[karl 12]

Mr Walker, on 06 November 2009 - 02:48 AM, said:

Of course, many would argue that, without the sense of human spirituality which underlies all religious belief, and indeed without the organised support of religious groups, we would still have slaves, and women would still have no rights.

I see what your saying but I think moral integrity is a human attribute and not a religious one -perhaps Arthur had it right when he said:

Quote

"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion."

Arthur C. Clarke

Steve Allen also makes a good point about organised religion here:

Quote

"When the churches literally ruled society, the human drama encompassed: (a) slavery; ( the cruel subjection of women; © the most savage forms of legal punishment; (d) the absurd belief that kings ruled by divine right; (e) the daily imposition of physical abuse; (f) cold heartlessness for the sufferings of the poor; as well as (g) assorted pogroms ('ethnic cleansing' wars) between rival religions, capital punishment for literally hundreds of offences, and countless other daily imposed moral outrages. . . . it was the free-thinking, challenging work by people of conscience, who almost invariably had to defy the religious and political status quo of their times, that brought us out of such darkness."

Steve Allen

[Mr Walker]

Quote

name='karl 12' date='08 November 2009 - 10:50 AM' timestamp='1257639649' post='3158767']
I see what your saying but I think moral integrity is a human attribute and not a religious one -perhaps Arthur had it right when he said:

I also see moral integrity as a human attribute, but i see it as congruent with spirituality. Both evolved from the same source and both are essential and integral parts of the evolution of sapience. A sapient mind cannot develop without integrating aspects of spritual thought or the ability to examine moral and ethical questions. That is a part of the nature of being sapient. As our minds ask the big questions, they also create natural responses . To do this, alsong with logic a sense of innate and comparative moralities is required For this an understanding of a spiritual sense is a prerequisite even if we dont recognise this.

For example. Why should any human have an innate right to life? The answer is because of a value we place on a human life. That value intrinsically involves a spiritual as well as an economic value it also involves a p[hilosophic and an emotional value but of all of these the spiritual value seems mos tembedded in the human psyche.
In fact the spiritual value, in most societies, outweighs the econmonic value in the eyes of the individual and the law. Why are humans capable of greed and of altruism? ie how have we evolved the sapient awarenesses which allow for these concepts and choices.

Religion is "merely" another illustration of the human need to categorise, differentiate label etc., as well as to bind/bond in groups, have ceremonies and fancy dress etc., to create a sense of unity or belonging to a group. Religions do this for our spiritual selves, as football clubs do it for another element of our social selves.

Quote

Steve Allen also makes a good point about organised religion here:

Quote

"When the churches literally ruled society, the human drama encompassed: (a) slavery; ( the cruel subjection of women; © the most savage forms of legal punishment; (d) the absurd belief that kings ruled by divine right; (e) the daily imposition of physical abuse; (f) cold heartlessness for the sufferings of the poor; as well as (g) assorted pogroms ('ethnic cleansing' wars) between rival religions, capital punishment for literally hundreds of offences, and countless other daily imposed moral outrages. . . . it was the free-thinking, challenging work by people of conscience, who almost invariably had to defy the religious and political status quo of their times, that brought us out of such darkness."

Fair comment, but also true of many societies which were not overtly religious. The vikings and genghis khans mongols were not driven by religion even if they contained a religious element. Economic environmental and social pressures created their societies and their atrocities. The same is most likely true for christian societies.

I disagree that most social changes were brought about by non religious people In fact many were religious and even christian. Some were certainly dissident from mainstream belief at the time, but the anglican church in Britain, for example, was one of the driving forces against slavery world wide. If you read this

Quote

it was the free-thinking, challenging work by people of conscience, who almost invariably had to defy the religious and political status quo of their times, that brought us out of such darkness."

It does not inherently say that the people were not religious or spiritual. People of conscience, and even free thinkers, are often spiritual, and thus religious, in nature.

The staus quo may have been partly religious but the quote also indicates it was partly political(and i would add economic and social. Religion, simply, does not exist independent of people/society, economics, politics, or even the environment. It is part of the social ecosystem of humanity)

Perhaps this is a case of me growing up in the tradition of ënglish religious and social system, where religion was more often a force for social change, despite its links to the establishment
British christianity, from church of england, methodism, quakers and puritans, through to imports such as calvinism, has long emphasised a social component to christianity; from the village level to the global.

This post has been edited by Mr Walker: 08 November 2009 - 01:28 AM

[churchanddestroy]

Sein_Engel09, on 03 November 2009 - 04:17 PM, said:

okay, will someone please explain to me why the hell there is so much hatred for people of different religious beliefs than another person? its ridiculous, childish and a waste of time. i really dont understand why people get this rush or satisfaction from bashing others beliefs. yes, i realize its been happening for as long as religion has been around in different times, but its the 21st century, dont you think its time to grow up and drop this non sense? seriously, of all the things occuring in this day and age, don't you think worrying about what other peoples religious beliefs should be one of the last things on our minds? its possible for people of opposing religions to get along. take my fiance and me for example. he is a hardxcore christian and i am a wiccan. we get along beautifully and are, obviously, getting married. im not sayin that everyone in every religion should do this, but its an example of how people can get along even though they dont have the same religious views.
i shall digress...i caught myself ranting.
please let me know your opinions.

Because most people can't wrap their minds around the concept that beliefs are just that: beliefs, and in the same way that David Icke's belief that this world is secretly ruled by shape-shifting blood-sucking reptilian aliens doesn't seem to bother most people, so too should we not bother ourselves with the fact that people believe strange things, religiously.

Also, being an ******* is not exclusive to any particular religion. I know Christians who are jerks and I know Atheists who are jerks. I know Wiccans who are jerks and I know Muslims who are jerks. In fact, it would seem that I have encountered people who are jerks from almost every major religion, not to mention jerks from every corner of the political spectrum. Hmm, it seems that I've picked up a theme here: That people are jerks. Why? Because no philosophical, religious, or political position is immune from people who suffer chronic cases of unwarranted self importance, from the Christian who refuses to see anything other than pure literal truth in their KJV Bible to the Atheist who mocks people who pray. The common thread here is people suffering from massively bloated egos, unwarranted self importance, and blatant hypocrisy, not to mention that many of these jerks are also intellectually and philosophically stunted. I, personally, find it most ironic when I encounter this in my secular contemporaries, because my mentality is that those who are religious but intellectually stunted at least have the fall back excuse of being unquestionably religious. Those of us who are secular, even if we believe in a God, and suffer from the afflictions I've mentioned have no excuse for being the way they are. So, what else is new?