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

[viper37]

I've heard of atheists talking about discrimination of people on the basis of religion.  Heard right here in fact.

The moment you prevent radical religious people from indoctrinating other people, they cry out loud about their freedom of religion, something they wish to deny everyone else.  Ironic.  Especially when it comes from someone supporting Erdogan.

[viper37]

And the various Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Protestants that were murdered by the Communists, what was their crime?

Many were murdered by the very religious Tsarist russia too.  The first wave of Jewish to immigrate toward Palestine were from the Russian Empire.  I don't think they left because they felt free under a religious state not of their own.

[viper37]

They said communism was based on science.  If you get to disregard Marx, I get to disregard Inhofe as not being a true Christian.

I can say X is based on science.  But I need to prove it. This is where communism and nazism failed both.  They both claimed to be based on science and produced bogus science reports to "prove" it.  Yet, none of it resisted to any serious analysis.  If you can't reproduce your experiment's results, it's hard to qualify as science.  And yes, I know, many economis studies can not be reproduced independantly, the same goes for psychology.  But not all of them, and at least, they try to develop mathematical models to predict societal behaviors.

[Berkut]

I'm not sure why that would be true. Different people react to stimuli in different ways. That doesn't mean the stimuli plays a sidelined role...or even insignificant one.

because i don't think there's been a single case where religion has literally caused someone to suicide bomb.

I don't really see where there is anywhere to go with a comment like this.

It is rank apologism, and I don't understand the motivation for it.

You can go any number of places in the world today, interview people who have attempted Islamic suicide bombing, their victims, their families, those who enabled them, those who actively recruit more of them, and those who claim to want to be suicide bombers.

They will all tell you that they are doing so because of their religion, because that is what their god wants them to do. Yet no matter what they say, or how many of them say it, you are going to dismiss what the people who best understand their own motivations (themselves) and categorically simply refuse to believe them about what motivates their actions.

Do you do this for any other actions humans take? If you ask me why I went to the store, and I say it is because I wanted bread to make a sandwich, will you refuse to believe me, and instead insist there is some other motive?

What is special about religion that causes people to categorically deny that milllions of people are doing things for the exact reasons that they say they are doing things?

I can certainly understand in particular instances pointing out that sometimes the reasons people give for their actions are not always true, but you are saying that in EVERY SINGLE CASE that some person takes ANY action that they claim is taken because their faith says they ought to do so, they are lying or deluded, and there is really some other reason.

Not all suicide bombers are religiously motivated, of course, but damn sure that vast majority of them are - and the idea that there is some foundational economic or political reason behind it is refuted by the fact that there are numerous examples of people who have engaged in these and other horrific acts who had no such economic or political background. the 9/11 suicide bombers were mostly affluent, middle class men, as one example.

To argue that they did what they did for reasons other than religion is simply baffling. It is a mental contortion that is just...well, bizarre.

[Razgovory]

Public policy drawn solely from science has already proven to be a dangerous road.

When and where?

Raz doesn't distinguish between science and pseudo-science.  He often tries to use the latter to discredit the former.

Okay, so Sociology is a pseudo science now.

[Razgovory]

I've heard of atheists talking about discrimination of people on the basis of religion.  Heard right here in fact.

The moment you prevent radical religious people from indoctrinating other people, they cry out loud about their freedom of religion, something they wish to deny everyone else.  Ironic.  Especially when it comes from someone supporting Erdogan.

You never did catch on about the Democracy thing did you?

[Razgovory]

  I disagree with the notion that Old Testament God is a cruel as Zeus, there is no stories of Yahweh raping women, eating people, turning people into bugs or whatever.

you must have missed the sending of plagues, turning people into salt, flooding the world, commanding genocide-bits then. Old Jahweh is not a nice guy, not one bit.

I am also not sure whom Zeus did rape - unless you apply the modern definition - in which case making Mary pregnant at the age of 13 must also count as statutory rape.

Oh right, you're a fuckwit.  I forgot.

[Valmy]

Okay, so Sociology is a pseudo science now.

It is a Social Science. Same thing really.

[Berkut]

I wish there was a way for each Languish poster to designate one other poster who just isn't allowed to post in their threads.

That would really be great.

[The Brain]

I wish there was a way for each Languish poster to designate one other poster who just isn't allowed to post in their threads.

That would really be great.

That hurts.

[PRC]

I wish there was a way for each Languish poster to designate one other poster who just isn't allowed to post in their threads.

That would really be great.

Reddit style upvote / downvote system.

[Razgovory]

I wish there was a way for each Languish poster to designate one other poster who just isn't allowed to post in their threads.

That would really be great.

Grumbler's not that bad, but I'm out.  The same basic argument you made could argued if you replaced "religion" with "economics" or "politics".  Both are things that influence people into saying things that you disagree with and doing things that harm you.  I'm guessing you don't understand that, and with the vice-like lock your ass has on your head, you damned well won't learn from anyone here.  Hell, you don't even want to read people who disagree with you, and day dream about simply shutting them out of the thread.

[Valmy]

You're out? Some defender of the faith you are.

[crazy canuck]

I wish there was a way for each Languish poster to designate one other poster who just isn't allowed to post in their threads.

That would really be great.

Grumbler's not that bad, but I'm out.  The same basic argument you made could argued if you replaced "religion" with "economics" or "politics". 

Well yes.  And that is why we actively reject things like communism (politics/economics).  Biblical literalists are not a neutral force in the world.  They create real world harm that replaces scientific fact with myth. Just as a communist regime would create real world harm.  Btw I am using Communism as a comparator because that is the one you brought up

[Capetan Mihali]

Has Raz posted his Cristero War photo yet?  That's de rigueur.