Are you Brain Dead?no waaaaaaaaaaaaay
Read bitch
Thats why no-one fucking says "In the Name of darwin"
Are you Brain Dead?no waaaaaaaaaaaaay
It's called sarcasm. I hope you're not deliberately being a dumbarse.Are you Brain Dead?
Read bitch
Thats why no-one fucking says "In the Name of darwin"
no waaaaaaaayAre you Brain Dead?
Read bitch
Thats why no-one fucking says "In the Name of darwin"
Like a book, so easy to put down.Enjoy your holiday.
Why do secular countries have higher Literacy and Education levels and lower levels of crime compared to more religious countries?
Oh that's right, because religion is the problem.
How so?Severe over simplification.
The politics of countries and the world are much more complex than that. The countries in anarchy and poverty are not that way purely because they are very religious nor are affluent countries affluent due to their sectarian nature.How so?
No one's actually taking responsibility, there isn't really any particular known author or editor. It's all supposed to be an over-arching 'word of god'. The problem with following so-called scriptures is that they are permeated and tainted by the manipulations of the common man. The Christians attacked the idea of worshipping false gods, well to worship a book is just as false and misleading as well.Well, it's their holy book. They should and and are responsible for what it says, if they follow it.
I've said right at the very start that it's human stupidity that distorts what religion is about. Who wrote the bible? Certainly not God or Jesus. It's humans. Stupid humans. Look at the history of the Protestant movement and the Protestant bible, it's all distorted, tainted and man-made.You were saying that the people who interpret the book are at fault
I agree with that.Besides wich, who wrote the book is irrelevant. Doesn't matter whether it was Jesus, Bill next door or fucking Zeus. Still doesn't change the fact that either most of the world's nutjobs are following it or it's a screwed up text.
See, that's why so many people are missing the point about what religion is supposed to be about. Religion is essentially about spiritualism. Stupid humans institutionalised religion, and they fucked it up.We're not debating spiritualism, moron. I never even argued that definition.
We're talking about how fucked up organised religion is
so much win.See, that's why so many people are missing the point about what religion is supposed to be about. Religion is essentially about spiritualism. Stupid humans institutionalised religion, and they fucked it up.
Facepalm.jpgIt's extremists sects within particular religions.
Then again you have radical atheists who assault, rape and murder.
Stupid atheism...or is it better to say stupid human stupidity?
Hey tully, nice maths.So... 1000 x 365 is 3.65 million. 3.65 million people are killed every year by Americans?
stfu stfu stfuHey tully, nice maths.
Try again.
By the way Schroe, I've kinda stolen the use of that emoticon off of you. Soz beb.
But there is an amusing and interesting correlation between the two. Coincidence? Not bloody likely.The politics of countries and the world are much more complex than that. The countries in anarchy and poverty are not that way purely because they are very religious nor are affluent countries affluent due to their sectarian nature.
For the points about charity and emotional needs, we have suitable substitutes of similar effect, namely humanism and non-denominational spiritualism. However, there is no greater or even similar motivator for acts of terrorism and war than ideoligical deifferences, with religion naturally topping the list of ideologies. Let's think back for the past 50 years and identify which wars would not have been there if it weren't for the ideological (esp. religious) differences on each side:By saying religion as a base is at fault for, what was it? The majority of the worlds problems? You're showing how little you've really either examined or understood the world's social issues. It's funny that you're talking about all the atheists who as a majority don't commit crimes and all the religious people who do. How often do cases arise with people of sound mind who say "I committed fraud in the name of Abraham" or "I raped that women because I read that I should in the bible." We also need to consider the good things religion achieves; the charity organisations, giving purpose and meaning ( for some people) etc. See it is not religion that is faulty, nor the lack of it. Religious people read a holy book and believe the things and interpret them in a way that suits them. The same way an atheist may be raised by his parents or be taught things a school and only follow those things which suit him. Religion is often used as a justification, but it's not the only justification used for crime or problems.
I'll start by saying that my statements were made in response to someones comment that religion is basically the complete source of societies problems and my arguments are structured in response to that.For the points about charity and emotional needs, we have suitable substitutes of similar effect, namely humanism and non-denominational spiritualism. However, there is no greater or even similar motivator for acts of terrorism and war than ideoligical deifferences, with religion naturally topping the list of ideologies. Let's think back for the past 50 years and identify which wars would not have been there if it weren't for the ideological (esp. religious) differences on each side:
Well of course Afghanistan and the War on Terror wouldn't exist.
Iraq would have had no justification.
The Israeli-Palestinain conflict wouldn't occur because there is literally no difference between them except for religion.
The Sri Lankan Civil War would have been impossible without religion to divide them into Hindus and Buddhists.
India and Pakistan would still be one country.
Somalia would not be ripped apart by an Islamist insurgency.
The Balkans would have been silent.
The Iran-Iraq War wouldn't have occured because there would have been no Islamic Revolution in Tehran.
Vietnam would not have been split into Communist North and Liberal South.
The Six-Day War would never have occured.
The Soviets would never have gotten involved in Afghanistan but for the Islamists.
The Korean Peninsular would never have been divided and war wouldn't have broken out.
Hell, even the Second World War may never have occured, but for ideology.
So this leaves us with the Gulf War and the Central African conflict. Wow.
World War One
No, Bush and his Evangelical, neo-conservative cronies wanted to invade Iraq. The only reason they were allowed to get away with it is because the American public was largely divided upon the issue. So whilst the people debated amongst themselves, Bush went ahead and did it anyway.I'll start by saying that my statements were made in response to someones comment that religion is basically the complete source of societies problems and my arguments are structured in response to that.
I can't comment on all the wars you made reference to because I don't know the details of all of them.
But for starters, the American government wanted to invade Iraq, and had 9/11 not happened they would have found another excuse to do so.
I could go onto the several other conflicts on your list which I am informed about but it probably wont be to any benefit.
Ah, but you're missing the bigger picture.But I'll just ask this, there are civil wars going on in many countries in the world, some of which are related to religion. But what about the wars for resources and money. You can't blame religion for greed, and greed is as big a source of the world's problem's as religion is.
Religion is ideology. They're one and the same. Only difference between religion and political ideology is that one works in the realm of the supernatural, whereas the other normally works within the realms of human society.And also we're talking religion not ideology. Unless you're trying to say that religion is ideology, but the source of problems is in religion as an institution more than it is the ideologies of religion.
Try looking in John. Intolerence in the Book of JohnSorry I just read your second world war comment. In which Holy Book did Hitler read that people with blue eyes and blonde hair were supreme beings and that Jews were evil and should be tortured and slaughtered?