Is religious tolerance a bad idea?

[scotth]

I did. They agreed. It was eerie.

In fact, since they beleived in karma and reincarnation, I proposed the following scenario.

You are invited to a dinner party hosted by Mr. Body. You, and all your fellow guests are in the parlor when the lights go out, and a gun shot is heard. When the lights come on, Mr. Body lies dead, shot through the heart and no one confesses to killing him. There's no powder on his hands or body, so he couldn't have shot himself. After a thorough investigation, neither you nor the police can accertain who the murderer is.

Do you let the guests, one of whom is a murderer, go free? Or, in line with your belief in karma, do you pick up a gun and shoot one of them randomly, trusting in their bad accumulated karma to ensure that the murderer takes the bullet?

Their answer, "Hey, that's a great idea!"

At which point, I would either run, or shoot.

People who think like this are a clear hazard to the population that believe that this life we are living today is all we'll ever have.

 

[elliotfc]

And even this is only really true if less people are born due to no/less religion. The number of deaths won't really change, but the manner and timing of them certainly can improve.

Having far fewer die of ignorance rather than old age, seems like a worthy goal to me.

How does ignorance kill someone, exactly?

Are the words religion and ignorance interchangeable?

-Elliot

 

[scotth]

How does ignorance kill someone, exactly?

Are the words religion and ignorance interchangeable?

-Elliot

Are we reading and replying to the same thread?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

How does ignorance kill someone, exactly?

At the risk of misleading vividness. . .

"Oh, no! My brother talks to people he can't see, and occasionaly tries to stab his own legs with a knife! What am I to do?"

"Your brother is possessed by demons! We must sprinkle some dirty water on him and mumble some words. That'll cure him!"



"Those people are dark, daddy. Why?"

"They are dark because dark skin is the mark of Cain, and they are bad."



Must I go on?

Are the words religion and ignorance interchangeable?

-Elliot

No. A is a subset of B.

 

[elliotfc]

Are we reading and replying to the same thread?

Using scientific means I feel confident that I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that both you and I are replying to the same thread. As for reading the same thread, I don't know if you have read every post in this thread, and I know that I have, but I'm not sure if I can prove that point.

-Elliot

 

[ceo_esq]

No, of course not. Not nobody, but many many less.

Except for the fact that in the absence of religion there would probably be fewer people for a number of reasons, how do you reckon that fewer people overall would suffer and die if there were no religion?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Except for the fact that in the absence of religion there would probably be fewer people for a number of reasons

Full stop. Firstly, what are those reasons, and secondly, what evidence do you have to support that?

 

[drkitten]

Except for the fact that in the absence of religion there would probably be fewer people for a number of reasons, how do you reckon that fewer people overall would suffer and die if there were no religion?

How many people have suffered and died as a direct result of religious beliefs, either their own, or those of the person inflicting the suffering?

 

[elliotfc]

At the risk of misleading vividness. . .

"Oh, no! My brother talks to people he can't see, and occasionaly tries to stab his own legs with a knife! What am I to do?"

"Your brother is possessed by demons! We must sprinkle some dirty water on him and mumble some words. That'll cure him!"

OK....the brother certainly exists, we agree there.

As for demons...demons being entities...are you saying that they are ignorant because demons don't actually exist? I think it sensible to describe someone as ignorant if they have a *deficit* in knowledge. Meaning, *if demons existed*, and someone didn't accept that or know that, the ignorant label would apply quite well.

I reckon you think that the person doing the sprinkling is wrong. Now, what are they *specifically* ignorant about?

"Those people are dark, daddy. Why?"

"They are dark because dark skin is the mark of Cain, and they are bad."

It appears that the above person is ignorant of skin pigments and melanin and all that stuff. Or not? I dunno. I'd have to get to the bottom of it. For all I know they are quite cognizant of it. Now, if they were to say that "evilness" manifests in the womb and results in the manufacture of such things, I would disagree with them wholeheartedly but I don't know if ignorant is the word. Again, I associate ignorance with a deficit in knowledge.

Must I go on?

You don't have to do anything, we're just talking here.

No. A is a subset of B.

So...is everything religion has to say ignorant (I think we would define ignorance differently, but nevermind that for now), or just some/most of the things religion says?

And of course if God does exist then science is ignorant (it's a methodology...how could a methodology be ignorant...but nevermind that, it's a serviceable thing to say since we're comparing religion to ignorant).

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

Except for the fact that in the absence of religion there would probably be fewer people for a number of reasons, how do you reckon that fewer people overall would suffer and die if there were no religion?

Fewer and BETTER people. -Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

Full stop. Firstly, what are those reasons, and secondly, what evidence do you have to support that?

Sub-replacement fertility is a new phenomenon, and it's occurring in the nations where people have basically stopped going to church.

-Elliot

 

[ImaginalDisc]

OK....the brother certainly exists, we agree there.

As for demons...demons being entities...are you saying that they are ignorant because demons don't actually exist? I think it sensible to describe someone as ignorant if they have a *deficit* in knowledge. Meaning, *if demons existed*, and someone didn't accept that or know that, the ignorant label would apply quite well.

I reckon you think that the person doing the sprinkling is wrong. Now, what are they *specifically* ignorant about?

Are you not aware of the fact that demons don't exist, and that mental illnesses cannot be treated by exorcism?

It appears that the above person is ignorant of skin pigments and melanin and all that stuff. Or not? I dunno. I'd have to get to the bottom of it. For all I know they are quite cognizant of it. Now, if they were to say that "evilness" manifests in the womb and results in the manufacture of such things, I would disagree with them wholeheartedly but I don't know if ignorant is the word. Again, I associate ignorance with a deficit in knowledge.

The Mormon Chruch held, for quite a long time, the belief that dark people are dark, because dark skin is the Mark of Cain. It's all over their "holy" book.


You don't have to do anything, we're just talking here.

So...is everything religion has to say ignorant (I think we would define ignorance differently, but nevermind that for now), or just some/most of the things religion says?

If it isn't based on facts and evidence, but rather spurious speculation without a shred of proof, it's ignorant, often willfully so.

And of course if God does exist then science is ignorant -Elliot

What? Even if god exists, Maxwell's theorems will still work, for one thing.

 

[elliotfc]

How many people have suffered and died as a direct result of religious beliefs, either their own, or those of the person inflicting the suffering?

Very very many. But people have suffered and died as a direct result of....

-love
-intelligence
-desire for money and material goods
-science
-bad culinary arts

...and many other things.

If we ban everything that has directly led to the deaths of many people...well...what's left? Hiding under your bed all day? And what if somebody jumps on your bed and breaks it? Then what?

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

Are you not aware of the fact that demons don't exist, and that mental illnesses cannot be treated by exorcism?

No, you are the ignorant one. You so silly. Demons do exist.

I agree that mental illness cannot be treated by exorcism, and so does the Catholic Church, so no problem there.

The Mormon Chruch held, for quite a long time, the belief that dark people are dark, because dark skin is the Mark of Cain. It's all over their "holy" book.

Now, do they believe that evil manifests itself with dark skin pigmentation? Again, if so, what specifically are they ignorant about?

If it isn't based on facts and evidence, but rather spurious speculation without a shred of proof, it's ignorant, often willfully so.

I disagree. A person can hold things to be objectively true by...oh I'll just use your phrase "spurious speculation"....but the things is...they wouldn't be ignorant. They would only be liable to being called names by you is all.

What? Even if god exists, Maxwell's theorems will still work, for one thing.

Agreed. Or, they work most of the time especially when we're looking. I dunno. They didn't always work, at least that's what they physicists say. What do they know.

-Elliot

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Sub-replacement fertility is a new phenomenon, and it's occurring in the nations where people have basically stopped going to church.

-Elliot

Correlation, not causation, has been established. Try again.

Edit: Now that I think about, how is having fewer births bad? we can barely feed and clothe the planet's populace as it is.

 

[Meadmaker]

The question is for how many are they the primary source for information?

That is indeed the question. My guess is that the answer is darned close to 0.

And if you add in that the US only supports abstenence only programs also for religious beleifs then it is much worse case for religion.

And if you add in the US budget deficit and its effect on interest rates, then it really proves the case.

The OP was about the Catholic Church and its contraception policy.

In my humble opinion, there is a strong element of "I don't like them so I will blame them for everything" in the OP.

The Catholic Church just isn't all that powerful.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

No, you are the ignorant one. You so silly. Demons do exist.

Prove it.

I agree that mental illness cannot be treated by exorcism, and so does the Catholic Church, so no problem there.

You are wrong. Read this week's commentary. It seems the Catholic Church just loves spraying its Jesus water on people's faces.

Now, do they believe that evil manifests itself with dark skin pigmentation? Again, if so, what specifically are they ignorant about?

*sigh* They believed, and no longer do, offically, that black skin was the mark of Cain, and that dark people were innately evil. For the record, being dark does not make on evil.

I disagree. A person can hold things to be objectively true by...oh I'll just use your phrase "spurious speculation"....but the things is...they wouldn't be ignorant. They would only be liable to being called names by you is all.

If you say things which are untrue, which you do not know to be true, you are ignorant. If you say things which are untrue which you know to be false, that is a lie.

 

[ceo_esq]

Correlation, not causation, has been established. Try again.

Edit: Now that I think about, how is having fewer births bad? we can barely feed and clothe the planet's populace as it is.

Are you inferring this simply from the fact that we do barely feed and clothe them?

Also, regarding the negative consequences of fewer births, have you read up on the demographic disaster facing Western Europe and Japan?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Are you inferring this simply from the fact that we do barely feed and clothe them?

Well, our resources are inequitably consumed primarily by the wealthiest populations, not the neediest, and that without heretofore technoligical achievements by people such as Norman Borlaug, we would have already faced a Malthusian crisis.

Also, regarding the negative consequences of fewer births, have you read up on the demographic disaster facing Western Europe and Japan?

More older people and fewer younger people is an arguement for a more secure and better regulated health care and social security system not an arguement in favor of religion.

 

[elliotfc]

Correlation, not causation, has been established. Try again.

You are right. More and more people are saying causation however, for what it's worth. Just saying is all, you can be non-plussed about it.

Here's something to read if you're interested....oops...having a problem copying and pasting the web addresss...so just do a search for...
"from empty pews to empty cradles"
article by 3 professors.

I think it's generally appreciated that people who attend church regularly tend to have more children. I read recently that Canadian women who attended church regularly were 50% more likely to have 3 or more children than women who didn't attend church regularly.

If it's just a correlation, fine. It's a correlation. It's definitely a correlation.

Edit: Now that I think about, how is having fewer births bad? we can barely feed and clothe the planet's populace as it is.

The Population Bomb was written what....30 years ago? Any year now it will all come true. Just like 1984. Any year now, 1984 will all come true.

We all have to have faith in something.

-Elliot