Can we agree on this? Biggest problem in the world today.

[MyTriforce]

Bankers

 

[Xshu]

I cant be assed to use quote marks on so much content so I'm just going to copy paste

Fair enough. It does make your posts a little harder to read, but if it's inconvenient for you, that's fine.

The old testament is still in the Bible. The New Testament isn't exactly peace and love, either.

Well sure it's part of the Bible, but that's really just there for examples by now. The New Testament essentially bulldozes almost every law set in the Old Testament, if my understanding is correct. That's why we don't sacrifice animals anymore. Of course it isn't all peace and love, but a lot of it is. Especially the parts about Jesus, because, well, it's Jesus. Even most can atheists agree that Jesus was a stand-up guy.

Yes. The Invisible Pink Unicorn is a parody of the religious ideas which are self contradictory. Either way, you cannot disprove the invisible pink unicorn, just like you cannot disprove a loving and just god that condemns people to hell for all eternity, etc.

I can't speak for any religions besides Christianity, but the Bible is not self-contradictory. Some religions contradict each other, but the core resource, the Bible, is not self-contradictory. Please feel free to point out any perceived contradictions and I'll be happy to explain them to you.

In any event, I still already disproved your unicorn. Something can't have colours if it's invisible. By virtue of its invisibility, it has no colour.

Total nonsense. Religion hates change because it's based on a set doctrine, unlike science which is always open to new evidence. Religion will change when forced to change, and thats where we get Tomatos grayscale of believers who don't kill people. We have "Moderate" muslims and "fundementalist" Christians, as well as "Intelligent Designers" who believe in god by believing in intelligent design, etc. What you mean to say is that religious concepts will warp themselves to stay alive in the society they are in, but the religion itself, the basic set of ideals set down by the unchanging book, doesn't change one jot.

Well, first of all, I said theism. I did not say religion. Theism only requires a belief in a god or gods. Some religions, as is evident by Young Earth Creationists, are indeed resistant to change. Most theists, however, are perfectly willing to say evolution was a part of the plan.

Second of all, science may be more more open to new evidence than religion, but not by as much as you seem to imply. If someone found a modern-day rabbit from the Cretaceous period, do you have any idea how many people would call bullshit on it no matter how proven it was? Any time anything comes along that challenges the way something in science currently works, science resists it to the point of ridiculousness. I point you to the outcry over Pluto's change in status as a planet for recent proof. Some scientists still refuse to accept it's not one.

Third, yes, that is true of religion. What I said of theism also remains true. I don't see what's wrong with that. The Bible is not a bad doctrine for being unchanging. Seriously, defending hookers. Turn the other cheek. Good stuff.

Finally, science is not fundamentally opposed to religion, as you seem to think it is. No scientific theory is directly opposed to the existence of God. Evolution, the big bang, nothing. Hell, we could find out the Aesir exist and it wouldn't prove the non-existence of God.

Atheism is about a disbelief in god - Even dawkins himself thinks that the possibility remains that god could exist, though it's very unlikely. I personally claim that god doesn't exist because I think it's total nonsense, but I can't disprove the existence of something, hence Invisible Pink Unicorn/FSM arguement. Atheism is general on the other hand maintains the possibility of a god/gods.

I believe agnosticism is the one that maintains the possibility of God, but then, there are different degrees of each. If you want to identify as atheist while maintaining that there's a very small possibility god exists, that's your call to make.

And Al Quada and the State of Israel aren't?

Note how you say "Al Quada" and "State of Isreal", not "Islam" and "Judaism". There's a difference. The first two are groups which use religion as an excuse to hate and kill. The latter two are religions that promote being good people, and they are being abused by the former two. Intolerance, again, is the problem here.

That's because religion in civilised countries has to water itself down to survive. Hence the phrase, "Moderate muslim." It doesn't mean that it's any less crazy, it just means that people don't follow the crazy bits, because they prefer to live in peace despite what their batshit god says.

I believe the Bible specifically says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". This is a direct order never to strike first in a fight. Honestly, it's like you've never even read the thing.

Again, I can't speak for other religions, although I do know that Islam orders its followers to respect the other "people of the book", the Jews and the Christians.

So, there are bits of barbarianism in it. And, yet, this is still somehow a good alternative to atheism. Not a good arguement.

That's like saying democracy is bad because the ancient Greeks came up with it and they were mostly batshit crazy. The really old parts of the Bible were written in a time when the masses were barbarians, so they do barbaric things and God singled out the least barbaric and hedonistic of the people and got them to natural selection the asses of everyone who was making the world worse. Is it pleasant? No, but that's how the world works when you don't live in a civilized society. Eventually the world mellowed out and smartened up, so God sent Jesus to tell us to be cool. Saying the Bible is barbaric for its old laws is like saying American law is barbaric because it used to practice slavery. Things change.

These people are called psychopaths, and more often than not the fear of hellfire drives them to kill other people in the name of god.

Oh, that's as ridiculous as the claim that atheism makes people immoral. It's silly to think that nobody has ever in history been scared out of a theft or cheating on his wife because they were afraid God would lay the smackdown on them for it. If religion can't do something that simple then it's not a very good tool for controlling the masses, now is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either religion can control the masses and thus prevents some bad people from doing bad things, or it can't be used to control the masses and your argument is thus void. Which is it?

I never said they were. If you want to believe in god and live in peace, fine. I still think you're stupid, but I won't put you in the box of a evangelicalising lunatic or "extremist." I have beef with the idea more than anything, because that is the root cause of all of it.

You say you have a beef only with the idea, and yet you claim the people who believe these things are not worthy of respect. You say this even though you also acknowledge that it's easiest to convert the desperate and needy. Are you saying you have no respect for the desperate and needy?

Oh for fucks sake. You'd have to be blind not see that that's exactly what religions are. Religions are sets of stupid, backward ideas on how to act based on what some mythical deity says. You can argue that believers want to live in peace until the eagles choke, but at the end of the day religion teaches irrational nonsense, often with irrational nonsense that tells people to kill other people because of who they are. Kill the Unbeliever! Kill the jew! Kill the gays! Burn the witches! That is what religion ends up as, directly or indirectly. Even the most peaceful religions tell people to waste their lives trying to seek god or nirvana or whatever instead of doing something constructive for human progress. Religions are sets of irrational and evil ideas, and no amount of goody goody living in peace will change that, because the commandment to suspend personal reasoning in the name of a deity is still written in the "Holy books".

Again, you making it sound very much like you're simply angry at religion and lashing out at it when you behave this way. Thou shalt not kill is backward? Turn the other cheek is backward? Love thy neighbor is backward? You're only looking at that which you misconceive as bad and none of what you know full well is good. That's just petty.

Where does it say kill the unbeliever? Where does it say kill the Jews?

Of course, the witches and gays comment is often taken out of context. Gays of the time were usually raping other men during war or engaging in orgies to false gods. Witches of the time were doing what people think satanists of today do, although even then I don't think it says to burn them anywhere. I could be mistaken, though.

I like how you paint human progress as though it's a good thing when half the people in this topic claim humanity itself is the worst thing in the world today. Maybe if we spent less time progressing and more time searching for inner-peace, we wouldn't use all of our progress to kill each other.

Your use of the term "evil" is interesting. Even as you reject God, you indirectly claim the existence of universal set of morals?

Your final words there are curious as well. Being a "goody goody" living in peace is no excuse for being religious? You certainly are an extremist, aren't you? I would think anyone who chooses to live in peace for almost any reason is a good person. Why should their faith or lack thereof make a difference as long as they do good?

Irrational belief is not worthy of respect, especially that belief encourages an agenda to make other people suffer because they are different. Note: Pro lifers, jihad, christian lobbyists against gay rights and sex education, oppression of women by islam, israel commiting genocide against palestine because they have a "Divine right" to the land, and on, and on.

People who use religion to push their agendas should not be used to represent religion any more than Stalin should be used to represent atheism. Some people are just dicks, and the fact that they're religious almost never has anything to do with their being a dick. They just use the fact that they're religious to cajole other people into believing them, but they would just use something else if there was no religion. National pride, perhaps. Anything that unites people could take its place.

And by the way, there's nothing wrong with the pro-life line of thought. It's a perfectly valid opinion to think that a fetus counts as a human life and not an organ. It's only those pro-lifers who threaten or intimidate people who disagree with them that are taking it way too far, just like all the other people you mentioned. Bad people will use any excuse to hate.

And religious worldviews are based on books that tell people to kill other people for trivial reasons. You can't pick and mix which bible bits you like. It's either the word of god or it isn't.

Except that the later parts of the Bible overwrite most of the old parts. The old parts are only still in the book because there are still good examples and stories in them. The old rules like sacrifices to God aren't followed anymore, just like the old genocide rules aren't followed anymore. It's not designed as a rule book, it's designed as a book of examples with some rules that happen to be in it. Those rules can be old and overwritten, because it's a story that goes in chronological order. They have to specify what God's rules were at the time. Some people don't get it and still follow some of the old rules, and that's why it's important to understand the context in which it was written. Do most people? No, but that's more the fault of mass-human stupidity than the Bible.

Of course, but a claim that something exists without proof is totally without credibility and should not be ever taken seriously.

...You know there's no proof that black holes exist, right? Only a lot of evidence. There are a lot of scientific theories that only have evidence. That doesn't make them wrong, it just means there's no way to prove them at the moment.

Pick and mixing the word of god because they find it instinctively wrong to kill, duh? It's still the same book, they just leave bits out at convience. It doesn't mean it's any less barbaric at its core.

Thou shalt not kill. They're following it to the letter on that one. Oh sure, God occasionally gave direct orders to kill at first, but his standing orders haven't been interrupted in a while, so anyone killing is still breaking the rules.

 

[Syndef]

sorry to be nitpicking your post, but for the last time americans did invent freedom nor do they have a patent on it. both emancipation from slavery and the right for women's suffrage came before in europe, hell at a point the only two nations practicing apartheid was america and south africa. however you are right about that it has become a part of the american identity to be freedom loving as well as freedom fighting

and i am fully aware that this contradicts what i wrote about shame and pride, but i never wrote that i was not part of the problem

Never said America invented ideas of freedom. I would be putting myself in a terrible position if I said that. America is just well known for trying to spread it around these days. It will obviously look like domination or cultural destruction to some, and that's a damn shame, because to an extent and in some cases, it is true. What I did say though (and I'm glad you caught it) is that America seems to be commonly associated with these values.
Don't misunderstand though, personal freedom and the like are pretty much universal ideals. Today, the United States wants to stand for it. Tomorrow...hell...it could be Ukraine...who knows? Would we even be able to recognize the earth in a decade?
Remember Rome? Everyone remembers Rome. There are still people that are enthusiastic about it and admire its values and achievements to this day (and, just like America, its atrocities are also acknowledged: imperialism, slavery, etc.) But yep, you know it, Rome itself is dead and gone, and a bunch of ruins are all that's left. Nations born and die, but ideas live on (sound familiar to CoD4 players?).

 

[Sixties Spidey]

Biggest problem in the world today isn't war, it isn't news bias, it isn't global warming, and it isn't terrorism either. It's ignorance.

 

[Daedryon]

Bumping for the good of the forum.

 

[Morderkaine]

I blame religion for the world's impending downfall. On a political, economic and globally fuck-up-people scale.

I'm probably more scared of Christianity these days than Islam...although to be honest they all seem to be as bad as each other.

I would say religion is the biggest problem in the world, and over population is another major one as it just makes all the other ones worse by reducing resources and crowding people. Religion causes the worst problems, it justifies the horrors that people commit in its name (honor killings, suicide bombings, discrimination due to differing religion). Its spread from parents to children, brain washes them, and is most likely all completely false and made up (yes there might be a God, but its rather unlikely).

[quote="cuddly_tomato" post="18.88668.1365386
You know those idiots who talk in the news about all the crime the GTA games cause? About all the school shootings being the responsibility of Maralyn Manson? You are doing the exact same thing when you blame religion for the terrible things that people do. Worse, you completely overlook the fact that even without religion people do terrible things. Some of the people who don't believe in "this bullshit" have committed some of the worst attrocities imaginable in the name of "cleaning it up". Do I hold atheism responsible for that? Of course not. That would be ridiculous for the simple reason there are over a billion atheists in the world and for the most part they are not trying to wipe out other creeds and cultures, but are happy to lead their lives with their own beliefs. By the exact same token, how can religion really be responsible for so much shit in the world when there are at least 4 billion theists in the world who all just live their lives and don't try to cause any trouble?

Some people are just bad. If they are atheist, religious, or simply Charles "Batshit" Manson crazy then they need to be judged on their own merits for what they do. In each case the the person responsible is just that, the person responsible. Not what they believe, not what they have been taught, but the person themselves.[/quote]

The problem is that religion claims a higher authority over other laws (in the minds of the religious), it give excuses for their actions, and it promotes a narrow view of the world. Religion teaches people to believe whatever they are told by authority figures as true with no proof other than old books and teachings, and that questioning is wrong and evil. It is a ``virtue`` in religious societies to be able to believe with no proof and to not try and learn for yourself.
Hmm, a system of "believe what I tell you, and you are a good person if you take everything I say on faith, and hell and torture awaits those who dont believe what I say." Thats pretty much part of all major organized religions - they have been creating brain washed soldiers or other followers for years.
The question is, whether greed for power and money is the biggest problem in the world and religion is just used as a tool, or whether religion itself is the biggest problem.
Saddest thing is, what people die for and dedicate their lives to is just a lie created thousands of years ago.
I recommend anyone with an open mind to read Richard Dawkin`s "The God Delusion"

 

[cuddly_tomato]

I recommend anyone with an open mind to read Richard Dawkin`s "The God Delusion"

Dawkins is just Falwell with a different skin.

You don't need more than half an eye to see that religion causes no problem what-so-ever, it is merely an excuse given after the fact. Evidence - please inform me of an atheist state that has actually worked. Now please inform me of a theocracy that has actually worked. You will see a remarkably similar pattern.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is no difference between religious bigotry and anti-religious bigotry. You are part of the problem.

It is a ``virtue`` in religious societies to be able to believe with no proof and to not try and learn for yourself.

Gautama Buddha:- "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."

If only certain atheists could do the same....

You want to know a real problem in the world today? Fundamentalist, evangelical atheism like yours. Prefer the term theophobia to distinguish it from the reasonable and balanced atheists. Fundamentalist atheists are by far the most common fundamentalists out there right now. I haven't seen a fundamentalist Christian, Muslim, Pagan, Hindu, or Buddhist on this forum, but plenty of Atheist fundies.

The most dangerous form of fundamentalism today is fundamentalist atheism. The reason for this is that in the occidental world, the fundamentalist atheist thinks of himself as intellectually superior to the believer. He thinks of himself as having a clearer view, a better understanding, as "not being fooled" by the promises and hopes of the religious believer. He sees himself as a beacon of light in a dark world. He looks condescendingly at the history of man, seeing it as a long path leading finally to this mature look on the universe.

The fundamentalist atheist sees his creed and his breed as the future of humanity, those through which humanity will be saved from its own feebleness. But let's not be fooled ourselves. It is a creed. Maybe we are fooled by the fact that the English language does not capitalize the word as it does every other creed. The Buddhist, the Hindu, the Christian, the Anglican, the Taoist, are all corrected and capitalized by my word automatic corrector. Not the atheist. This small "a" gives him the illusion that he is not "like the believers", that he is of a different, more mature breed.

Most religious persons in today's world would think that their religion is based on a belief, which leaves some room for doubt, be it only as a possibility. The fundamentalist atheist does not think so. He thinks that there is no need for doubt. He thinks that doubt is a position of weakness, that it leads to belief. It used to be that it was the religious person who thought doubt dangerous. Now most mature religious persons will gladly admit that doubt is unavoidable and healthy. The atheist thinks that doubt should only be for doubting that god exists. Doubt is only beneficial to other people for the fundamentalist atheist because he thinks he knows better. That's why he is dangerous. Even worse, he does not see himself as a danger but as a form of saviour. Seems to me I have heard that one before.

I prefer a more humble approach.

 

[all-for-one-and-one-for-all]

i would just like to say to all of you that live in the United States and wrote a negative post on this that if you don't like the way America works then leave. What better way to protest against thsi "evil nation" then to leave it. All you people do is sit on your computers all day and bash the nation you live in with your personal opinions and your trash. You are the people that are ruining this nation, you are the ones that deprive us of the morals that we need to make this great country work. Positive attitudes are the ones that we need, love for ones country has been the basis for the greatest nations that this world has ever seen. The U.S. has many, many, many, problems and yes they may start with the leaders, but if the people don't do anything about it then how will it change? it won't is the simple answer to it. So do something about it don't just talk trash.

 

[all-for-one-and-one-for-all]

i love religion

 

[NeoDeath90]

Religion. You can commit the most horrible acts of violence and genocide, yet it's acceptable to some people if it's done in the name of their god/gods.

 

[Lullabye]

i love religion

go die.

Religion is a problem. People are the cause of all the bad shit that happens to themselves except for natural disasters and other wierd and random shit. Religion is just the name we gave the face of human incompetence. Not saying that other things people do are not as bad, like ultranationalism, racism and such but religion is the big one today. Racism has gotten a lot less worse and alot of todays nationalistic extremists stem from religion.(i.e the "HOLY LAND"). If we can just nerf religion like we did so much other crap society spews out there would be many less problems. Well thats just what i think. I am no psychic and with the track record humanity has so far, nothing good can possibly come from anything we do. I don't care if you believe in god or not, if you force your religion on others (whether it be christianity or atheisim....i know i know, not a religion) you are not bringing happinness and salvation or understanding and logic. Except for few cases it usually brings annoyance, fear, resentment and all those lovley things people are so well known for.

 

[Lullabye]

Too many children.

No, really. Think about it.
Children are filthy, loud, and obnoxious little snots.
When they grow up, they become filthy, loud, and obnoxious adults.
Or sometimes, politicians.
Or soldiers.
Or terrorists.
Or rapists.
Or regular people who just contribute to making everything worse.

Instead of blaming "people," I blame "children."
It makes me sound like a mean old man and damnit, I like that.

But people become politicians, soldiers, terrorists, rapists and.. Eh.. Regular people.. Too.

children are people to. or are you saying children don't qualify, because children invented language, and the concept of god. If that doesn't qualify someone for being a person i don't know what does.

 

[davepenman]

Lazy people who take their liberty for granted.

 

[AbsoluteVirtue18]

Pop music! Nah.....Greed. Yeah. That works.

Rome? Really? I was think more along the lines of Constantinople.

 

[kandza]

WE are the problem. No humans no problems. But what is life without problems?

 

[irishstormtrooper]

Is it a modern day Roman Empire? I'd disagree with that.

I do too. We haven't captured any territory by force in more than a hundred years.

 

[xanith02100]

The biggest problem in the world IS the United States.

For an abundance of reasons. Many possibly fixable now that President Bush is gone. Many probably so deeply rooted into the country that they will never be fixed with anything short of a complete restructuring of government.

To note, I am a U.S. citizen.