By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - People or Religion, who corrupts who?

 

People or Religion, who corrupts who?

Religion causes people to... 25 18.12%
 
People want to do bad thi... 69 50.00%
 
It's a two way street, t... 33 23.91%
 
See results 11 7.97%
 
Total:138
Scoobes said:

I can't remember where I read it but statistically people are more likely to stick with the religion of their parents than their political viewpoint. It was something like 40-50% stick to their parents politics whilst it's around 80% stick with their parents religious views.

That probably works with atheists too but then it's dificult to use atheism as a tool.

How not? Atheism liberates you from the clutches of religion, and leads you into the freedom of science. The allure is the same as that of religion.



Around the Network
happydolphin said:
Scoobes said:

I can't remember where I read it but statistically people are more likely to stick with the religion of their parents than their political viewpoint. It was something like 40-50% stick to their parents politics whilst it's around 80% stick with their parents religious views.

That probably works with atheists too but then it's dificult to use atheism as a tool.

How not? Atheism liberates you from the clutches of religion, and leads you into the freedom of science. The allure is the same as that of religion.

It's harder to manipulate people into doing violent acts through disbelief whereas it's easier to manipulate people if you can make them believe they're doing it for a greater power/good. That's what I meant by tool. 

In this respect any belief system is more powerful a tool than a lack of belief.



dsgrue3 said:
DaRev said:

I might be mistaken, but that was a piss poor attempt at not being one-sided. So I can only conclude that you really are one-sided. In any event, let me ask you this, was your ancient gandmother an monkey and do you suppose that she had flees?

If by one-sided you mean logical, then yes it was one-sided. Otherwise, I acknowledged the validity of the claim of a supernatural being/force.

I'm not sure what you're looking for from an approach.

Nope, my grandmother is a homo sapien just as you and I are.

If that is supposed to be a slight to evolution, then you just demostrated your profound ignorance of the topic. We didn't evolve from monkeys. Modern primates (Humans, Chimps, Apes) share a common ancestor. That ancestor is an "ape-like" creature; that does not mean we came from monkeys.

If there is anything else I can educate you on, let me know since you don't seem to know much at all.

Ape-like? WTF does that mean? So you and your scientist friends don't know what the fuck people supposedly EVOLVED from, so the best you geniuses could come up with is some generic half-assed term? Listen Pal, come with cold hard facts (like you ask from religious people), a real live ape-man and proof of his cells evolving or how he turned into a human, or else get that crock of shit out of here.

So we evolved from something that wasn't a monkey, but instead was monkey-like? Well, funnily enough dude, I sort of agree with you, cause those ape-like creatures, there're called humans!



Nintendo Network ID: DaRevren

I love My Wii U, and the potential it brings to gaming.

Scoobes said:

It's harder to manipulate people into doing violent acts through disbelief whereas it's easier to manipulate people if you can make them believe they're doing it for a greater power/good. That's what I meant by tool. 

In this respect any belief system is more powerful a tool than a lack of belief.

What about eugenics?
The power of belief is a force to be reckoned with, it can be powerful for good and very powerful for bad. The people who followed Hitler believed in the greatness of their race, whether it was under a veil of divinity or not, the point was that they held an ideal and it drove the nation towards some of the greatest atrocities our world has seen.

The power of belief need not require religion.



the2real4mafol said:
Neither, it's the money that corrupts everything


Money is simply another form of power.



This is the Game of Thrones

Where you either win

or you DIE

Around the Network
DaRev said:
dsgrue3 said:
DaRev said:

I might be mistaken, but that was a piss poor attempt at not being one-sided. So I can only conclude that you really are one-sided. In any event, let me ask you this, was your ancient gandmother an monkey and do you suppose that she had flees?

If by one-sided you mean logical, then yes it was one-sided. Otherwise, I acknowledged the validity of the claim of a supernatural being/force.

I'm not sure what you're looking for from an approach.

Nope, my grandmother is a homo sapien just as you and I are.

If that is supposed to be a slight to evolution, then you just demostrated your profound ignorance of the topic. We didn't evolve from monkeys. Modern primates (Humans, Chimps, Apes) share a common ancestor. That ancestor is an "ape-like" creature; that does not mean we came from monkeys.

If there is anything else I can educate you on, let me know since you don't seem to know much at all.

Ape-like? WTF does that mean? So you and your scientist friends don't know what the fuck people supposedly EVOLVED from, so the best you geniuses could come up with is some generic half-assed term? Listen Pal, come with cold hard facts (like you ask from religious people), a real live ape-man and proof of his cells evolving or how he turned into a human, or else get that crock of shit out of here.

So we evolved from something that wasn't a monkey, but instead was monkey-like? Well, funnily enough dude, I sort of agree with you, cause those ape-like creatures, there're called humans!

You seemed rather clueless so I used a simple term.

"The gorilla and chimpanzee diverged around the same time, about 4-6 million years ago, and either Sahelanthropus or Orrorin may be our last shared ancestor with them. The early bipedals eventually evolved into the australopithecines and later the genus Homo."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

You would probably benefit from reading the article in its entirety.

By the way, which third world country are you from that you didn't learn basic evolution theory? It's quite interesting to me that someone in the 21st century has literally no knowledge of this.



happydolphin said:
Scoobes said:

It's harder to manipulate people into doing violent acts through disbelief whereas it's easier to manipulate people if you can make them believe they're doing it for a greater power/good. That's what I meant by tool. 

In this respect any belief system is more powerful a tool than a lack of belief.

What about eugenics?
The power of belief is a force to be reckoned with, it can be powerful for good and very powerful for bad. The people who followed Hitler believed in the greatness of their race, whether it was under a veil of divinity or not, the point was that they held an ideal and it drove the nation towards some of the greatest atrocities our world has seen.

The power of belief need not require religion.

I never said it did. Even if religion didn't exist, excuses will be made for acts of violence and there are plenty of examples of this throughout history. My two points were:

1. Atheism is a lack of belief and is therefore not a useful tool to manipulate people into carrying out violent acts.

2. Religion is one of if not the most powerful tool for manipulating large groups of people as it is an incredibly powerful belief system that is ingrained in people from a young age and continues across generations (moreso then other ideologies).

Take your eugenics example; a non-religious, social philosophy/pseudoscience used to perpetuate atrocious acts of violence. Who actually believes in eugenics and actively carries out "tests" anymore? Over the course of a century, viscious acts done in the name of eugenics have more or less stopped. A new excuse/tool has to be found (and sadly will in due course). That's not going to happen with religion; it's ingrained in society over multiple generations and is a deeply held personal belief system. If someone wants to manipulate people then religion becomes an easy way to do so by twisting religious texts to fit an agenda.



Religion is a concept. It in itself cannot corrupt, but in what people do with it. Personal responsibility, people.



Scoobes said:
happydolphin said:
Scoobes said:

It's harder to manipulate people into doing violent acts through disbelief whereas it's easier to manipulate people if you can make them believe they're doing it for a greater power/good. That's what I meant by tool. 

In this respect any belief system is more powerful a tool than a lack of belief.

What about eugenics?
The power of belief is a force to be reckoned with, it can be powerful for good and very powerful for bad. The people who followed Hitler believed in the greatness of their race, whether it was under a veil of divinity or not, the point was that they held an ideal and it drove the nation towards some of the greatest atrocities our world has seen.

The power of belief need not require religion.

I never said it did. Even if religion didn't exist, excuses will be made for acts of violence and there are plenty of examples of this throughout history. My two points were:

1. Atheism is a lack of belief and is therefore not a useful tool to manipulate people into carrying out violent acts.

2. Religion is one of if not the most powerful tool for manipulating large groups of people as it is an incredibly powerful belief system that is ingrained in people from a young age and continues across generations (moreso then other ideologies).

Take your eugenics example; a non-religious, social philosophy/pseudoscience used to perpetuate atrocious acts of violence. Who actually believes in eugenics and actively carries out "tests" anymore? Over the course of a century, viscious acts done in the name of eugenics have more or less stopped. A new excuse/tool has to be found (and sadly will in due course). That's not going to happen with religion; it's ingrained in society over multiple generations and is a deeply held personal belief system. If someone wants to manipulate people then religion becomes an easy way to do so by twisting religious texts to fit an agenda.

Eugenics was used in history by non-religious people to push an idealistic vision of genetics of certain races. It didn't need to be religious to cause atrocities and that's my point.



i corrupt everyone.