All Religion is Bad.

[mijopaalmc]

if someone dares say religion is harmful or falsehoods dressed up as "higher truths" the apologists run in and say that not ALL religions are bad

You just said it (in bold), honey, not the "apologists". By saying "religion is harmful or falsehoods dressed up as 'higher truths'" without any qualification as to what kind of religion you mean, you are, by a common convention of the English language, saying that ALL religion is bad. It is similar to Michael Savage saying "liberalism is a mental disease"; it doesn't distinguish between individual liberal beliefs it just labels the whole thought system wrong.

 

[Caius Textor]

All religions require faith and a blind belief in some sort of extra-mundane entity/force/sbrubble. Also, they all require a dogmatic acceptance of metaphysical claims (science also has metaphysical claims, but they are debatable and even "observable" at some degree). Buddhism does not escape that rule.

I think religion per se, the idea of religious belief, is bad and causes harm. Also, history shows us that religious organizations have caused harm out of being religious, have exploited the "spiritual" to gain secular power and so on. The fact that they have been VERY good at times is just a side-effect; even wars have positive points about them. That doesn´t mean we should do war (or promote religion) just for the uncertain benefits that it could, maybe, yield.

That being said, it´s pretty low to attack an ideology or a person having an ideology saying that "it´s like a religion". People can have deep ideological convictions without having a "blind faith" on them. Everyone can have a religious-like attitude towards pretty much anything, including science. In particular, bashing communism as a religious-like belief is a shallow, narrow-minded fairy-tale, with obvious political (as opposed to logical/rational/factual) origins.

 

[articulett]

You just said it (in bold), honey, not the "apologists". By saying "religion is harmful or falsehoods dressed up as 'higher truths'" without any qualification as to what kind of religion you mean, you are, by a common convention of the English language, saying that ALL religion is bad. It is similar to Michael Savage saying "liberalism is a mental disease"; it doesn't distinguish between individual liberal beliefs it just labels the whole thought system wrong.

Thanks for dropping by and illustrating my point for me. I wasn't even going to mention that it was you who derailed that particular thread...

(shh.... don't say anything bad about religion... because to Mijo you mean ALL religions are equally bad...he's got an over-generalization thing going on--he thinks if something has any randomness in it, you can rightfully define it as random... pregnancy results are random...poker is random... and evolution is as random as a tornado in a junkyard producing a 747)

 

[Hokulele]

All religions require faith and a blind belief in some sort of extra-mundane entity/force/sbrubble. Also, they all require a dogmatic acceptance of metaphysical claims (science also has metaphysical claims, but they are debatable and even "observable" at some degree). Buddhism does not escape that rule.

I'm not sure how well that applies to Taoism. Granted, many scholars make a separation between philosophical Taoism and religious Taoism, but if you read the central tenets, there does not seem to be much in the way of supernatural or metaphysical claims. *shrug*

 

[Apathia]

I'm moving to Planet X, where they don't have these damned
either-ors!

 

[Caius Textor]

I'm not sure how well that applies to Taoism. Granted, many scholars make a separation between philosophical Taoism and religious Taoism, but if you read the central tenets, there does not seem to be much in the way of supernatural or metaphysical claims. *shrug*

Well, so why is it called/considered a religion then? There is where I, particularly, draw the line. Maybe it´s just a terminology problem.

 

[The Atheist]

Most Asian religions - Buddhism, Taoism, Shintoism (depending on your definition of god(s)), Confucianism - don't necessarily follow gods. And believe me, there are a ton of Asians out there. So 99%? I dispute that.

Sure, sorry, and I wasn't meaning to belittle you by relegating you to 1%!

I was speaking hyperbolically, of course, partly because the overwhelming majority of religions do have a god, partly because I don't personally count Buddhism as a "religion", but that's merely a semantic debate, but mostly because the poll is aimed at religions which do have a god/s.

As someone stated - the bottom line is: Supernatural beliefs are bad, per se.

 

[Hokulele]

Well, so why is it called/considered a religion then? There is where I, particularly, draw the line. Maybe it´s just a terminology problem.

Sure, sorry, and I wasn't meaning to belittle you by relegating you to 1%!

I was speaking hyperbolically, of course, partly because the overwhelming majority of religions do have a god, partly because I don't personally count Buddhism as a "religion", but that's merely a semantic debate, but mostly because the poll is aimed at religions which do have a god/s.

As someone stated - the bottom line is: Supernatural beliefs are bad, per se.

I guess, if you want to define a religion as requiring a supernatural or metaphysical element, sure, that is bad. Basically that is teaching that it is possible, and even preferable, to believe in something that must be taken in faith, rather than fact.

However, I am not the one who has classified Buddhism, etc., as religions. Most governments, census takers, and other classification systems regard these as religions. If you want to focus on faith and gods, word the poll that way. If you want to focus on philosophy and lifestyles, hmm, I'm not sure what to say.

 

[Caius Textor]

It came to me, rather late of course, that this poll might be rendered meaningless because everyone will have a different, and sometimes conflicting, idea of what religion is.

Call me a genius...

On my defense, I´m judging based on the concepts and ideas behind religions. I have previously defended the Roman Church for its role in preserving knowledge, which is a solely secular aspect. I maintain that the blind belief aspect and the political exploitation of that is bad and always been.

 

[JoeEllison]

Most governments, census takers, and other classification systems regard these as religions

Pretending to be Luke Skywalker is also classified as a religion by at least one government... so certainly that is a less than effective way of defining it.

 

[Hokulele]

Pretending to be Luke Skywalker is also classified as a religion by at least one government... so certainly that is a less than effective way of defining it.

Nice cherry-picking. Put that in the context of the entire post please.

 

[articulett]

Don't worry TA, I'm sure T'ai, rttjc, and Iamme will be coming by to boost the figures in your strawman poll any minute now.

I should do a poll and see if gayak's query regarding "who says religion isn't child abuse?" is automatically seen as a statement that all religions are harmful to all children indoctrinated with them... you know-- see if it was worth derailing a thread over rather than discussing the abuses in the OP... see if most people would demand an APA report in order to allow someone to make such a claim as Mijo did-- hmmmm...

But I don't think polls ever would change the mind of a creationist or religious apologist... heck, even facts don't sway them...

 

[articulett]

I'm moving to Planet X, where they don't have these damned
either-ors!

And look. You used your 1000 post to not-vote on the poorly worded question.
And it didn't even have the planet X option. Good for you. Endorse the planet X option even when it's not there. It probably is the best way of dealing with the nonsense. Congratulations on 1000 posts!

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I dunno. Good and bad, depending on circumstances.

Religion compels people to charity, in some cases. It brings people to love for others. However, if this is caused by illogical assumptions, such as God and the afterlife, they may be doing good for the wrong reasons, and you may decide that that is wrong. Of course, its poor assumptions also lead to nastiness like bigotry.

Of course, it depends if Zen is considered a religion. Also, I read a Theravadan book in which the author claimed that Buddhism (At least his version of it) was not based on blind faith like other religions. And what about Confucianism? A lot of religions basically focused on how to live properly (Respect yor elders, study well, etc.)

Mr. Atheist, I would be glad to join your ranks .

 

[Dorian Gray]

All dichotomies will devolve into pedantic metadiscussions of terms.

True__

False__

 

[articulett]

All dichotomies will devolve into pedantic metadiscussions of terms.

True__

False__

true...

What's religion?
What's bad?
What's harm?
Does all refer to people or religions?
Are we talking averages?
Monotheism?

TA is trying to prove to gayak that saying religions suck or anything like that is a blatant attack on all religions-- He is disappointed that he's not proving his thesis, but he's chocked it up to the fact that he is clearly more moral than those who vote no...

per this thread should anyone wonder about the bee in his bonnet:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2792073#post2792073

(he has me on ignore because I am a horrifying individual per TA, because I once wondered aloud if he had a brain tumor...) It will make him very very happy if you vote no--with bonus points if you deride me like Mijo did above. Now don't let him down--

 

[T'ai Chi]

I'd like to see evidence of

-atheist charities
(and no, not just charities that have no religious goals, I mean actually promoting atheism)

-non-religion being the center of any culture

-beautiful and inspiring atheist works of art

Not saying any don't exist. Apparently thought it is rather hard to come by. Google searches didn't amount to much.

 

[JoeEllison]

I'd like to see evidence of

-atheist charities
(and no, not just charities that have no religious goals, I mean actually promoting atheism)

-non-religion being the center of any culture

-beautiful and inspiring atheist works of art

Not saying any don't exist. Apparently thought it is rather hard to come by. Google searches didn't amount to much.

Proof-positive that atheism isn't a religion or belief system.

 

[Gregoire]

Ok, let's put this to the test.

I have been having a fairly lengthy discussion in SMMT, which ought to be in here. The main problem is this phrase:

ALL RELIGION IS BAD.

Nice, black and white comment. Not, "most religions are bad" or "some religions are bad", but ALL. I have covered the matter several times and that is a fair description. "Bad" will equate to "causes mental or physical harm", the contention being that belief in god is bad, of itself.

I would like to poll views on this.

Sorry there are only two choices, but it is a yes/no answer needed and I've lost the instructions for putting Planet X in polls.



And PLEASE!

Do vote before reading the spoiler about why I voted the way I did.

I am new to the Forum so I don't know how most people think, but like most questions using words like ALL, NONE, ALWAYS, or NEVER I cannot say "true".

Specifically, I can imagine situations where a belief that "bad things happen for a reason" etc could help someone get through a difficult situation.

 

[Z]

Is Deism a religion? Is solipsism? What about anti-dogmatic religions, like some forms of paganism, which dogmatically eschew dogma? How about the Discordians?

I'm sorry, but I cannot agree that all religion is bad, nor that all religion causes harm.

In fact, given that the central tenant of the Universal Church of Truth and Light is to believe what you will, and do no harm, I'm not sure you can EVER say that all religion is bad. Even if you define 'causing harm' as 'promoting belief in nonexistant entities' - since some UCoTaLers choose solely to believe in the nearless endless wonders of the material universe.

So I have to vote that statement as false.

`The Rev.