|
OwlFancier posted:There is some debate as to why this is in the Christianity thread and I believe there is an argument that liberal churches have also liberalized the practice of faith, and that the lack of adherence to liturgical tradition and churchgoing as an integral part of practice, does not satisfy the spiritual desires of many people, which is why you go to church, after all. The majority of people go to church because they've been brainwashed to do so since birth.
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 06:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:56 |
|
|
RandomBlue posted:The majority of people go to church because they've been brainwashed to do so since birth. Which means you have a segment of the population that has a need to go to church, unless you plan to change that by stamping out religious practice, you are going to run into the issue of how to satisfy that need. "Because they've been brainwashed to do so since birth" is the reason people do a lot of things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 13:09
|
|
|
Covok posted:To be frank, the notion that THE LEFT (tm) is hostile to religion sounds more like a right-wing talking point that's been readily gobbled up by "but both sides are bad"-ers. The left isn't hostile to religion, young people are. The right wing has just as many atheists and anti-Christians who suck it up for their own pet issues, they all tend to be young and libertarian. You know you say this but from reading the thread it seems like the consensus is that "religion is kinda ok I guess when it lines up with my political beliefs, but I can't wait for it to vanish off the face of the earth man"
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Which means you have a segment of the population that has a need to go to church, unless you plan to change that by stamping out religious practice, you are going to run into the issue of how to satisfy that need. I wouldn't say being trained to do something constitutes a need that we should respect and accommodate. Do you think we should give babies addicted from birth hard drugs all the way into adulthood?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:You know you say this but from reading the thread it seems like the consensus is that "religion is kinda ok I guess when it lines up with my political beliefs, but I can't wait for it to vanish off the face of the earth man" And? Do you think that counts as open hostility?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:You know you say this but from reading the thread it seems like the consensus is that "religion is kinda ok I guess when it lines up with my political beliefs, but I can't wait for it to vanish off the face of the earth man" I get the impression that many posters in this thread treat a person's religious belief as a moral failing of that person. It seriously bothers posters here even if it were to have no effect on themselves or the rest of society. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:You know you say this but from reading the thread it seems like the consensus is that "religion is kinda ok I guess when it lines up with my political beliefs, but I can't wait for it to vanish off the face of the earth man" I would go one step further and say I don't really care what happens to religion except insofar as it doesn't line up with my political beliefs, in which case I'd fight it the same way I fight any political opposition. Human beings are profoundly irrational creatures with or without faith; faith isn't distinguished by much except that it's communal and old enough to have momentum and really good apologetics, and if it disappeared overnight the only difference would be that our wacky and fractious beliefs would probably be a little more individualized. If anything, I think secular institutions that aim for longevity and stability could probably take a few lessons from how religion organizes itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I get the impression that many posters in this thread treat a person's religious belief as a moral failing of that person. It seriously bothers posters here even if it were to have no effect on themselves or the rest of society. Personally, as an atheist, I view it more as weakness or slight mental illness than a moral failing. Like I said, the majority of religious believers have been brainwashed to follow their religion blindly since birth. It's extremely hard to overcome that conditioning especially if you're surrounded by others with similar beliefs. I don't particularly have a problem with the spiritual aspect of religion, even though I disagree with it. I have a problem with the fact that religion has been used as a means of controlling the masses for thousands of years and used as justification for countless horrendous acts, wars and abuses of power. It's 2017 and the vast majority of the world still believes in magic (OK, "miracles", same thing), spirits, demons, angels, gods, etc... The same people laugh at the silly religions of the ancient Greeks and Romans, yet the only reason they perceive theirs as real and totally not silly is because they were trained to do so. Regardless, I'm not hostile towards religion unless you're using the more mild definition "opposed", but I am hostile towards religion used as a means of control or used as an excuse for inhumane acts or war. Kinda like the right has been pushing since 9/11 and our current President has been working on taking that to a new level with his Muslim bans and anti-Muslim rhetoric.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:I wouldn't say being trained to do something constitutes a need that we should respect and accommodate. Do you think we should give babies addicted from birth hard drugs all the way into adulthood? How you feel about that is irrelevant unless, as I said, you plan to outlaw religion. The motivation to practice it is present and, absenting an overt and prolonged crackdown, is likely to perpetuate. So you are faced with how to deal with that desire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:How you feel about that is irrelevant unless, as I said, you plan to outlaw religion. The motivation to practice it is present and, absenting an overt and prolonged crackdown, is likely to perpetuate. We shouldn't outlaw religion, but overall its on the decline in the US, without any need for a legal crackdown.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I get the impression that many posters in this thread treat a person's religious belief as a moral failing of that person. It seriously bothers posters here even if it were to have no effect on themselves or the rest of society. It doesn't put someone in the category of "bad person" automatically, but religious beliefs are an intellectual failing and by extension that damages moral capacity. They can still be good people, but they will always be held back by their adherence to a supernatural power structure. The ideas of sin, or karma, and/or an afterlife in general have negative effects on people's mental health. This in turn affects the health of society at large. It's a detriment to progress to have to fight through these archaic and biased ideas, making both cultural and structural changes more difficult. I can't speak for other posters, but it bothers me because I care about the well being of my fellow species and want all of us to have a better future. It doesn't matter if some pastor out the boondocks will never personally sermonize me, it's still hurting our collective community.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Much as I think deontological ethics are silly, I don't think they're actually mental illness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Oh shush, just accept that religion by definition requires brainwashing, and is also a mental illness, and that religious people don't ask questions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Christians donate more to charities but also vote more right wing by a wide margin. I wonder if that's the difference between "I should be a good person so I do things that make me a better person" vs "Society should be good so I do things that make society better.". If mainline Christianity puts the focus on you, personally, to be a good person then you can donate, volunteer etc. but the social problem itself is sort of incidental to bettering yourself. It doesn't really matter if there's less poverty as long you are doing good things. In contrast leftism describes different ways to structure society in order to solve problems such as poverty and in that context your personal actions are just secondary "icing on the cake".
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Much as I think deontological ethics are silly, I don't think they're actually mental illness. That's not really fair to deonotoligists Also I'll just go on record as saying that not all religions indicate you might lack critical thinking abilities, but the abrahamic ones are a good hint. empricism is good and we should use it all the time, even if that means we're wrong sometimes and have to change. way better than just throwing your hands up and saying "well let's everyone have an opinion" like you see in things like the sale of "alternative" medicines in the US. NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
I'm hostile to anything that lets people deny ownership of the terrible things they do. I'll stop hating religion when I stop hearing about how gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, or how women shouldn't have access to birth control, or about priests touching little boys. Sorry that I'm hostile to lies that have been used to justify holy wars and slavery, and institutions that con the elderly into giving up their life savings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
Bates posted:Christians donate more to charities but also vote more right wing by a wide margin. This is only true if you count donating to the church as a charitable donation. Otherwise they donate at a rate similar to everybody else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:That's not really fair to deonotoligists Consequentially I see nothing wrong with being unfair to deontologists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
personally i have little regard for christians, musselmen, shamans and the like, but boundless respect and admiration for my fellow Daoists
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
RandomBlue posted:Personally, as an atheist, I view it more as weakness or slight mental illness than a moral failing. Like I said, the majority of religious believers have been brainwashed to follow their religion blindly since birth. It's extremely hard to overcome that conditioning especially if you're surrounded by others with similar beliefs. This, but liberalism instead of religion; and also it's a moral failing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:personally i have little regard for christians, musselmen, shamans and the like, but boundless respect and admiration for my fellow Daoists The only moral irrationality is my irrationality. Edit: I have also never seen a non-racist use the term "musselmen". Maybe this is just a joke, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
The leading factors for what religion you believe in are when and where you were born, period. If there were any rationality or legitimacy behind these religions, the correlation wouldn't be anywhere near as high as it is. Take any of the Muslim hating Christians here and change their place of birth to any Muslim country and they'd be Muslim. Your faith is almost entirely attributed to the randomness of where and when you happened to be born. If you'd like to argue that it wasn't random, it was part of plan, then you're arguing that that plan also includes that 2-3 billion or more were planned to be born in a time and place where they'd belong to one of the wrong religions if your religion happens to be one that believes it's the only right religion, which by population is the majority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
KillerQueen posted:I'm hostile to anything that lets people deny ownership of the terrible things they do. I'll stop hating religion when I stop hearing about how gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, or how women shouldn't have access to birth control, or about priests touching little boys. Sorry that I'm hostile to lies that have been used to justify holy wars and slavery, and institutions that con the elderly into giving up their life savings. Do not apologize for being a good human being.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Alienwarehouse posted:Based on what? Around %75 of Americans identify as Christian. The country isn't %75 right-wing, so presumably there are some Christian lefties out there who could be more effectively mobilized. Seems like an untapped resource, or maybe another example of liberals abandoning yet another part of their base and letting them drift over to the other side. I'd also argue that religious arguments are more effective at swaying authentically religious people to your point of view than secular ones. RandomBlue posted:The leading factors for what religion you believe in are when and where you were born, period. If there were any rationality or legitimacy behind these religions, the correlation wouldn't be anywhere near as high as it is. Take any of the Muslim hating Christians here and change their place of birth to any Muslim country and they'd be Muslim. Your faith is almost entirely attributed to the randomness of where and when you happened to be born. If you'd like to argue that it wasn't random, it was part of plan, then you're arguing that that plan also includes that 2-3 billion or more were planned to be born in a time and place where they'd belong to one of the wrong religions if your religion happens to be one that believes it's the only right religion, which by population is the majority. If we assume this to be true it doesn't change that fact that peoples' religion in a massive part of their identity and influences their politics. So to ignore religion because you believe it to be arbitrary and false still surrenders large groups of people to your political opponents.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:You know you say this but from reading the thread it seems like the consensus is that "religion is kinda ok I guess when it lines up with my political beliefs, but I can't wait for it to vanish off the face of the earth man" Yeah, to be honest, I'm slowly kind of agreeing that, at the very least, the people in this thread are hostile to religion. They seem like the kind of atheist who thinks being atheist makes them inherently smarter, which tends to be a bad position to take and is rather narcissistic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Agag posted:Around %75 of Americans identify as Christian. The country isn't %75 right-wing, so presumably there are some Christian lefties out there who could be more effectively mobilized. Seems like an untapped resource, or maybe another example of liberals abandoning yet another part of their base and letting them drift over to the other side. Christians who vote vote vilely so your thesis doesn't line up with the data
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Christians who vote vote vilely so your thesis doesn't line up with the data Then you need to swing some over to vote a different way. Maybe speaking to them using their own reference points will be more effective?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
Covok posted:Yeah, to be honest, I'm slowly kind of agreeing that, at the very least, the people in this thread are hostile to religion. They seem like the kind of atheist who thinks being atheist makes them inherently smarter, which tends to be a bad position to take and is rather narcissistic. A good chunk are ex-evangelicals or other right wing Christians. Adult converts to anything tend to be more... enthusiastic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Agag posted:Then you need to swing some over to vote a different way. Maybe speaking to them using their own reference points will be more effective? You mean like the dems do every election and get curbstomped? You know which block swung heaviest for Trump in the primary? Christians. They didn't swing for him in the general because Christians overwhelmingly vote R. Mr "Two Corinthians" vs a campaign so Jesus laden I got probated multiple times for pointing it out. Christians are evil, through and through. They represent a clear existential threat to our republic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:A good chunk are ex-evangelicals or other right wing Christians. Adult converts to anything tend to be more... enthusiastic. I grew up mostly Southern Baptist with 2-3 years of Pentecostal in there. Let me tell you all about how to continually switch up your idiotic babble so you don't just sound like you're repeating the same 4-5 syllables and bore yourself to death while you wait for someone to be seized by the holy spirit and start talking in a language people can actually understand to pass on a message direct from God at least 2-3 times every church service. Agag, I never said religion or religious people should be ignored. I also don't believe religion or the lack thereof says much of anything about intelligence. There is tremendous pressure from pretty much everyone around you to stay within that group once you're there. The whole thing is designed to make it extremely difficult to break away once you've become a regular. Hell, most people I know have no idea I'm an atheist mostly because I don't want to see my son ostracized and that definitely would happen. We home school due to medical issues and the percentage of extremely religious people is much higher among that group. The main problem religion presents within politics is that in a lot of cases the Church pushes a political agenda and their political views get very intertwined with their religious beliefs, making it extremely difficult to make headway of any kind in a debate. It's hard enough getting someone to challenge their own political views without reinforcing those with religion. My typical approach is to ask sincerely why someone believes the way they do and to point out without being a jackass that my understanding of their world view seems counter to what they're supporting. For example, I asked a very religious family member why they supported Trump when he seemed basically the opposite of everything the Bible says a good person or Christian should be back before the election. Their response at the time was that Hillary was a criminal and a war monger and thought it was worth having him if that's what it took to get the Supreme Court seat even though they didn't like him. There are also Christians that see it literally as a fight between Good and the forces of Satan and there's no real discussion that can be had at that point. Long term I think the answer is education, understanding, patience and not being a jackass or douchebag to people that don't share the same viewpoint as you. As others have pointed out religion has been declining in the US fairly rapidly anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
Or people who are sick and tired of the influence evangelicals have, combined with their stubborness. Logically, abortion has no right to be the massive shitfest of an issue it is - we know that someone's consciousness is stored in the brain, fetuses can't support that until much later, ergo abortions before viability shouldn't matter. It should be a non-issue, if you look at it scientifically. But it's not. Same with climate change - the science is in, the modelling has been done, we've got to deal with the problem. Now to be clear here, I don't think the problem is strictly speaking whatever metaphysical beliefs you have. Some legit tech millionaires think they're in the matrix, whatever, that's just as absurd as any other metaphysics. The problem is that, the way these things are setup, you get two major negative consequences. The first is that organized religion is acting as a kind of 'moral heirarchy'. People, (not God/s, people) at the top give their interpretation of the religious mythos, that interpretation becomes law. There's no critical thinking or debate about policy or outcomes, absent pointless theological bullshit, because by challenging that law, you automatically get threatened with expulsion/exile - a really terrifying and frightening thing when this is your only community. The second consequence is that said leaders tend to be influential people in their own right, either proximate to or themselves rich and powerful. When the chips are down, who's interests are they going to represent? Themselves. I dont really have any problems with pagans or bahai or whatever, and that's not usually what these discussions are ever talking about. Nor is that what the question in the title is referring to. Its refering to this propaganda that somehow the left is intrinsically anti-christian/(whatever majority religion the reader has), and by consequence hates the reader. There's a further implication that this choice is arbitrary or, worse, itself a direct manifestation of whatever stupid metaphysics they have. (And therefore, all rational objections the left have are invalid. It doesn't matter how logical or reasonable they sound, because that's just ~dark magic~ i.e. The only way to stay faithfull is to shut your brain off). The usual comparison here is with either the French or Russian revolutions. The context of those revolutions, and the clerical collaboration with the overthrown regimes, is never acknowledged. Someone, only organized religion is granted the unique positron of being able to act like a 'political actor', yet also able to absolves itself of ever having to accept responsibility for its politically motivated actions. It gets to meddle in and enable the politics it prefers, all the while still holding the illusion that it is 'above such world concerns'. Projecting an image of clean and pure innocence, while dipping its fingers deep in the dirty world of political horse-trading. Its such blatant hypocrisy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Agag posted:Then you need to swing some over to vote a different way. Maybe speaking to them using their own reference points will be more effective? Have you ever actually tried to use Progressive Jesus arguments with the religious right? I've had long, non-vile-spewing discussions with conservative Christians and that line of argument goes no where. The religious right starts putting up defenses for that roughy at birth when they are indoctrinated by their parents and community. "Be wary of an outsider talking about Jesus, because they are agents of the devil trying to steer you away from God.", is not an uncommon position from conservative Christians. Quote all the Bible at them you want and cite the context and history around it, they don't care. The only times the Bible explicitly mentions abortion it is to perform it genocidally. Jesus explicitly said to pay your taxes willingly in full. He explicitly said the most important thing is to abandon your worldly possessions and give everything to help the poor and desperate. They don't care. You can maybe sidestep the brainwashing with painstaking effort, but it would be far more effective to focus on secularizing culture and our youngest generations so we don't have to unbrainwash people in the first place. Focusing on tangible things in their lives and recent history yields more results anyways if you want to get political votes. One of the only semi-effective points I've used is bringing up the "golden age" of America in the 50s and 60s conservatives currently idolize so much. Start raving about how great the economy and production was then, and they will agree with you. Then tell them the tax rate on the top bracket was 75+% during that time and it coincided directly with strong unions and the massive expansion of the middle class They usually dismiss it as a different time and say it wouldn't be effective now, but it at least makes them pause a little. Using religious arguments just makes them defensive because you are attacking an identity. Also, tying to sell a benign brand of snake oil to stop people from buying the poisonous snake oil is a not a good long term solution to stop people from being vulnerable to snake oil salesmen. Covok posted:Yeah, to be honest, I'm slowly kind of agreeing that, at the very least, the people in this thread are hostile to religion. They seem like the kind of atheist who thinks being atheist makes them inherently smarter, which tends to be a bad position to take and is rather narcissistic. Being an atheist doesn't make you inherently smarter, it's just a justifiably correct neutral position. People can "convert" to atheism for either dumb or well thought out ideas. However, being religious does actually make people stupid. It doesn't make stupidity their defining trait, but it makes them more stupid. Someone could be a genius and come up with a whole new branch of mathematics. Certainly not a "stupid person". But if that same person also believed that 9/11 was an inside job with explosives in the tower, it makes that person more stupid. Religion functions in much the same way. Doesn't stop people from expressing intelligence, but it hurts it overall. Btw this is a terrible line of argument if you are trying to convince someone to secularize and comes off aggressively smug on matter how it's phrased. It's not very persuasive even if it's true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
RasperFat posted:Also, tying to sell a benign brand of snake oil to stop people from buying the poisonous snake oil is a not a good long term solution to stop people from being vulnerable to snake oil salesmen. Hey there, I'm not trying to sell snake oil, *swings baton* I'm trying to sell the bread of life, *doffs bowler* which heals and nourishes and grants life everlasting. *bows* "LOL, OK, how does that work." Well, *grooms mustache* first, *narrows brow* you have to DIE. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:If anything, I think secular institutions that aim for longevity and stability could probably take a few lessons from how religion organizes itself. Every time they do, they end up cults. You can't have a dogma without people to enforce that dogma. Various diets, the Secret, the NFL or FIFA in the rest of the world. At some point you end up brawling because a dude wore the wrong shirt into the wrong bar and that's disrespectful to the generations of United fans who've bravely warmed seats in this bar since time immemorial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:How you feel about that is irrelevant unless, as I said, you plan to outlaw religion. The motivation to practice it is present and, absenting an overt and prolonged crackdown, is likely to perpetuate. So, in other words, it ought to be made illegal but it's "special" and therefore you dodge the question. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
RasperFat posted:Being an atheist doesn't make you inherently smarter, it's just a justifiably correct neutral position. People can "convert" to atheism for either dumb or well thought out ideas. Wow, holy loving poo poo, I can feel the fedora emanating from that post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Its such blatant hypocrisy. I don't think any of us here (with the exception of the occasional nut ) will defend corrupt religion. And if we are honest and authentic we should be saying to it (corrupt religion) “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:So, in other words, it ought to be made illegal but it's "special" and therefore you dodge the question. I'm not sure what you are saying here makes sense. Please elaborate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:You mean like the dems do every election and get curbstomped? Sounds good, only need to eliminate %75 of the population to excise this evil and save the Republic. RasperFat posted:Have you ever actually tried to use Progressive Jesus arguments with the religious right? I've had long, non-vile-spewing discussions with conservative Christians and that line of argument goes no where. Atheists or liberals contemptuous of religion lecturing religious people isn't what I'm talking about. If anything that would be counterproductive. I'm talking about greater inclusion and use of actual Christians who aren't diehard right wing. They must exist or every election %75 of the vote would go GOP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:56 |
|
|
You still have it backwards. It isn't the left that is hostile to religion, it is that region is hostile to the left. Of course, if you point that out people freak out and go #notallchrstians. But so what? In our own left wing bubble the liturgoons participate in things like ex-gay and straight up genocide. But mentioning that those things are bad is intolerant and trolling. See the problem here? It's like arguing with Nazis. You can't argue with someone who doesn't abide by the structure of the system, it just makes you look foolish. The left is very open to religion, we see religious appeals from the left all the loving time. It doesn't work because religion is necessarily reactionary so all it does is muddy the waters and make the left loop foolish while religious folks continue to pull the lever for R every time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 17:00
|
|