<strong>Then you have a great illogical bias against religion. You seem to think people will cease to be simpletons if they cease to be religious, but none of the anecdotal evidence supports you. People find new ways to be stupid all the time. Don't let your bias cloud your judgement.</strong><hr></blockquote>
State sponsored & organized stupidity has some scary implications, like Nazis, Taliban, etc. Unorganized stupidity is, well, less organized.
State sponsored & organized stupidity has some scary implications, like Nazis, Taliban, etc. Unorganized stupidity is, well, less organized.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nazis, religious? Soviets? Religious? Communist China? Religious? Saddam? You don't need a religion for abuse to exist. Even your example came down 50:50 as you searched for specifically religious attorcities. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Where religion has often stood in for culture in global conflict you might argue a Lennonesque "and no religion too" but the simple truth is that in any of those cases there was enough difference of family, community and history, that religion is just another one of those things. Perhaps Religion ought to answer for more because it seems to want to promise more, but it's just another cultural difference. Nationalism and property are at the heart of more struggle than religion.
Though I cannot be counted amongst the devout, I flatly reject the equivocation of religion and stupidity, even though though religions have been getting dumber, and especially Christianity seems past its peak there is a great depth to religious thought, history and practice, the equal of any humanity, and worthy of study, reverence, and careful* (and *critical) participation.
And still, this is all a distraction, something besides the point that you're forcing, though not making:
If you want to assert that a religious endeavor is a stupid one, I will say to you, proove your case. I would argue that a religious endeavor is an irresistable one, and that irresistable forces often make people act stupidly, but even for a cynic like me there is no guarantee that they will extinguish intelligence in their fervor.
I'm sorry that this has become a religion debate. I, for one, know that there is value in religion. It can be really healthy, but I do not want government involved in funding it. That's what it comes down to. Gov't should not be in this business.
<strong>I'm sorry that this has become a religion debate. I, for one, know that there is value in religion. It can be really healthy, but I do not want government involved in funding it. That's what it comes down to. Gov't should not be in this business.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You're right. The government should actually be taxing it like any other businesses. By making them tax-exempt, they are technically funding them anyway.
You don't need a religion for abuse to exist. </strong><hr></blockquote>
No, that's why I'm focused on the "state sponsored" aspects of the problem. I'd rather have individual drunks than state sponsored zombies, religious or not. Religion just adds another monkey wrench into the works.
So the 50/50 was on purpose, because it's a bigger problem than religion. I'd have the same problem if AA became government sponsored and everyone had to start pledging alligence to the flag in order to get support to fight alcoholism.
I still contest that an alcoholic is better than that situation, deadly or not.
<strong>As for the bible, that book was written 30 years after the events happened and translated I don't know how many times.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If anyone actually knows about this, without blowing air out of their ass, I am really interested to know for a particular area of research I'm working on. Links would be helpful too. Thanks in advance and sorry for the off topic question.
Wasn't the Bible written by over one thousand individual people, over a time period of roughly six hundred years?
I heard that from a religeous source, some years ago but I don't remember where. I would like verification on how many people participated in the writing of the bible, and how long it took. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.
Comments
<strong>Then you have a great illogical bias against religion. You seem to think people will cease to be simpletons if they cease to be religious, but none of the anecdotal evidence supports you. People find new ways to be stupid all the time. Don't let your bias cloud your judgement.</strong><hr></blockquote>
State sponsored & organized stupidity has some scary implications, like Nazis, Taliban, etc. Unorganized stupidity is, well, less organized.
<strong>
State sponsored & organized stupidity has some scary implications, like Nazis, Taliban, etc. Unorganized stupidity is, well, less organized.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nazis, religious? Soviets? Religious? Communist China? Religious? Saddam? You don't need a religion for abuse to exist. Even your example came down 50:50 as you searched for specifically religious attorcities. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Where religion has often stood in for culture in global conflict you might argue a Lennonesque "and no religion too" but the simple truth is that in any of those cases there was enough difference of family, community and history, that religion is just another one of those things. Perhaps Religion ought to answer for more because it seems to want to promise more, but it's just another cultural difference. Nationalism and property are at the heart of more struggle than religion.
Though I cannot be counted amongst the devout, I flatly reject the equivocation of religion and stupidity, even though though religions have been getting dumber, and especially Christianity seems past its peak there is a great depth to religious thought, history and practice, the equal of any humanity, and worthy of study, reverence, and careful* (and *critical) participation.
And still, this is all a distraction, something besides the point that you're forcing, though not making:
If you want to assert that a religious endeavor is a stupid one, I will say to you, proove your case. I would argue that a religious endeavor is an irresistable one, and that irresistable forces often make people act stupidly, but even for a cynic like me there is no guarantee that they will extinguish intelligence in their fervor.
<strong>I'm sorry that this has become a religion debate. I, for one, know that there is value in religion. It can be really healthy, but I do not want government involved in funding it. That's what it comes down to. Gov't should not be in this business.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You're right. The government should actually be taxing it like any other businesses. By making them tax-exempt, they are technically funding them anyway.
<strong>
You don't need a religion for abuse to exist. </strong><hr></blockquote>
No, that's why I'm focused on the "state sponsored" aspects of the problem. I'd rather have individual drunks than state sponsored zombies, religious or not. Religion just adds another monkey wrench into the works.
So the 50/50 was on purpose, because it's a bigger problem than religion. I'd have the same problem if AA became government sponsored and everyone had to start pledging alligence to the flag in order to get support to fight alcoholism.
I still contest that an alcoholic is better than that situation, deadly or not.
<strong>As for the bible, that book was written 30 years after the events happened and translated I don't know how many times.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If anyone actually knows about this, without blowing air out of their ass, I am really interested to know for a particular area of research I'm working on. Links would be helpful too. Thanks in advance and sorry for the off topic question.
Wasn't the Bible written by over one thousand individual people, over a time period of roughly six hundred years?
I heard that from a religeous source, some years ago but I don't remember where. I would like verification on how many people participated in the writing of the bible, and how long it took. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.
[ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: lucys_trip ]</p>