Runa216 said:
Who said anything about friendly debate? I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I'm pretty aggressive when it comes to wiping out the mess that is religious right. I mean, don't misunderstand, I don't think "All who disagree with me need to be eradicated." I've never thought that and it's the worst kind of mentality you can have, especially as one who considers himself to be an intellectual. No, people misunderstand. My hatred for religion isn't about having a different opinion and needing to censor it, it's about science. It's always been about science and rationality and logic and progression. I don't beleve that, as an encompassing theory, Religion should be respected unless it can quantify and justify its claims. Until the religious can find even a shred of evidence supporting the existence of a god and that the events in the bible (or any holy text) happened as stated, it needs to be treated as the mythology it is. I don't mind people reading the bible, but I just don't understand the mentality of "This is how it happened becuase a book written thousands of years ago told me so, and the book also informed me it's infallible, therefore it is truth, end of discussion. No, I can't prove it, but I have faith and a billion friends who agree with me, so I must be right." I know that sounds like a strawman argument, but that's basically what religious arguments boil down to. The very idea that this stance needs to be respected not for its contributions to science and philosophy, but becuase many of us were raised in a nation where 'freedom of religion' is a thing, and mocking someone for thinking something so absurd is not acceptable. As for gays, I don't care if it is a choice, or if it is genetic, or if it can be cured or if it needs to be fixed, I see no issue with it. If my neighbours are gay, it doesn't impact me in any way whatsoever, so I have no right to push my morals on them regardless. That should be in effect on a global scale. My 'morality' comes down to something very simple: "if your actions are harming someone else, then it is not cool. Otherwise, have fun, do what makes you happy and don't be ashamed of who you are." This goes for pretty much everything in life, from what entertainment you enjoy right down to your body. Your body is really your last bastion of freedom, you should be able to do what you want with it, it's your decision and your choice to balance the risk/reward. Even if being gay DOES lead to HIV (it doesn't, but for the sake of argument let's say it does), then you need to decide if being with the one you love is worth that risk, and nobody has any right to judge you for it unless you're spraying HIV blood in the ketchup containers at the work cafeteria. As for premarital sex, as a man who doesn't believe in religion, I fail to see why you should save sex for some arbitrary signing of a paper. I just don't see the correlation. Hell, even when I did think sex was some holy thing that needed to be on a pedestal as some special intimate bond, I didn't see why you'd need to not do something you enjoy (as long as you're doing it safely and responsibly) just so you can wait so OTHERS deem you acceptable to have intercourse. I just don't see the need for the correlation at all, and it seems so silly. I won't even get into my thoughts on sex, intimacy, and love in this thread. The funny thing, I'm kind of amazed nobody's gone "oh, but you're pushing your beliefs on us" yet. It's kind of an 'equal and opposite reaction' thing. I only push back against religion when it pushes on me, my friends, or my ideals. I maintain that if I could go without hearing about some religiously motivated terrorist attack or battle over teaching intelligent design over evolution or some instance where some woman was stoned to death for not marrying her rapist or some parents who starved their kid to cure him of the devil becuase he didn't want to read his bible, I honestly wouldn't even give two shits. Let crazy people think crazy things, just keep it far away from me and I'll simply chose not to associate myself with them, but as soon as I see an instance of someone using religion to influence politics or education or violently protest things they have no right to protest based on some outdated unsubstantiated nonsense, I feel the need to fight back. I actually grew up in a religious household surrounded by religious people, so I grew up a pretty active christian. it wasnt till I was 16 that I realized that science and religion could not really mix and I decided to go the path of the intellectual and abandon religion...which was met with scorn and hatred, or plain old judgement. One person tried to tell me "God has put doubt in your heart so you could come back with greater faith" without realizing how crazy he sounded. Anyway, I rant too much. You shouldn't do religion, becuase religion is bad. And if you don, just...stick to other religious people, don't try to get into an argument with people who reject your religion, becuase you will lose. even if you're arguing with another religion, you always lose because there is no way to 'win' a religious debate, since there is no way to justify one religion over another. |
The teachings and life of Jesus are the exact opposite of the religious 'straw man' you've presented. People naturally want to feel superior even without religion, some wrongfully use Christianity (though they would have to completely ignore the words of Jesus to be the way you describe), others, like you, use science, logic, and their own perceived intelligence to build their brand of self-importance and superiority. Your crusade against Religion certainly has some elements of truth about certain vocal ones who misuse religion, but it has turned you into the exact thing you claim to hate. You are the atheist version of the fundamentalist Christian straw man you describe.
EDIT: Also, you ask for undeniable natural proof of the supernatural, which is by definition impossible. This would be akin to asking a being who lives in a two dimensional world to prove or disprove the existance of a 3rd dimension. It would be impossible due to the natural limiatations on how that being is able to observe their surroundings. If the Spiritual world is by definition another dimension, outside of the time and space we are constrained to, we have no direct way of observing it or testing it. You have created a set of constraints for your thinking that make it impossible for you to think outside your own logical box.
Just for the sake of argument, since your logical process takes place entirely inside your own mind, and is influenced by your own personal experiences, upbringing, and multiple other factors specific to you, how can you be certain that those logical processes are propor? How can you be certain the logical process of others on who's work you base your own logic is propor? Can our own thinking (which is just electrical impulses taking place inside our mind) be used to verify itself, or is that circular reasoning? Is there any impirical, provable evidence to show that our minds don't have flaws that cause our logical reasoning to be wrong? This would be impossible since we would in theory be judging our own flawed logical processes using that same flawed logical process, naturally leading to a flawed conclusion without our knowledge. I'm not saying logic should not be used, it absolutely should, I'm just saying that holding your own logic up as the absolute truth is just as arrogant as what you rail against. Many, many people with greater intelligence than either of us have used logic to come up with very different opinions on a myriad of subjects.
EDIT2: You say Religion is bad, I counter that "Pure and undefiled religion before our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself unstained by the world. " Take a look at Mother Teresa's life and tell me that true religion is bad. You're judging something based entirely on how it is misused. I'm going to start a crusade against kitchen kinves because they are used in murders, nevermind that is not their purpose.
