Societies don't have to be secular to be modern

[Martinus]

I disagree. This may have been true in the past, where churches often bickered over doctrinal issues, but these days they work more or less as a single political entity and have similar political goals (e.g. on abortion, gay rights etc.). Of course some may be more extreme than others, and some more moderate, but the same is true even in countries like Poland where 95% of people declare themselves catholic.

Take the US Catholics and Mormons for example. They couldn't be farther from each other in terms of the dogma, but they work as one when it comes to social and political issues.

Um...Marty those are secular political goals.  I do not think a requirement of Secularism is allowing gay rights and abortion.  A religious society would have a church that controls the educational system, thought, and discourse so as to control the political system and society.  Merely having religions that have political opinions is not the same thing as having a religious type of society as opposed to a secular one.

Oh please. They are quoting Bible at gays. They are saying gays are going to burn in hell. They are saying America lost God's protection because it allows gays to live. And you are saying these are merely political goals? It's laughable.

[Valmy]

Noone denies that the religion has served its purpose in the development of human thought. But today it is an obstacle, not a stepping block.

Religion will always be necessary, humans have a deep need for it as has been pointed out many times before.  The question is how can religion come to serve our modern ideals?  I believe the religion I am apart of does that becuause it actually concerns itself with eternal truths not trying to preserve old superstitions and irrational nonsense.  Removing religion will only have it replaced with more nonsense of a different stripe.

[Valmy]

They are quoting Bible at gays. They are saying gays are going to burn in hell. They are saying America lost God's protection because it allows gays to live. And you are saying these are merely political goals? It's laughable.

They are political goals in service of their beliefs.  Beliefs I believe are fundamentally false and based on ignorance and poor literacy but beliefs non the less.

I fail to see what is not secular about people advancing a political program in support of their beliefs.

Gays can and have made good use of religious texts to support their own cause as well.  Are they therefore demanding a religious society?  Of course not they are using that in support of their political program.

[Valmy]

In a sense you are saying to be secular you have to ban religious thinking and politics...which is not secular but totalitarian atheism.

[The Brain]

Noone denies that the religion has served its purpose in the development of human thought. But today it is an obstacle, not a stepping block.

the religion I am apart of

From.

[Martinus]

In a sense you are saying to be secular you have to ban religious thinking and politics...which is not secular but totalitarian atheism.

I am not saying you have to ban religious thinking but yes, you have to ban religious politics. This is how the separation of church and state is perceived in many European countries, for example France.

It's funny how you denounce Europeans misunderstanding America as a fundamentalist theocracy, yet call European secular states to practice "totalitarian atheism".

Religion is a private thing. It should be kept to homes and churches. It has no place in the public sphere.

[Martinus]

Noone denies that the religion has served its purpose in the development of human thought. But today it is an obstacle, not a stepping block.

Religion will always be necessary, humans have a deep need for it as has been pointed out many times before.  The question is how can religion come to serve our modern ideals?  I believe the religion I am apart of does that becuause it actually concerns itself with eternal truths not trying to preserve old superstitions and irrational nonsense.  Removing religion will only have it replaced with more nonsense of a different stripe.

Well, even well-meaning, religion is a fallacy. It relies on false information. It supports lies about reality. Even if these lies are used for a good purpose, they are still lies, which may have - and often does have - negative long term consequences.

Are you familiar with informatics and programming? There is a concept called GIGO - garbage in, garbage out. If you feed false premises to a reasoning process ("There is a judge in heaven." "We will live after death." "This life is not important") this will lead to all kinds of fallacious conclusions ("Why bother saving human lives? It's important we save souls instead." "There is no point trying to improve out lot here - justice will be served in the afterlife." "The earth is just a short stop - no point to save it from ecological oblivion then.") 

[Neil]

Regular people don't reason.

[Martinus]

Regular people don't reason.

Perhaps. But if you intentionally lie to people - no matter how good your intentions - negative side consequences of this are much more unpredictable than if you tell them the truth.

The mob does not reason, true. But it can do enough damage if it just allowed to run away with a true fact and distort it in their heads. Its destructive power is much more unpredictable and chaotic when you feed it a fundamental lie.

[Valmy]

Well, even well-meaning, religion is a fallacy. It relies on false information. It supports lies about reality. Even if these lies are used for a good purpose, they are still lies, which may have - and often does have - negative long term consequences.

Are you familiar with informatics and programming? There is a concept called GIGO - garbage in, garbage out. If you feed false premises to a reasoning process ("There is a judge in heaven." "We will live after death." "This life is not important") this will lead to all kinds of fallacious conclusions ("Why bother saving human lives? It's important we save souls instead." "There is no point trying to improve out lot here - justice will be served in the afterlife." "The earth is just a short stop - no point to save it from ecological oblivion then.") 

Well I am in Voltaire's camp that a true religion cannot have claims that cannot be arrived by rational thought.

Alot of your claims in the second paragraph are pretty ridiculous even by religious people.  Your fallacy is to take the most ridiculous ideas and claim that they are held by all religious people.  Also the fact that people, millions if not billions, of people cling to such beliefs supports my point that there is something about religion that satisfies very deep human needs and it will always have an important place in society.

[Valmy]

Regular people don't reason.

Perhaps. But if you intentionally lie to people - no matter how good your intentions - negative side consequences of this are much more unpredictable than if you tell them the truth.

The mob does not reason, true. But it can do enough damage if it just allowed to run away with a true fact and distort it in their heads. Its destructive power is much more unpredictable and chaotic when you feed it a fundamental lie.

I get that you hate religion but you are changing the subject.  Having religion in your country does not make it religious or not-secular.

[The Brain]

@Valmy: How do you have a secular society if you make laws based on religion (non-rhetorical)?

[Neil]

Regular people don't reason.

Perhaps. But if you intentionally lie to people - no matter how good your intentions - negative side consequences of this are much more unpredictable than if you tell them the truth.

The mob does not reason, true. But it can do enough damage if it just allowed to run away with a true fact and distort it in their heads. Its destructive power is much more unpredictable and chaotic when you feed it a fundamental lie.

I don't think that's particularily important.  Mobs that are full of allegedly rational ideology are just as dangerous as mobs full of snake-handlers.  Material comfort and perceived safety are far more important.

[Viking]

A Secular society can have religious freaks running around the place telling everybody to follow the bible. They can even be in government and administration and be openly religious.

[Grallon]

...  Also the fact that people, millions if not billions, of people cling to such beliefs supports my point that there is something about religion that satisfies very deep human needs and it will always have an important place in society.

With enough brain surgery, genetic modifications and appropriate drugs you can do away with all this superfluous evolutionary luggage.

However if you need to worship something - then worship something that is transcendent, visible and tangible all at once: the State.




G.