Religion makes you meaner

[Obelix]

Are we talking about a fate worse than a fate worse than death? That's pretty bad.

 

I can easily consider a fate worse than death involving a gurney, life support, automatic hydration and Frank Carson telling you jokes.

 

Forever.

 

---------- Post added 10-11-2015 at 13:19 ----------

 

Why don't people choose a nicer god, one that just frowns or at the most gives a loud 'tut'.

 

They tend to be boring and don't sanction all out war against infidels.

 

I mean lets face it - given then chance of a good war involving lots of manly fights, brimstone, charges, ambushes at dawn, (all this assuming overwhelming superior numbers of course), booty, plunder, pillage, women, beer and whatnot.....

 

 

....or the choice of sitting round holding hands with the enemy singing Kumbaya for a few weeks, which one are most people going to consider more acceptable and less nationally embarrassing?

 

I mean look at the Swiss. Known for cuckoo clocks, being neutral, watches and chocolate.

 

Compare that to the Germans who managed to subjugate Europe a couple of times militarily, and then did the same economically.

 

Or look at the French. The only country that managed to lose a war with the Italians, not once, but twice.

 

Military victories define countries. That's why they pander to "gods" that provide and justify them, and those "gods" tend to be a bit on the mean and vindictive side....

[SnailyBoy]

In my experience sarcasm isn't a common trait in Christians, I've found that many don't even get sarcasm.

 

Quite the opposite, the ones who are dislikeable (which isn't all Christians) I've found to be more pretentious rather than sarcastic.

 

---------- Post added 10-11-2015 at 12:55 ----------

 

 

Sarcasm can be negative or positive, when used right it can be a useful exercise in tuning childrens' BS detectors in preparation for all the similar stuff they'll come up against in life (including doorstep salespersons, religions, fraudulent investment schemes, general gossip, etc.)

 

---------- Post added 10-11-2015 at 12:56 ----------

 

 

I didn't watch that, I saw it come up and recognised it, is it the part where she tells the kids that Harry Potter is evil?

 

Here's a nice measured response regarding Harry Potter

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/parents-should-drown-children-who-read-harry-potter-because-dumbledore-is-gay-says-extreme-right-a6727221.html

[Zamo]

I didn't watch that, I saw it come up and recognised it, is it the part where she tells the kids that Harry Potter is evil?

 

Yep... and if this was the old testament then he'd be killed!

[Waldo]

A religion is more than just the superstitious beliefs people made up thousands of years ago to try and make sense of the things they couldn't comprehend. It is a documented system that sets out beliefs that must be believed and practices that must be practised. How can you say there is no intention to influence? How can you say there is no manipulation when the authors of these works of fiction pass their work off as that of 'the one true God' and tell people they will burn for eternity if they do not follow the rules?

 

Gee. I'm not saying that there is no intent to influence, in the religions as they are in this day and age.

 

I was saying that there is no evidence (at least, none that I've seen) to support the assertion made by some on this thread, that religion was designed* to control people.

 

A lot of religious people seem pretty screwed up to me; but a lot seem like really cool intelligent and deeply insightful people with kind benevolent natures. Conversely, a lot of raging anti-religous types, seem quite hateful.

 

 

 

* referring to what Cyclone refers to as 'original design', which I would just call 'design' (any modifications to an original design, I would just call re-design; but I just don't have the energy or inclination to argue semantics with strangers on the internet).

[JFKvsNixon]

I can easily consider a fate worse than death involving a gurney, life support, automatic hydration and Frank Carson telling you jokes.

 

Forever.

 

What I was talking about is a fate worse than a fate worse than death. It's pretty bad.

[Alan Ladd]

In my own life, I don't know that many adults that are religious, or would class themselves as profoundly religious, but the ones that are I find to be kind and considerate. That sharply contrasts with the 'fire and brimstone' impression that is often presented in the media. I'm not saying that the media, or in this case academia seek to deliberately misrepresent religion, and those that have devout religious beliefs; but I think a lot of important nuances are missed. And it can be used to make sweeping generalisations.

 

Yes there's a great deal of cruelty and hypocrisy in religion, and of the religious, that's hardly news. We know that. Maybe it's those high up in their respective religions that are most guilty of this. But the non religious can lead by example, and not use this as a stick to beat others with?

 

With notable exceptions the contents of the bible and the koran give positive examples of how human beings should live together in toleration and kindness. The old testament is clearly an amalgam of a number of writers some tolerant others vindictive. Overall they are ancient lessons meant to instruct and guide.

 

As in all things certain strong individuals come along and hijack these writings claiming some great insight and seek to control and dominate.

 

Religion is fine. The fundamentally religious are another matter altogether.

[RootsBooster]

Gee. I'm not saying that there is no intent to influence, in the religions as they are in this day and age.

 

I was saying that there is no evidence (at least, none that I've seen) to support the assertion made by some on this thread, that religion was designed* to control people.

 

A lot of religious people seem pretty screwed up to me; but a lot seem like really cool intelligent and deeply insightful people with kind benevolent natures. Conversely, a lot of raging anti-religous types, seem quite hateful.

 

 

 

* referring to what Cyclone refers to as 'original design', which I would just call 'design' (any modifications to an original design, I would just call re-design; but I just don't have the energy or inclination to argue semantics with strangers on the internet).

 

If nothing else, I think Leviticus is good enough evidence on it's own but it all begins with the book of Genesis, "Do what I say or else...."

[gomgeg]

With notable exceptions the contents of the bible and the koran give positive examples of how human beings should live together in toleration and kindness. The old testament is clearly an amalgam of a number of writers some tolerant others vindictive. Overall they are ancient lessons meant to instruct and guide.

 

As in all things certain strong individuals come along and hijack these writings claiming some great insight and seek to control and dominate.

 

Religion is fine. The fundamentally religious are another matter altogether.

You're probably correct about that, most religions seem to have good basic principles until some start to believe their faith is the right one and start to inflict it on others, some even going to the extreme of being prepared to kill for it.

It's always amazed me that people of faith who believe they are going to paradise when they die will fight tooth and nail to stay here.

[cassity]

 

Religion is fine. The fundamentally religious are another matter altogether.

 

I think ALL religion is fundamental, with the core value being sky pixies. Some may read "sky pixie" as an attempt by a 14 yr old playing down their divinity as an insult..I'm fine with that considering on the other foot children are the sexual victims of 'faith' as well as other individuals being the victims of homicidal butchery.

 

Where Gods exist, confrontation exists, where confrontation exist so does meanness +. Religion as you say is fine..problem is, add men (unavoidable by default) and the excrement hits the fan. That's not to say the non religious are devoid of meanness. Religion by its very nature is mean, no surprise there considering all texts are the sole architect of man. It stifles and confines simply because it isn't questionable, and even if it is, it's only questionable based on the premise it's all true as a starting point without apology or rationalisation.

[I1L2T3]

Why don't people choose a nicer god, one that just frowns or at the most gives a loud 'tut'.

 

Or a more efficient God?

 

---------- Post added 10-11-2015 at 19:27 ----------

 

You're probably correct about that, most religions seem to have good basic principles until some start to believe their faith is the right one and start to inflict it on others, some even going to the extreme of being prepared to kill for it.

It's always amazed me that people of faith who believe they are going to paradise when they die will fight tooth and nail to stay here.

 

You don't need to be religious to be a good person.

 

But you may feel that religion could help if you don't know how to be a good person, or perhaps want to strive to be a better person, and need a handy set of guidelines. Practically all the major religions can provide such guidance.

 

Like you say it can all go wrong when people become too devout. There is plenty of guidance in the great texts too about taking things to extremes.

 

You don't need to be religious to be a bad personeither though