Gorrath said:
The difference between your what ifs and mine are that the ones I proposed have and actually do happen and are happening right this moment. The ifs I chose aren't some broad or sensationalist things, they are things that are actually happening right this moment or have happened very recently. There is a movement to try and put faith-based belief into science classes. There are people who have demonized vaccinations, with no evidence, and caused children to suffer because of it. There are priests in the middle of the AIDS epidemic decrying the use of condoms. And there are people who are having to fight tooth and nail for basic civil rights due to other people's religious beliefs. This isn't some random collection of things I picked out of a hat. I'm not playing on fears, I'm talking about realities.
The difference is, both (except for my extreme example about morality) has happened. The school that I worked at is prohibited to even mention religious beliefs. We couldn't even celebrate Halloween for religious undertakings. Schools in the boroughs of NYC are adopting such practices slowly, but noticeably. The one brave soul who admitted to having faith in my physics group was damned near laughed out of the group. In fact, he wasn't asked back. The extreme backlash in these very forums when religion is even brought up is palpable. Even when one person just suggests to live and let live. Take this page for example.
I do feel if I mention more examples, it will be countered with 'It's not my experience' or 'that's just a few examples'. I am willing to chalk this differences up to perceptions, but if you rather not I can continue.
also find it most odd that you suggest that there would be some lack of morality without faith based belief, but that's a whole different argument. What's more, while I can point out specific examples of powerful groups actually doing the things I pointed out, I have seen no major Humanist/Secularist/Atheist groups in the United States that want the what ifs you suggested. There is a massive religious group with great international power who has tried to stymie the use of condoms. There is not a massive international atheist organization calling for a ban on religion. I think you are engaging in a serious false equivocation here.
I put morality in quotes as I found a lot of people feel science itself isn't moral, but the pursuit of knowledge, and only Religion or Philosophical views have morals. I mean, sure. Yeah, I can point out certain groups trying to appeal to others using the pretty dressing of science in terms of 'anthropological studies' to prove their side and gain supporters (like the American Freedom Party who don't routinely use the call of God, but the warped statistics gathered by 'scientific means'), but I don't really see how that would work out, as it never seems to. You point out X,Y,Z of people who fit in this category, and I can look at the throes of others
who also fit, but do not behave the same way. Or it will simply become a number game. Which side has more, or which doesn't count. That way leads to madness. I suffice it to say, both sides use their primary weapons (faith or science) to prove their hate if that's what they have.
Because at the end of the day, that's what we're talking about. Those who have hate or ignorance and will use the tools in their arsenal to gather supporters. Those who want to dumb down or impose their beliefs will use whatever means necessary. Whether is the dream they had from God, or the 'carefully put together statistic fact sheet' that proves how dangerous something or someone is. I will not turn my back on either, and I consider equally dangerous. but I will not go out of my way to point the finger at Religion when plenty of people harmful to humanity use science just as well to try to impose their harmful agenda.
There is no doubt that we have made advances in all areas despite being mostly culturally Christian. There is also no doubt that some of the main arguments against progress in the past and in the present, on certain topics, are entirely based on religious objections or unscientific claims. Ask homosexuals fighting for the right to marry if they think fear of religious persecution is "silly".
Religious persecution is actually illegal and would have been outright thrown out the window and people in jail if that were the case. The Laws themselves were drafted as it being illegal. Were they drafted by people who believed in God long ago? Absolutely. Are the people who are trying to fight these unfair laws so our fellow citizens can enjoy the same freedoms we enjoy purely Atheists? Not hardly. This is not an exhaustive list of of people who support same sex marriage [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_supporters_of_same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States#Elected_officials], but I invite you and anyone else to just right click any elected official and see their religion. Some might have one, some might not. But the point is, both non-religious and religious alike and stepping up to change our laws.
They point to those groups because those groups do damage. If some surgeon happens to be really good at his or her job and also happens to be religious, it makes no difference to me. What matters is if that surgeon goes on to say that he/she thinks that he has miraculous healing powers due to God's influence and that doctors shouldn't wear gloves or wash their hands because germ theory is "only a theory" and that disease is God's punishment for sin. It's not about people having faith that makes those atheist groups take action, it's when people try and impede the rights of others or spread unscientific claims in place of scientific research that get them all riled up.
My argument is any loud group of any belief or creed does damage. The Golden Dawn certainly, CERTAINLY does damage. Horrible damage that actually makes me afraid that we as humanity will never learn from our mistakes. It's as scary to me as the ignorance of Westboro. But I don't see any threads about the Golden Dawn here. I don't see anyone clamoring to point out the evils therein. People here much rather target Religion and the like because those people might try to impede the rights of others or spread unscientific claims.
This is where I bring my original point back full circle.
I do not understand why people are so pre-occupied with religion when at best it's a minute annoyance to those who don't believe. Yes, trust me, I do know about the scientific research that was hindered over time, but that means we don't get to colonize Mars sooner. Ok. sad. We have the Fourth Reich brewing in Greece, with attacks on people and land and having these Neo-Nazis actually taking places of power in Greek government, yet we have 4-7 articles every two weeks about religion.
with all due respect, but forget religion. We have more pressing matters that we can focus on, yet we deal with the minor annoyances in our craw. We talk about those faithful hindering our ability to learn, and grow, and progress and we consider them worth all our spite and ire and we ignore the hate and real trouble that's brewing up because... I'm guessing Religion is the softer target. Because we must obviously be right on this, so let's point at the religious evil and feel so self confident.
Now, I don't really know you, Gorrath, but I feel you have a sensible head on your shoulders. I like that. So I'd never speak down to you, or presume to tell you what to think or how to feel. But religion is really the absolute least of our troubles. This Spirit Science thing (Which I still don't know anything about) will be just as important as Kaballah when Madonna converted to it in a month. It won't affect us, and even if it delays us, that just gives us time to get our math right. Religion will not bring trouble to our collective door. not like the other things we turn a blind eye on. So my question I feel still remains; Why do we spend so much time focusing on religion?
