Sarene wrote...
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
As I said there will be no positive outcome unless religion itself is destroyed.
I view religion through a Durkheimian lens. Society begins with religion; religion is a primary reality. So, religion is the encounter of society with an ideal; religion simultaneously creates and gets created by society. It is created by community as the symbolic self-manifestation of its own depth; and in turn religion creates the community, since it teaches the members common values, initiates the new generation into the living tradition, and confronts the entire community with the highest ideals present in its history and thus acts as an impetus for social change and renewal. In fact, he wrote that one "[cannot] be a social being, that is to say, he could not be a man, if he had not acquired [religion].”
It's just that, to reiterate, culture and historical conflict change the practice of organized religion; something pure can be corrupted. :(
Sounds like convoluted nonsense. I see religion as a tool that explained that which couldn't be explained in any other way. Modern Day religion I see as a mental disorder. A mass hysteria if you will.
(I swiped this from someone else)
Lets start a new religion. Lets call it Pachyderm worship. In the Gospel of Pachyderm, a prophet says the our creator is Pink Elephant. Pink Elephant created the world in 3 days and rested on the 4th. The Mighty Pink Pachyderm moved the dust and molded all the animals of the world with his trunk. Then he created Man from the dust with that mighty trunk. You don't believe it? Why? You have never seen a Pink Elephant? If you don't believe you will go to hell. You will suffer eternity shoveling Pachyderm dung. To help you understand we have this book. The book says there have been some who have seen the Pink Elephant. These are mystics who have had mystical experiences. In their religious rite they would consume large quantities of Holy Blood of the Pachyderm, the ceremonial moonshine made with a holy and blessed still. The mystic sees visions and sees their Pink Elephant. So you must believe it.
Oh you're saying Pink Elephant doesn't exist? Thats heresy and you are an infidel. Ok, Prove to me the Pink Elephant doesn't exist. You can't right? Therefore it does exist and you better repent else you will be stomped on and suffer eternity in hell shoveling Pachyderm dung forever.
Sound familiar?
If only one person believe this then we'd think he was crazy, am I right? Now what would happen if Millions of people thought this was the truth? Another example Russell's teapot
If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
Expanded on by Richard Dawkins
The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell's teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don't exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don't stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don't warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don't kneecap those who put the tea in first.
As of this century religion serve no purpose in my eyes. Any "morals" that people claim that only religion can teach us (such as not stealing, killing,etc) we can teach our children to do because it's the right thing.
When I think of religious people I can only think of 1) the people who shout me down because I'm an Atheist. 2) the people who want to stripe away my rights for being an Atheist and not one of "god's children" 3) the people who want me to live on my knees with my face in the dirt and pray to their god otherwise they will kill me.
Without Islam or Christianity there wouldn't be a "holy war" no "Jihad". No suicide bombers because "Allah will reward them", no abortion clinic bombings. The list goes on and on. In my eyes the world would be a lot better if religion was abolished