Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page
Maybe a world without religion would be better. Let's assume it would be. Now what? A world without violence, murder, theft, and any number of things would be better too, so why not just get rid of those?
People have a natural instinct towards religious like beliefs, you can't get rid of that. And I don't know how you would argue that religious people should be converted to atheism.
Separation of church and state is the best answer I can see. Let the advancements of science and thinking do their work.
Churches feed the division between people
Churches feed the division between people, and there were in the past only two groups, the saved and the dead...No one troubled to keep sinners alive, though at least for the Catholics, they would not execute the insane because they needed to give people the chance to repent before death, but then they would kill them...
If your concern is for the natural consider how natural it is for one to crap in ones britches, and how unnatural it is to not...If society has always modified its behavior in view of the greater good, it cancertainly limit the influence of religion on society...There is a limit to how much nonsense people should be subjected to...
no, people feed division between people. Church or no church, there would still be division
Oh, we can change religions certainly, just as we can change our bathroom habits. But we can't do away with either.
But the dog will not lie down . Religion is not going to fall asleep and not let its damaging dogma effect us all. It is proactive, it will never just be happy with those who choose. It constantly tries to educate the young into its beliefs. Our education systems dictate we will never have a free vote.
First of all, I would like to point out that I do not think religion would stop wars. I just want to say that before anyone assumes that that is what this thread is about.
This thread is about how I think a world without religion would bring a kinder, better oiled, more socially economically sufficient, and more intelligent world. Many will hate me for it. But this is merely my opinion, and it doesn't stop me from having many friends who are religious. To all the religious people reading this who are already critizing my argument before it has started, I would like you please to be open minded.
In my last thread (see here http://www.philosophyforum.com/philosophy-forums/branches-philosophy/ethics/7159-morally-twisted-society.html) there was a clear clash between those who were religious and those who were not. The religious people argued that unloving sex is equally as bad as violence. One of the repliers reasoned that although violence can be justified, sex without love cannot, because it is entirely selfish. I would argue again that it can be justified simply by the fact the people having sex enjoy it and it can harm no-one if done safely. I would also argue that a religious person cannot criticize selfishness because religion is entirely selfish. Most religions have the idea that being 'good' all your life will pay for a completely selfish form of life insurance: heaven, or it's various alternatives. This also gets rid of any form of altruism.
If on the other hand you are atheist, you can still be altruistic. Yes, of course many religious people will tell you that they have done things that are purely altruistic, but I find the concept that they have not at some point thought of it as a help to pay for their ticket into heaven unlikely. Do humans really need religion to be kind? I certainly don't. I am in no way saying that I am always a kind person but I need no God for it to feel good to help a dying animal. Wouldn't it be nicer if everything people did was out of the goodness of their hearts instead of for God?
The other problem that religion creates is the fundamentalist morals and values that it carries with it. These morals are often logically and socially economically flawed, and by that I mean they have no positive influence on society. The reason people follow them is to please God. So there again we see the selfishness of religion. Instead of helping society, religious people are thinking of their own personal gain by following absurd morals so that they can get into heaven. We only have to look back to the slave trade, which the puritans didn't see as morally wrong in any form, to see just how absurd these fixed morals can look. Even if something only creates positives in terms of happiness, such as professional pornography as discussed in the last thread, religious people will condemn it and judge those that are in it or watch it as nothing but evil. You can call me a pervert, a sleeze, or whatever for arguing against them, but it won't matter because I think they are the ones that are perverted. Christianity and Islam says that people should dress modestly, and that nudity is an evil thing that should not be seen by anyone but you or who you are married with. Does this mean to say that the tribes around the world that wear barely any clothes are going to Hell for it? Does this mean to say, that the people that lived before humans started wearing clothes, all went to Hell? And what do you mean by nudity? What parts of the body must not be seen and why? Breasts certainly seem to be one of them, but seeing as they have nothing to do with sex, why?
It is for similar reasons that often intelligent discussions are infected by people who's morals are perverted by their selfish attention to their religion. If it wasn't for religion, we could discuss economics and logic with more ease, not bothering to stop to think about absurd morals that, from an atheist perspective, do not help anyone.
Not only that, religion represses people, and this is the most dangerous thing of all. Repression creates aggression. We can see it with the muslim extremists, and when it comes to sexual repression, it doesn't take a genius to see a link with it and serial killers such as Ed Gein. And before anyone says it, yes I know their also is a link with serial killers and the opposite extreme to sexual repression as well. But non-the-less repression is dangerous, it's unhealthy, and it's unnatural, and the only thing that creates it is religion, or someone's excuse for it.
Religion also creates some disturbing and sadistic traditions and ideals. Satī, witch hunting, human sacrifice, male dominance and racism are to name but a few. Sure you are thinking, well those things happened a long time ago, but they didn't really did they? Male dominance and racism is still very much thought of as morally OK in a few parts of the world. And who says the other things aren't going to reinvent themselves at some point in the future, because some religious group that believes sacrifice is 'morally right' becomes more powerful.
This is why I think a world without religion would be better, to give an unadulterated and open minded look at how the world could be made a better, using economics and logic, instead of nonsense morals and values.
There has never been a society or culture without religion.
Man is a meaning seeking creature, man searches for transcendent purpose.
The best you can hope for is religion which inspires to positive ends.
Even if you destroyed all religion, man would invent new religions.
Our relationship to the universe is an eternal persistant existential question.
Oh dear... a typically uninformed post by someone who clearly doesn't have the slightest clue what he is talking about.
Why don't you actually learn something about religion before laying into it? You have not made a single statement about religious belief which applies to religion as a whole. I'm guessing you are a typically small-minded ignorant atheist who once sat down and heard the deranged ramblings of an evangelical pastor, and assumed that this is what all religious people believe.
In my last thread (see here http://www.philosophyforum.com/philosophy-forums/branches-philosophy/ethics/7159-morally-twisted-society.html) there was a clear clash between those who were religious and those who were not. The religious people argued that unloving sex is equally as bad as violence. One of the repliers reasoned that although violence can be justified, sex without love cannot, because it is entirely selfish. I would argue again that it can be justified simply by the fact the people having sex enjoy it and it can harm no-one if done safely.
I would also argue that a religious person cannot criticize selfishness because religion is entirely selfish. Most religions have the idea that being 'good' all your life will pay for a completely selfish form of life insurance: heaven, or it's various alternatives. This also gets rid of any form of altruism.
If on the other hand you are atheist, you can still be altruistic. Yes, of course many religious people will tell you that they have done things that are purely altruistic, but I find the concept that they have not at some point thought of it as a help to pay for their ticket into heaven unlikely. Do humans really need religion to be kind? I certainly don't. I am in no way saying that I am always a kind person but I need no God for it to feel good to help a dying animal. Wouldn't it be nicer if everything people did was out of the goodness of their hearts instead of for God?
It is for similar reasons that often intelligent discussions are infected by people who's morals are perverted by their selfish attention to their religion. If it wasn't for religion, we could discuss economics and logic with more ease, not bothering to stop to think about absurd morals that, from an atheist perspective, do not help anyone.
This is why I think a world without religion would be better, to give an unadulterated and open minded look at how the world could be made a better, using economics and logic, instead of nonsense morals and values.
B
It appears to me that one doesn't need a God to be religious. All one would need is a belief. Today it seems that the biggest "Religious" group isn't one that believes in a god, but believes in science. Scientists go around telling us 'This is definitely how the universe was made.' yet they don't show proof. Prove black holes exist, bring me one or go to one close up. Prove the universe started as small as a pin head, I've heard a scientist say it began as an infinitely small point. You don't need a god or gods to be religious. The next big religious war might be between scientific beliefs. It wasn't the Theist who created eugenics. Having a belief in god isn't dangerous, having a belief period can be.
Anyone who wants to get rid of religion, two words - Good Luck -