-religious conflict is so much better... What is society really based upon?
I think we'll have WWIII and then we'll get much less apathetic... or perhaps just have another lost generation... or three.
Religion goes in cycles. We cling to it. We question it. We abhor it. We are shattered by our own human stupidity. We search for a new anchor. We either cling to religion, something else, or become absurdists. We can only live so long believing we don't have a reason to exist.
Humanity wants acceptance. The porcupine's dilemma doesn't factor into the average person's life.
|
On March 23 2011 11:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:24 jimmyjingle wrote:
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play Atheism is exactly not playing.
You could also contend that agnosticism is also not playing.
Edit: Damn, Ninja'd
|
My view: Religion will never die, it has existed since the dawn of time.
However, I really think this kind of threads are really not worthy, as said before they separate the community, people can defend/ofend others just for their pleasure as it is the internet.
I believe noone is looking to get convinced by someone else's view, this is just a motivation for flame war. I really think religion is not an appropiate topic to discuss in internet in a public forum.
|
inamorato you should fix that post, i am thoroughly getting confused trying to follow it
|
On March 23 2011 11:25 Arefel wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest Why did you bother posting this? It's got no source or anything and is CLEARLY outdated/wrong. Now all the gullible/ignorant people are going to be citing it. =[[[[[[[[[[[
LOL North Korea? How in the FLYING FUCK did that get found out? Seriously, post something at least halfway credible so there aren't idiotic misunderstandings.
|
|
|
On March 23 2011 10:53 stalefish wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:51 Ghostcom wrote:On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here. What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion... Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex. Yes but a moral codex that is out-dated, and is unable to change due to peoples belief that there is some magical being that handed it down to them.
Which of the moral codex' are you talking about? I can't really name any of the major religions where the "rules" regarding how to treat other people is actually outdated... Sure, the threat of hell/eternal punishment seems rather silly, but it's really all a question of how litterally you understand the texts...
|
On March 23 2011 11:24 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:18 stalefish wrote:On March 23 2011 11:13 101toss wrote:
Just a note about the results of attempting to forcefully eradicate religion.
There were these people called Nazis. They thought Jews, people who believe in Judaism, should be eradicated. Then we had the final solution, the holocaust, an event to "purify" the world of the Jewish religion.
If you want to eliminate religion, you can't force it upon others (unless you plan on exterminating people). It will have to be a voluntary switch, a phasing out. That voluntary switch won't happen, though.
Why not? Because obviously your way is right and its right just because it is. disregard proof and logic. And the study is not trying to achieve the extermination of those who are religious, its merely showing a reason as to why people think religion will become extinct. I never posited my ideas as absolute truths. These are merely my views and opinions (and are certainly biased to an extent), and you have your freedom to refute my thought as you please. And yes, the study has nothing to do with killing religion. It's merely statistical data. However, a majority of the posters here suggest that killing religion outright would be the best thing for the world. Thus, the thread devolved from discussing the data into discussing the validity of religion.
Well I dont agree with other posters who are speaking for the direct eradication of religion. In my opinion theism will eventually become significantly less popular, and die out. But obviously this cant be forced because people have to come to a point of understanding through reason and logic.
|
On March 23 2011 11:20 BlackMagister wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:13 whiteguycash wrote:On March 23 2011 11:07 BlackMagister wrote:On March 23 2011 11:00 whiteguycash wrote:On March 23 2011 10:48 Igakusei wrote:On March 23 2011 10:38 whiteguycash wrote:How quaint, an Atheist support group. On March 23 2011 10:38 Consolidate wrote:On March 23 2011 10:32 bumatlarge wrote:
As some one who has been a christian for his entire life, you eventually are going to have to start killing people before you make religion extinct. Whether that is sad to hear or not, it's the truth. You aren't going to be around forever. Religions are just advanced cults. It would be very difficult to eradicated cultist tendencies and behaviors. The best we can do is relegate Christianity to the same category as something like Scientology. Really, with that mindset, why wait at all? I mean, I would assume that you are a naturalist, and doesn't naturalist thinking promote evolutionary standards, up to and including the mind and society? Why wait, when your own school of though encourages eradication of different beliefs? [. . .]Just because we evolved through natural selection doesn't mean that we should continue to use "survival of the fittest" as an excuse to murder or otherwise eradicate our weaker cousins.[. . .] That might be right for you, but thats not right for me. Since we have nothing transcendental past ourselves, our own morals and decisions are relative. For someone championing naturalism, you really need to learn to follow the thoughts and worldviews developed into their logical conclusion. Or I guess you don't. Its all relative anyways. Naturalism is not the same as eugenics. Just because someone believes in evolution does not mean they think human society should be governed by "survival of the fittest." We can have standards of morality without religion and it's not like there is one standard set of morality even within religions because of various interpretations. But why bother? you are only held accountable to people, and there is no grand scheme, so why not do whatever you want? I find it interesting, By the way, that so very many renowned Atheist celebrities would agree with my school of thought. Who? Like Sam Harris? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_LandscapeThe moral relativism thing is pretty silly. There are societies where most people do not believe in God, but they don't go around killing and raping each other. Life even without Heave and Hell, God/Jesus and The Devil still has meaning. I treat people kindly because I know my actions have consequences and I want to live in a world where we can get along. I know some people do exploit others and want to correct that. Some thiests claim without God they would kill, but of course they wouldn't. Even without God there are things to care about, there are consequences to actions even if you're just held to them by other humans and not something supernatural.
But why? what makes these things important? why do they have more weight than my cutthroat attitude. I don't know why moral relativism is silly to you, because you have no objective reasoning to pin it down to, other than the 10-1 ratio of Betas to Alphas in Society. Lack of Moral relativism is beneficial to Betas, because they have inherent protection. Moral relativism is beneficial to alphas because they are the lords of their domain. With a strong Beta presence in philosophy and "morality" you end up having a society otherwise diluted by inferior and faulty genetics. It would be better if only the strongest, smartest, and best looking were allowed to reproduce or live, because it would give our race the best chance of living and advancing through the eons, surviving catastrophic events, and ultimately migrating to other inhabitable places.
also, once people get too old and decrepit, it would make sense, in terms of societal justice, to do away with them, because they are hindering the advancement of the human race, in that they provide little to no benefit while consuming a greater amount of resources than the general populace.
|
On March 23 2011 11:25 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:24 jimmyjingle wrote:
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play Atheism is the lack of one particular belief. You can't not play.
I thought Atheist's deny the existance of a god? Like they think the universe came into existance by....natural(??) means or something. Basically they don't need god to explain the creation of the universe somehow?
|
On March 23 2011 11:29 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 10:53 stalefish wrote:On March 23 2011 10:51 Ghostcom wrote:On March 23 2011 10:46 alurlol wrote:
It's inevitable, common logic would dictate this eventually, with the religious minority growing smaller and smaller each passing year, in the Western world anyway. The day religion is completely gone the better, hopefully sooner rather than later, the people 500 years on from us will look back and wonder why the hell it didn't happen sooner.
I mean, I honestly cannot understand what is going on in the minds of grown adults who blindly shun science in favour of some crazy fictional literature, hell Jack and the Beanstalk is more believable that half the shit that is written in that book, snake-staff? Give me a break. I won't even start going in to all of the fucked up issues religion has caused, there's far to many to talk about here. What do you think about the people who follows science blindly, like say - the doctors in the KZ camps? Sure they are few and far between, but so are the nutcases who blindly follows religion... Science alone isn't the answer - science leaves humanity behind, it's the MIX of morals and science that will make society progress, and religion is more or less just a moral codex. Yes but a moral codex that is out-dated, and is unable to change due to peoples belief that there is some magical being that handed it down to them. Which of the moral codex' are you talking about? I can't really name any of the major religions where the "rules" regarding how to treat other people is actually outdated... Sure, the threat of hell/eternal punishment seems rather silly, but it's really all a question of how litterally you understand the texts...
Does it not say in the bible directly that God hates gays and that women are to be silent and not to speak?
|
On March 23 2011 11:28 ShatterZer0 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:25 Arefel wrote:On March 23 2011 10:34 Warf wrote:i got the list from this study from highest percentage of non believers in god(s) to lowest Why did you bother posting this? It's got no source or anything and is CLEARLY outdated/wrong. Now all the gullible/ignorant people are going to be citing it. =[[[[[[[[[[[ LOL North Korea? How in the FLYING FUCK did that get found out? Seriously, post something at least halfway credible so there aren't idiotic misunderstandings.
You're a little bit late to the punch.
|
101toss quit trolling. If you really want to have a religion debate, go to some fundamentalist youtube page and bang your fucking ignorant skull off of the other imbeciles there.
You've posted like 7 times in 10 minutes. If you want to convince people to join you're wonderful religion go pray on your local adolescence you tedler.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On March 23 2011 11:27 I_Love_Bacon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 11:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 23 2011 11:24 jimmyjingle wrote:
atheism is just as useless as religion. take this thread for example.
the only way to win is not to play Atheism is exactly not playing. Agnosticism is not playing. Atheism is playing for the other team.
No. You could still call yourself an agnostic christian.
Agnosticism only deals with certainty. You would still have to define whether you're an theist or not (atheist)
|
On March 23 2011 11:32 inamorato wrote:
101toss quit trolling. If you really want to have a religion debate, go to some fundamentalist youtube page and bang your fucking ignorant skull off of the other imbeciles there.
You've posted like 7 times in 10 minutes. If you want to convince people to join you're wonderful religion go pray on your local adolescence you tedler.
I'm not trying to convert anybody here. Believing in something and voicing my opinion makes a troll? No more of a troll when compared to the people here who say religion can go fuck itself.
|
Religion is just people making a series of stories up to explain what they don't understand.
That being said, I am raised catholic, I think the majority of it is completely stupid, I believe in science and evolution, but how am I to know that what i was taught at a young age (that being that when i die i go to heaven) is not true? People are always going to have thoughts like this because you can't prove what happens after you die.
|
I checked it with google translate and still couldn't find the source for that graph that you posted. Maybe I'm missing something? A little help? :3
|
Baltimore, USA22251 Posts
You guys are lucky I'm in a lazy mood tonight. I'm just going to close this instead of reading through 9 pages and handing out bans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
