Why I've started to believe that religion is actively dangerous

[Berkut]

Because of things like this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/06/jim-inhofe-genesis_n_6815270.html

"I take my religion seriously," Inhofe writes. "[T]his is what a lot of alarmists forget: God is still up there, and He promised to maintain the seasons and that cold and heat would never cease as long as the earth remains."

For those still skeptical of his climate change skepticism, Inhofe quotes from the source material, "one of my favorite Bible verses," Genesis 8:22:


As long as the earth remains
There will be springtime and harvest
Cold and heat, winter and summer

Inhofe was asked about this particular piece of Scripture during a radio interview when his book came out. The passage, he said, is so conclusive that it's simply outrageous that scientists continue to address the matter.

"The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous," he said.

This is not just quaint - it is actively dangerous. And this idea that God is running things, hence we don't really have to take responsibility ourselves extends beyond just climate change, but it active in many, many aspects of public policy and at multiple levels.

[Syt]

Why do people elect folk like this? No one in Germany would have an issue if a politician professes faith in God, but something like this would see them dropped off the ballot very quickly. I hope.

[Barrister]

Because of an article from March?

And congratulations then Berkie.  You've now gone full Marti.

[Berkut]

Why do people elect folk like this?

Because there are plenty of people who think he is right, and they vote.

[Grey Fox]

Welcome aboard, Berkut.

[Berkut]

Because of an article from March?

Is the age of the article relevant to whether or not being concerned that the person who heads the Congressional committee responsible for dealing with the climate believes that God won't allow humans to mess anything up is valid?

And congratulations then Berkie.  You've now gone full Marti.

Uhhh, ok. That is a rather weird ad hom.]

[Valmy]

Well now you get a bit of my way of thinking. Most religions are full of dangerous or regressive crackpottery. Yet many people seem drawn to religion and spirituality (myself included). So my theory is to find the few religions which contain neither dangerous nor regressive crackpottery and support those. Hence why I decided to make my family religious, basically to inoculate us.

[lustindarkness]

But the bibble also talks about stewardship of gods creation, you know, taking care of it. Bah, never mind, it also talks about some real crazy stuff.

[The Brain]

The danger is retardism, whatever cloak it wears. Many of the most dangerous nutters aren't religious (other than in the "believes in crackpotism" sense).

[garbon]

The danger is retardism, whatever cloak it wears. Many of the most dangerous nutters aren't religious (other than in the "believes in crackpotism" sense).

[garbon]

So my theory is to find the few religions which contain neither dangerous nor regressive crackpottery and support those. Hence why I decided to make my family religious, basically to inoculate us.

Strange, yet bizarre.

[Syt]

But the bibble also talks about stewardship of gods creation, you know, taking care of it. Bah, never mind, it also talks about some real crazy stuff.

People in general pick the parts they agree with and that support their view.

[LaCroix]

people say a lot of things. i'm not convinced peoples' actions, at their core, are truly driven by religion as opposed to some other combination of factors.

[lustindarkness]

But the bibble also talks about stewardship of gods creation, you know, taking care of it. Bah, never mind, it also talks about some real crazy stuff.

People in general pick the parts they agree with and that support their view.

What?! Nah! Unpossible. It is the Word of God. How could mere mortals pick and choose what parts to follow?

[crazy canuck]

people say a lot of things. i'm not convinced peoples' actions, at their core, are truly driven by religion as opposed to some other combination of factors.

The problem arises when justifications for important policies are grounded in narrow religious beliefs that have no scientific merit.