If everyone became tolerant of one another, what problem is there in letting people believe in what they want? The idea that one side of an argument HAS to win at all costs is what produces inefficiency.

Let's say I don't like how the weather is. Is it easier to spend time proving to me that this is the most optimal weather state, or is it easier to just let me think what I want?

You mention religion as a medium through which negative thoughts pertrude minds, but isn't the opposite true? Do you think it would be wrong for a rich person to donate to charity for the sake of their religion? Religion has been known to portray helpful thoughts to the masses. Famous examples include being a "good samaritan" and "turn the other cheek."

As I said, the best way to deal with this issue is to have people respect each other's opinions. A lot more gets done if people stop bickering about what is right and what is wrong. Proper classes put in place to inform others of such viewpoints will also be advantageous. Just like we have classes on foreign cultures, it would be helpful to have classes on foreign religions to open people's mind

First off, governments get enough taxes. Frankly, I believe the majority of people are taxed too much (that includes the rich). If they figured out what a budget is and how to prioritize their spending on things that would help the entire country, they wouldn't need to bleed people dry. 

My answer to your title and OP is no, governments shouldn't start regulating religion. Governments would be overstepping with that.

I believe in the complete seperation of government and religion. Government free from religion and religion free from government. If a religion or cult is not harming anyone physically, leave 'em alone. Laws or government policies should never be based off of a religious belief. 

Not only do many statist oranizations teach many facts that have proven to be false or theories that greatly hold back society, but there are many other problems organized statism brings up too.



1. Taxes - how much do people lose to government?

2. Governments should not be allowed to get as bad as some do.

3. Government extremist - causing wars, terrorism, hate crimes, etc

4. Intolerance - how many more humans needs to suffer due to government rules?

In this day and age I just do not think there is room for states anymore. As a hobby it is fine, but there are so many things wrong with governments that it should not be allowed the power it has over society anymore.



Agree?

"If everyone became tolerant of one another, what problem is there in letting people believe in what they want? The idea that one side of an argument HAS to win at all costs is what produces inefficiency.

Let's say I don't like how the weather is. Is it easier to spend time proving to me that this is the most optimal weather state, or is it easier to just let me think what I want?"

Because it is always the best thing to make sure people have the best information to make the best possible choices.  You have to choose your battles, so I probably wouldn't argue about the weather, especially since that is largely a matter of opinion.  However, when a group of people have a certain belief, for example teaching your kids to follow their religion, preventing you from using contraception, etc. then it becomes an issue well worth discussing.

As for the "if everyone became tolerant part" that is not at all what we've seen, and as I'll probably get to later, it is directly opposed by most religious doctrines.

You mention religion as a medium through which negative thoughts pertrude minds, but isn't the opposite true? Do you think it would be wrong for a rich person to donate to charity for the sake of their religion?

Of course not.  Unfortunately, while religion seems to encourage people to give, most of that giving seems to go directly to supporting religious institutions or converting the non-believers.  When you take out money that is going towards supporting the churches and religion themselves, there is no evidence that religious people are more giving.  Plus, the amount we're losing in taxes due to deductions, parsonages, property taxes and so on offsets this.  

http://religiondispatches.org/new-study-three-quarters-of-american-giving-goes-to-religion/

Religion has been known to portray helpful thoughts to the masses. Famous examples include being a "good samaritan" and "turn the other cheek."

Religion is not the only source for "be nice to people" and "don't be a dick".  We see these ideas in many places from secular and religious sources.  There are however some terrible ideas that can only be found in religion... For example...

You are under constant surveillance by an invisible man, and he hates when you do certain things with your penis.

Anyone who does not believe as I do will be tortured for all eternity.

People who smash a cracker representing my god should be killed (host desecration, look into it).

We have a higher authority to support our agenda, so we do not need reason or evidence.

If you blow yourself up you will be a martyr and get 70 virgins.

The end of the world is coming.  And we should want that to happen, because then we will go to happy magic land.

Children are sinners from the day they are born and deserve to be tortured forever unless they are saved.

Any belief that goes against my book must be wrong and should be discarded.

People should not wear condoms to fight deadly diseases because it is morally wrong.

I need to follow someone I can not see, hear, or converse with without question on pain of death.

Someone drew a picture of my prophet.  We should fucking kill them.

Math is evil.

These are ideas and values that could only come from religion or the invocation of the supernatural (and surely there are many bad things that come from other sources).  These are also ideas that are directly opposed to tolerance.  You can not have true tolerance while believing that a person deserves eternal torture for their beliefs.

 Can you think of any positive values and ideas that can only come from religion?

As I said, the best way to deal with this issue is to have people respect each other's opinions.

No.  We should respect people.  We needn't respect ideas that are not worthy of respect.  When someone holds an opinion or belief that is not true we should discuss it and present the case against it.

A lot more gets done if people stop bickering about what is right and what is wrong.

We have to bicker about what's right or wrong.  That's part of figuring out what the right thing to do is.  

Proper classes put in place to inform others of such viewpoints will also be advantageous. Just like we have classes on foreign cultures, it would be helpful to have classes on foreign religions to open people's mind

We do not need waste time or money  discussing religion in anything but the context of culture.  We do not have to pretend that these ideas are valid and beyond question.  In every other subject or topic we endeavor to find the truth or the best course of action.  I don't see why in this one area we just have to accept every idea as equally valid.  

The difference is that government provides useful and essential services.  I tend to enjoy things like water delivery, a police force, education, roads, and so on.  So, despite its flaws, the government is worth keeping around and reforming.  

Religion does not provide any service that can not be accomplished by secular means, so there is no reason to keep it around.  

People:

SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE!

People:

NOW STATE, REGULATE CHURCH

WE DONT WANT CHURCH TO HAVE ANY AFFECT IN GOVERNMENT BUT STILL WANT THEM TO FOLLOW THIER RULES AND GIVE THEM MONEY

WE ARENT LISTENING TO WHAT WE ARE SAYING WE ARE JUST SAYING STUPID THINGS


Every day

I have my own water system, my own gun, went to a private school and  pay specifically for roadwork.

By your logic, I shouldn't have to pay any other taxes.

You're just finding pretty ways to say "all religious people should stop doing what they're doing and do what I'm doing instead. Also thinking that the source of shitty behaviour is an institution, rather than just people being shitty, because it's easier to blame something specific for potential harm to peaceful coexistence.

Anyways, by simply joining a religious debate on the internet I've already lost, and nobody will change thier opinions so I'm out.

Please do not tell me what my logic says.  Say what you think, don't tell me what I think.

First off, I sincerely doubt you have not benefitted or will not potentially benefit from government services.  You pay for roadwork you say?  Who do you pay for roadwork?  So have you singlehandedly built every road that you have driven or benefited from (for instance an item delivered through that road)? Did you hire people directly to build the roads?  Did you build them?  Or did we need an organization to pool your money with the money of others to build roads?  Do you benefit from an interstate highway systems? Have you ever seen a doctor or been somehow benefited from anyone who had public schooling?  Have you benefited from any discovery made by anyone who has gone to public school? Do you think you don't benefit from military and police deterance?  That you and your one gun are enough to face any threat that may potentially occur?  Do you have any family who has at any point used any form of social assistance? 

And even IF you have never benefitted directly or indirectly from any government function (which would be nearly inconceivable) that's kind of irrelevant when we're talking about a society wide thing.  I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you understood that I meant these things were good for society in general, and not just me in particular.  If you didn't, now you do.

Do you think that anarchy would be preferable?  Based on countries that have weak governments (closest example we could get to anarchy), I don't believe this to be the case.   But if you would like, feel free.  I believe South Sudan, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo would be good places to head for that.

You really think I need to pay 40% of all my gains to build roads? Are companies incapable of doing that?

And you think monanarchy doesn't charge taxes? Are you retarded?

- M, Carl