34 replies to this topic

[Shokkou]

Let's break down the statement, shall we? Religion itself is not only evil, but the most evil and destructive thing man ever invented. If this is in fact the case, then everyone who adheres to religion is evil. You can't very well hold an evil belief as a core tenet and not be an evil person right? Yet evil has not only been committed in the name of religion, but also in the name of opposing religion as well as entirely independent of religion and I'm sure even the most staunch gnostic atheist can name a handful of people who hold religious beliefs who they would not consider to be evil people. Therefore calling religion inherently evil is blatantly wrong and calling it the most evil and destructive thing ever invented even moreso. To say so reduces the speaker to just another blip in the sea of feuding sectarian viewpoints indistinguishable from the Bible, or Koran, or Torah thumping fundamentalists they claim to be against.

[*Anastasia]

The problem* I see with that argument, though, is that if you must consider every constituent part of something evil to be evil as well, then nothing can rightly be described as evil. I think the Holocaust was evil; does that mean I have to think every soldier who so much as caught a glimpse of a concentration camp was evil? Because I don't. In fact, I think war is, on the whole, evil, that killing other human beings over the truly minor things we wage wars over is evil. Must I then also consider every soldier evil? Must I then consider everything accomplished by wars of aggression evil as well? Because boy oh boy, if we're going to discuss unnecessary wars waged for truly trivial things, there's this little doozy that started as a tax revolt in 1775 that had some pretty wide-ranging effects which I apparently must consider evil solely because I consider warfare itself evil.

And on the issue of taxes, is every Sudanese citizen evil for paying taxes that funded the genocide in Darfur? Is every American taxpayer evil for funding the murder of Iraqis, Afghanis, Yemenis, Libyans, Palestinians?

So no, I don't think one has to consider every religious person evil to consider religion evil, and I can't rightfully say I ascribe that logic any merit. One needn't blame the raindrop for the flood.


*It's not actually a problem at all if your argument is, in fact, that nothing at all should rightly be described as evil, which might be a valid argument, but I put that aside as that didn't seem to be what you were arguing.

[voidoid]

I said that religion is evil.  I said nothing about every adherent to every religion.  I will vigorously defend everyone's right to the peaceful practice of whatever superstition makes their life a little bit more comfortable.  All I want is reciprocity.  And where I live the most whack-job fundamentalists have secured local government functions (school boards and liquor boards in particular) in order to enforce their peculiar beliefs on everyone.  My comments may not be generalized beyond that scope.

 

I do not object to their pracitce of their beliefs in their home.  I object to their insistence that I practice their religion by law and that all the children in public schools are indoctrinated in their religious beliefs.

[Redezra]

Personally I agree with the "nothing is actually evil" thing, makes the most sense here.

 

I just don't like organised religious structures that manipulate a deep need of many people to get them to do... stuff.

[He who posts]

2,1,1,3,5,3,5
Raised unrelgious, attend religious school for some years when young for 5 years or so. They sort of gave up as nobody read the damn bibles anyway.

Edited by xoindotnler, 26 September 2016 - 09:54 AM.

[He who posts]

 

Still wouldn't mind things like what is written in Edda, way more human than some sand bloke splitting seas and boats to survive world floods (damn boat people). 

Edited by xoindotnler, 26 September 2016 - 10:04 AM.

[Shokkou]

Your arguments are all invalid:

[Manoka]

Just as an aside, only about 7% of major conflicts around the world have been religious motivated, and only 2% of the deaths of these major conflicts have been from religious wars. So religion is actually not the most destructive thing and people kill each other over nonsensical things all the time. In fact as a single ideology, communism is the most deadly ideology. In just the last 100 years 40 million or so died in China, 20 million died in Russia, and 10's of millions more around the world have died needlessly under communist regimes giving the death toll 100 million+. The entire crusades killed like 2 million people, and that lasted for 200 years. 

 

So, no, religious wars, not the deadliest, not the primary source of conflict. 

Edited by Manoka, 26 September 2016 - 03:42 PM.

[He who posts]

Your arguments are all invalid:

[He who posts]

Just as an aside, only about 7% of major conflicts around the world have been religious motivated, and only 2% of the deaths of these major conflicts have been from religious wars. So religion is actually not the most destructive thing and people kill each other over nonsensical things all the time. In fact as a single ideology, communism is the most deadly ideology. In just the last 100 years 40 million or so died in China, 20 million died in Russia, and 10's of millions more around the world have died needlessly under communist regimes giving the death toll 100 million+. The entire crusades killed like 2 million people, and that lasted for 200 years. 

 

So, no, religious wars, not the deadliest, not the primary source of conflict. 

Meh, stupid arguments. Like if you count up all religious wars you can get it to say what you want then add the stuff that happened in name of religion but before recorded history. Numbers numbers. Like the communist death toll can look high but if we look at conflicts where there was financial gain aka capitalism you could spin out different numbers (like the crackpot theories that Germany needed to be destroyed because it was threatening other people's economic interests, middle east oil).

 

[slimshadyinc]

Religion killed lots of folks throughout history, way before data for deaths ever existed. I just know people have been tortured and killed because of it, and it sickens me to think of it. One of the biggest reasons religion doesn't kill as many people now is probably because religious leaders don't really lead countries these days.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Religion killed lots of folks throughout history, way before data for deaths ever existed. I just know people have been tortured and killed because of it, and it sickens me to think of it. One of the biggest reasons religion doesn't kill as many people now is probably because religious leaders don't really lead countries these days.

 

Tell that to people in the Middle East.

[KiWi]

Religion killed lots of folks throughout history, way before data for deaths ever existed. I just know people have been tortured and killed because of it, and it sickens me to think of it. One of the biggest reasons religion doesn't kill as many people now is probably because religious leaders don't really lead countries these days.

 
Tell that to people in the Middle East.
 

He said "as many"

and you're trying to imply those plots of land in the middle east fit our same definition of a country.

Silly jorost~!

[Manoka]

Religion killed lots of folks throughout history, way before data for deaths ever existed. I just know people have been tortured and killed because of it, and it sickens me to think of it. One of the biggest reasons religion doesn't kill as many people now is probably because religious leaders don't really lead countries these days.

The records come from Archaeological digs, and the data goes back to 3,500 B.C (although some go as far back 10,000 years ago, such as in India). So uh, no, it does go back that far. Religion is not as big a killer. And this includes the crusades, muslim conquests and conflicts in India (which most people don't know about but killed millions).

 

I find it funny how quickly people will try and back peddle. Religion "has to be" the worst thing ever or else your world view falls apart, right?

 

https://www.scribd.c...ps-Alan-Axelrod

Edited by Manoka, 30 September 2016 - 06:35 AM.

[Manoka]

 

Meh, stupid arguments. Like if you count up all religious wars you can get it to say what you want then add the stuff that happened in name of religion but before recorded history. Numbers numbers. Like the communist death toll can look high but if we look at conflicts where there was financial gain aka capitalism you could spin out different numbers (like the crackpot theories that Germany needed to be destroyed because it was threatening other people's economic interests, middle east oil).

First, they can use archaeological digs and other forms of evidence to be able to tally up the figures. So, the figures go back accurately to 5,500 years ago, and over 10,000 years ago for civilized humanities earliest wars. Also, not all wars designed for financial gain would be capitalism. Not everything designed for financial gain is capitalism; hell in theory, communism is about financial gain for the citizens. So that's a stupid argument.

 

Also the oil is going to france and China and doubt we seriously wanted the oil. In fact if anything, France and China wanted the oil the most, as did Russia, since they violated the international U.N. embargo on it. American companies wouldn't have benefited by opening up foreign oil companies to compete against. [1][2][3]

Edited by Manoka, 30 September 2016 - 06:30 AM.