Let's eliminate religion
 

It seems like a simple concept, but I think the planet would be more peaceful. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong.

There is one religion on this planet that I'm aware of, that is a barrier to peace. I don't see the Amish as a threat to peace on Earth.

OK with me! ;)

Simplify the concept even further. Lets eliminate free-thinking. Let us make thought uniform. That should pretty much eliminate conflict. Huxley's novel Brave New World would be a fairly good model on how to do it. Although, fortunately, technology has advanced a long way since that book was published. There are probably much more refined, perhaps brutal, ways which could more easily accomplish the goal.

I banned it from my life when i was 12. its worked great so far ! :lama:

Organized religion is the #1 cause of all terror,death and destruction on this planet.

Why is simply believing not enough?

Why do do we need a bunch of silly rules as interpreted by a bunch of fools in costumes reading from highly edited books telling us how we should live?

Screw religion as far as I'm concerned.I'm tired of watching people die over crap at the hands of fanatics who can't even prove what they believe in is real.

Yikes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Religion is a fairy tale.
I'll believe when I see, till then push the collection box in front of someone else.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

History tells us that most conflict is religious based,so eliminating religion and the need for it seems like a peaceful initiative. Seems like a start at least.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

got any facts to back that up?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-...b_1400766.html


"History simply does not support the hypothesis that religion is the major cause of conflict. The wars of the ancient world were rarely, if ever, based on religion. These wars were for territorial conquest, to control borders, secure trade routes, or respond to an internal challenge to political authority. In fact, the ancient conquerors, whether Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, or Roman, openly welcomed the religious beliefs of those they conquered, and often added the new gods to their own pantheon.

Medieval and Renaissance wars were also typically about control and wealth as city-states vied for power, often with the support, but rarely instigation, of the Church. And the Mongol Asian rampage, which is thought to have killed nearly 30 million people, had no religious component whatsoever.

Most modern wars, including the Napoleonic Campaign, the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the American Civil War, World War I, the Russia Revolution, World War II, and the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam, were not religious in nature or cause. While religious groups have been specifically targeted (most notably in World War II), to claim that religion was the cause is to blame the victim and to misunderstand the perpetrators' motives, which were nationalistic and ethnic, not religious.

Similarly, the vast numbers of genocides (those killed in ethic cleanses, purges, etc. that are not connected to a declared war) are not based on religion. It's estimated that over 160 million civilians were killed in genocides in the 20th century alone, with nearly 100 million killed by the Communist states of USSR and China. While some claim that Communism itself is a "state religion" -- because it has an absolute dictator whose word is law and a "holy book" of unchallenged rules -- such a claim simply equates "religion" with the human desire for power, conformance, and control, making any distinctions with other human institutions meaningless."

Sell that #^&#^&#^&#^& to the 2.5 million christian Armenians slaughtered by the islamic Ottoman Turks.You'll get nothing from that sale other than the "Are you out of your mind?" look.

It's human nature to have an answer for everything and one of the scariest thoughts to face his death. Religion gives you the answers to everything and sometimes it welcome stuff for death will give you greater things than what you might have now.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Got a handed to the Rastafarians though...they make some good music
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pastafarians make even better music.:smokin:

Are you serious?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Considering only about 16% of Americans consider themselves nonreligious , I think it would be a tough sell even on your home turf .
Speaking of turf. I'm pretty sure that's what most wars are over
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Can the song "Imagine" play while this thread is open. Amen.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, let's follow the example of the wife beater John Lennon.

You guys know anything about US History? The founding principles of this country were Judeo-Christian principles. They worked spectacularly well. The freedoms guaranteed to us, are guaranteed because we believe those rights are endowed to us by our creator. When the Democrats were enslaving blacks, it was Christians like John Brown who led the abolitionist movement. When the Democrats wanted to make segregation permanent, it was Christians like Martin Luther King and the Kennedys who spoke out against it.

Other than that, religion plays no role in our nation.

Revisionist history aside we are currently in a pickle across the globe and I am guessing we are not there to spread Christianity. My proposal would save lives in todays world.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you are correct.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Revisionist history aside "

Please, educate me. What did I say that was factually incorrect about American history? I am all ears...

"My proposal would save lives in todays world"

You cannot begin to show that eliminating all religion would result in a net gain of lives. For example, President Bush enacted the President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief in Africa. Bush will tell you that his faith was the motivation behind that plan. That plan is credited with saving one million lives in Africa.

One specific religion, is probably a net minus in the lives saved/lost column.

If you want to know what happens when religion is eliminated writ large, I refer you to the USSR, North Korea, Communist China, etc.

You said once you were religious, you go to some church. Why on Earth would you go, if religion, in the aggregate, results in the loss of life?

OK . . . done. Now that we've eliminated religion, let's eliminate death. Starting now . . . . going once . . . . going twice . . . going thrice . . . done!

All set. Fixed.

read the article....your first post sounded like a lunatic fanatical rant ...

nice facts...pickles

It all comes down to this , do unto others ...

Ridiculing religious people doesn't follow this ...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I just feel the benefits would outweigh any potential negatives if this were to happen. What could possibly happen that could be construed as a hazard to this idea? The need for religion should have been eliminated long ago when science explained just how bogus some of the principals of organized religion really are. I do understand this is unlikely and I hope this is not interpreted the wrong way. This forum is constant proof that being religious does not preclude one from being an A whole. I also know plenty of folks here who are more compassionate and generous than those who hide behind a cross.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess this means you have no facts :hihi: think(or research) back to aetheist dictated societies and tell us what history tell us? is it possible that those who leverage religion for evil means are in fact, aetheist or simply evil, since they are doing everything that their "religion" would direct them not to and the opposite of what is utlimately professed by their "faith"?...would eliminating religion all together reduce evil deeds?...would eliminating religion eliminate the ire that the religious and others have drawn through history from those that used their religion and other things as a weapon against them? it seems to me that evil is pretty indiscriminate but picks the low hanging fruit... for that answer please look back at your historical research .....

do atheists believe in evil?

I think there are evil people as well as nice people. I just don't feel religion is responsible in either case. Sorry if this offends you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Without religion how could the wolves heard the sheep?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not offended......

hey...what if you add the numbers of the ultimate expression of an atheist mindset...abortion....to your historical view of death by mindset or motivation? that would be about 336 million under China's atheist government and one child policy

government

"I just feel the benefits would outweigh any potential negatives if this were to happen"

You are entitled to that opinion. I disagree. No one is forcing people to go to church. They go, because they get something out of it.

"being religious does not preclude one from being an A whole."

No, it doesn't - you and I have both claimed to be religious, correct?Nor doesbeing an atheist prevent one from being a wonderful person. But study after study, shows that religious people are more generous (which saves lives), happier, less likely to divorce, less likely to cheat on their spouse, etc.

Faith is also a tremendous comfort to pepole when life inevitably kicks us in th egut, or in times of despair. I am a Eucharistic minister in my parish, I frequently give communion to very sick people in hospitals. It comforts them. You may not like it or understand it. You don't have to.

Alos, I asked you to tell me, specifically, where I revised history. Can you? or is that asking too much?

I think he was referring to the article by the Rabbi that I cited....

"I think there are evil people as well as nice people"

Thanks for the scoop.

No one would say that every religious person is good, or that every atheist is bad. But religion, at least as defined as judeo christian principles, usually tips the scales for the better. There is no data I am aware of, that refutes that. It's also common sense unless you are bigoted against religion.

There's also this little thing called the US Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of religion.

Also, both Scott and I have stated, correctly, that societies that have done away with religion, have generally been some of the darkest sh*tholes in the history of the planet. It's also true that the Judeo-Christian principles upon which this country was literally founded, have served the entire world pretty well.

But why let facts get in the way of a good rant?

So you justify religion because people feel like they get something out of it? This feeling is similar to that of a sick person who has been cured with a placebo. I just don't see the need for it. Desperation has also been cited for a sudden religious affiliation. The church has done well with such tactics,they are to be commended.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I justify religion because (1) it is expressly protected in our Bill Of Rights with zero ambiguity. I kind of like our constitution. (2) religion has been the source of incalculable good (and of course some awful things too), for both the faithful who take comfort in their beliefs, as well as the needy who benefit from the generosity of the faithful.

"Desperation has also been cited for a sudden religious affiliation"

Sure. If it makes the desperate feel comforted, why is that bad?

"I just don't see the need for it. "

Fortunately for you, in this country, no one is forcing you to buy into it.

"The church has done well with such tactics,they are to be commended"

Yes, that's all we do, is take advantage of the desperate. We don't do anything else. A speck of intellectual honesty is way beyond your capabilities.

Dangles, just know that as much as you clearly despise religion, if you or anyone you care about is ever sick and can't afford care, any Catholic hospital will treat you for free. If you are ever hungry, you can get a free meal at a Catholic food bank. If you ever need a place to stay, you can get a free bed at a Catholic shelter. Those bastards!

Good or bad, the religious freedoms granted in this country seem to be presenting an obstacle to our safety. As much disdain as you have shown toward the Muslim community displays an awareness that our constitution with all of the Judeo Christian values may end up endangering life as we know it. I just don't see the need for it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Good or bad, the religious freedoms granted in this country seem to be presenting an obstacle to our safety."

Agreed. But the threats to our safety come from one religion, not a variety of them.

"As much disdain as you have shown toward the Muslim community "

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you showing the same exact disdain when you say religions are a threat to our safety? Or are you as concerned about the Amish as you are about Muslims?

"our constitution with all of the Judeo Christian values may end up endangering life as we know it."

Agreed again (thsi is getting concerning). I believe our Constitution, sure as hell, is putting us in danger. And I don't know the answer, except perhaps we need to amend the Constitution, and if enough peopl efeel that way, there is a mechanism to do that. When the Founding Fathers guaranteed religious freedom, they were obviously referring to Judeo-Christianity. That freedom isn't in there so that Aztecs can move here and start making human sacrifices.

"I just don't see the need for it"

You may well not have any need for it. And if you can live a happy life without it, and be charitable to others, then I would say you are succeeding without it. But for some of us, it provides comfort and a moral compass. I'll admit it's a bit of a crutch, if you don't need it, maybe that shows a strength of chatacter on your part that I don't have.

A lot of people don't think we need guns. Most don't think we need mansions or billions of dollars. Most people in this country (founded by, nourished by, protected by mostly religious folks) are concerned far more with what they want than what they actually need. I say "actually" because when we say we need something it is usually an object or a means to get or maintain something we want. I don't need, nor want, gambling for money, but I would be willing to bet that your life as you structure it is mostly founded on wants not "actual" needs. Do you even actually need the elimination of religion, or do you want it?

The biggest problem with need as a basis for existence is that there is no universally agreed definition for absolute necessity. You can deconstruct all needs eventually to zero. There is no need for anything to exist. Taken up a notch to a personal level, you, Sea Dangles, are not necessary. The world doesn't need you.

But that we do exist, if that is not some mirage or a dream in some entity's mind, then there appear to be some very basic necessities to make that existence possible. So, if you get down to the basics of what you actually need--not much.

But having gotten to the stage of existence, willingly or unwillingly, if beyond scrounging about for the necessary basics there is left a bit of time for reflection (if you somehow have gotten ahold of consciousness), you may, beyond devising better ways to get, store, and increase the basics beyond actual need, "wonder" what the hell your doing here and why (hell, of course, being figurative since at this point you may not have created or divined its definition).

Thus and so (after "evolving" into the human race as we know it) we eventually, through our mysterious ability to think arrive at a time of millions then billions of human creatures who have gone far beyond dealing with actual need into vast spheres of wants. For most of us, needs have actually transformed into wants. And these diverse wants separate us. And the separation breeds conflict.

But if you see religion as the cause of conflict, you may be putting the cart before the horse. Religion, as you might say, being a want rather than an actual need, then how is it any more of a cause of conflict than all the other different wants.

History, contrary to what you said, does not tell us that most conflicts are religious based. That's why you cannot back that up with "facts" when asked to do so. But history does tell us that, excluding psychosis, differing wants are the cause of all conflicts.

Fast forward to your contention that the Constitution (with its Judeo Christian values, religious freedom, etc.) endangers life as we know it is, again, a mistaking wants for needs. When you said you just don't see the need for it, I couldn't tell if you were referring to the Constitution or religion. Or both. Obviously, or at least it should be obvious since there is no necessity for existence, neither the Constitution nor religion, nor anything else for that matter, are necessary. Certainly not for you. But, probably because you are stuck at some surface perception due to progressive notions, you don't see how the Constitution actually facilitates what you want. If adhered to correctly, it diminishes conflict, not exacerbates it. It allows for differing wants while prohibiting those wants from being forced on those who don't want them.

Your notion that constitutional protection of religious freedom dooms us because it protects Islam is not found in the Constitution. The Constitution does not prohibit the practice of Islam as a religion. It prohibits it as a political or governmental structure being interjected into the constitutional structure.

As for your protestation that "The need for religion should have been eliminated long ago when science explained just how bogus some of the principals of organized religion really are", again you mix need for want. Neither religion, nor science, are needed. But, sure, as a "need" to get what you want they both are "necessary."

And the recorded beginnings of science were practiced by religious people many of whom were looking for proofs of God. Many scientists today practice a religion. They may not adhere to what you call bogus principals, and they may not "need" all the trappings of religion, but they may want the iteration of ritual to connect with their notion of a God otherwise unknowable. And, after all, science has its own rituals. Procedures that must be done in certain specific ways every time in order to apply their own limited human minds to the task of discovering things not visible or recognizable to the human senses. Ritual of some kind, whether it be in law, politics, science, religion, human culture as a whole may not be needed in an absolute sense, but it seems to be needed to get at various wants.