Forum menu
eh?! Don't give a shit about drivers respecting my beliefs, I do get a bit testy if they don't respect my safety. Bit of a difference.Hmmmm, we get bent all out of whack if drivers don't respect our beliefs,
The driver's thing isn't a belief, it's a safety issue. If someone hits you with a car you will die.
If someone gets naked on a mountain no one will die.
(Although you could say if someone hits you with their religion you will die...)
Whilst the notion they caused an earthquake is ludicrous it is never wise to disrespects someones beliefs be it the cenotaph*, a picture of Mao or a sacred spot.
The outcome seems reasonable in that they have been punished and it will deter others .
* try wearing a white poppy around remembrance day or at an actual ceremony.
So you like sneering at other people's cultures because you know better, nice.....
No, I'm sneering at a belief that someone taking their clothes off can cause an earthquake because an invisible spirit doesn't like looking at naked people.
It's a specific sneer, not a macro one. And it's quite nice, yes. Thanks.
[img] 
[/img]
Is that you on this thread or an audio thread when folk are sneering at your "science"?
Oh, hi. You again. You'll have to remind me. I don't recall an "audio thread" where other people have sneered at my "science"? What would that be, then?
As honest as it was funny.
You do know the point being made as does everyone else.
Not really. Taken a poll, have you?
People stop believing in tooth fairies and Santa by their teens, yet gods persist.
Yeah, I wonder why? Might it be because religion might make people feel happy?
You lot really should keep quiet about stuff you obviously know absolutely bugger all about. It makes you look really stupid.
Yeah, I wonder why? Might it be because religion might make people feel happy?
Both Santa and The Tooth Fairy make my kids pretty happy whenever they visit
You lot really should keep quiet about stuff you obviously know absolutely bugger all about.
Do, do tell.
He will just get out his physics degree notes...they covered loads of this stuff. Heed your own advice here.
No offence Molly,as I do like you, but an atheist who has not studied the subject cannot really explain it.
Secondly you dont need to be a theological genius/expert to negate the central premise of the faith. I dont need to know all the details of their faith to debate the central one - ie : there is no god
Thirdly [abrahamic]religion is not about being happy its about the eternal salvation of your soul by following their rules.
Romans 6:23
By the way, the BBC coverage says:
Several local newspapers accused British tabloids of exaggerating reports that the tourists were arrested for causing the quake, rather than the actual charge of public indecency.
The Sabah-based Daily Express accused the papers of running "sensational" headlines, while the country's most popular English-language paper, The Star, said reports (pictured) alleging Hawkins and the others were arrested for angering mountain gods "couldn't be further from the truth".
Tourism minister, Masidi Manjun, said their acts would have merited punishment for breaking local laws and norms whether or not the earthquake took place.
Mr Masidi, who comes from the foothills of Mount Kinabalu, was also quoted in the Malay Mail as saying there had been some "fact-twisting" by foreign media.
"I don't know whether this is on purpose just to ridicule us, or their failure to appreciate our local traditions and customs," he said.
So yeah.
No but when I was working there I did see a number of people shit on the patch of waste ground outside the office.
Were they shitting in a [i]sexy[/i] way? 8)
Were they shitting in a sexy way?
No but they were discreet. Squat down, robes covering any indecency. It was quite normal - the cultural norm you might say. Whereas prancing around naked on a sacred spot in, ooh let's say Malaysia just for example, isn't. In fact it's likely to get peoples' backs up.
The what now? And there was me thinking it was a monument to the dead.
You mean like that mountain in Malaysia?
Anyway, moving on..
[img]
[/img]
You mean like that mountain in Malaysia?
The first derivation of the word Kinabalu is extracted from the short form for the Kadazan Dusun word 'Aki Nabalu', meaning "the revered place of the dead".
So apparently we are worse than some polytheist Malaysians.
Who knew.
They should have sent them down for 16 months based on our own standards.
Do, do tell.
I keep trying, you keep not getting it.
No offence Molly,as I do like you, but an atheist who has not studied the subject cannot really explain it.
No, I cannot explain religion, I don't know much about any of it myself. However I do know a lot of intelligent religious people, and I've taken the time to ask them why they are religious.
It's perfectly possible to accept religion alongside science - it all depends on how you interpret scripture and how you define God. However, many people choose the simplest possible interpretation which they then mock.
It would appear that some people who do this are either a) too stupid to comprehend anything beyond the simplest interpretation, or b) just love taking the piss to make themselves feel superior.
'Clever people are religious' does not equal 'religion is a clever thing to be'. Some of the cleverest people I know are shockingly taken in by marketing claptrap, and that's just on the telly, or the interwebz, written by strangers, as adults. Just imagine how powerfully indoctrination works when the indoctrinators are the parents of (even bright) children. That stuff really sticks. No human is truly, 100%, rational.
For what it's worth, I'm fairly sure that I'm not stupid (although happy to accept I'm nowt special) and nor am I taking he piss to make myself feel superior. I think I was just lucky that I had open minded parents, mainly.
Look at me! Look at me! I am shy! 😆
However when people comment on their bush or their camel toe nope you cannot say that coz you are sexist and a dirty old man. 😯
They should go to Lesbos island ... ya ... Lesbos ... 😆
chewkw - Member
Look at me! Look at me! I am shy!However when people comment on their bush or their camel toe nope you cannot say that coz you are sexist and a dirty old man.
They should go to Lesbos island ... ya ... Lesbos ...
Sometimes, or in fact often, you can be an utter ****t, chewkw
I think that wherever you go you should observe and respect the local customs and beliefs whether you share them or not. End of.
JulianA - Member
I think that wherever you go you should observe and respect the local customs and beliefs whether you share them or not. End of.
2 very different things, yes respect local customs to an extent* but I am perfectly entitled to ridicule the idea of religion and what it stands for on anything from creating a world in 7 days to boobies cause eathquakes.
*Not long ago respecting local customs in places like the US would mean being a racist bigot.
I think I was just lucky that I had open minded parents, mainly.
Did they pass it on to you?
You have to understand that wanting the truth about the origin of the universe may not be the reason people believe.
It's perfectly possible to accept religion alongside science - it all depends on how you interpret scripture and how you define God
Its possible to maintain any contradictory position but this does not make it credible and basically you have to ignore the bits of the bible that contradict known facts whilst still arguing the bible is true.
IMHO you cannot credibly square the scientific consensus of evolution and the biblical notion of being made as man in gods image. They contradict each other and its either one or the other.
IME what tends to happen is they accept that Genesis is not true [ myth etc] but then still argue the Bible/god is true which , frankly, just makes me chuckle and I refer to the credible point above.
Clearly whether you believe in god or not is not an intelligence test.
Did they pass it on to you?
You have to understand that wanting the truth about the origin of the universe may not be the reason people believe.
I would describe myself as open minded, but not at the expense of rationality. I'm fortunate to not have been brainwashed at an early age, that's all. My rational conclusion is that when it comes to religion and politics, humans have an inate ability to believe what they want to believe, despite an overwhelming lack of evidence to support their position. See; superstition, fairy stories, cults, Santa Claus, people who think Audi>VW>Skoda, that clothes with 'labels' on are worth double or more than clothes without, and of course religion. Some of them we get over, some we carry for our entire life and fervently instil in our children. It's a tragic flaw in the makeup of humanity.
Just checking can we ridicule this sort of religion?
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
No need, Mikewsmith. That sort of religion ridicules itself...
Personally, I think blaming religion for humanities stupidity is a lazy generalisation
Very true, but nothing new (here)
I think that wherever you go you should observe and respect the local customs and beliefs whether you share them or not. End of.
Exactly.
Yeah because this is the only example of religious belief resulting in behaviour worthy of ridicule...
Personally, I think blaming religion for humanities stupidity is a lazy generalisation, as by implication you are implying that if there weren't religions people wouldn't do stupid things. Where in actual fact most religions try and give guidelines on how to act like a reasonable, decent human being.
Or in context nobody blamed the worlds problems on religion but pointed out that there is a lot of failings in the world, some of them are due to religion and the use of religion as a reason for doing things.
Where in actual fact most religions try and give guidelines on how to act like a reasonable, decent human being.
Good point
those gays are an abomination and deserve to be stoned with the adulterers
IMHO the abrahmic religions are rather intolerant though most in the west now just ignore those bits...see point above about them ignoring the bits that are indefensible but still keeping the faith/belief.
Its one of the reasons why folk mock their intelligence.
just chucking this one in there for the tolerant Christians
[url= http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/06/12/christians-threatening-divorce-if-gay-marriage-passes-banned-friends-wedding ]Christians threatening divorce if gay marriage passes banned from friend's wedding[/url]
It really is bizarre that they think they own marriage and that it only happens with god. They [ the church] were very late to the party in the UK in terms of marriage and involvement.
Ironically they really dont like it when someone tells them what to do either as that is intolerant and discrimination.
thankfully most of the western christians ignore the bible in this respect.
just checking can we ridicule this sort of religion?
Evidently, yet IMO it's better to do it with real quotes rather than false quotes wrongly attributed to people.
Colleagues of mine (teachers) were overheard talking about how excited they were that a bloke who had 'actual fossils from the Garden of Eden' was coming to talk at their church.
Bampottery of the highest order.
It is something of a generalisation to equate religion with religious fundamentalism. It is a tactic favoured by Richard Dawkins, whose work has been replied to by intelligent, highly educated writers like Keith Ward.
Whenever I see threads on this forum with a "Religion = Bonkers" theme, I think its shallow ego-boost time.
It is something of a generalisation to equate religion with religious fundamentalism.
true but the general intolerance of the middle ground is fairly despondent, that and the fact that they either believe in all of it or just the bits they like - probably the worst of the lot
I don't think these New Atheist threads really have that much to do with genuine outrage at religious intolerance. I think they are motivated by the need for the posters to get an ego-boost and feel superior, feelings which largely motivate the New Atheist movement. It helps that religion and particularly Christianity is an easy target. But it gets boring after the 2,000th thread.
the need for the posters to get an ego-boost and feel superior, feelings which largely motivate the New Atheist movement. It helps that religion and particularly Christianity is an easy target.
Seriously all religion is an easy target, it's all made up even if it isn't then it conflicts with 10 odd other fairy tales. no need for an ego boost but when did a modern religion own marriage? or why should they become the moral arbitrator or what is right or wrong? Those upholding religious belief regularly fall outside of their moral codes it's a joke. And please play the answer not the man.
Seriously all religion is an easy target
Out of interest, have you gone out of your way to read any of the replies to the New Atheist books? You seem to think you have worked it all out, and that the debate is over. Your reply reminds me of the second hand book shop in Kings Cross where the bookshelf for "Religion" has a copy of a bible and is otherwise filled by works by Dawkins, Dennett, C. Hitchens, and Sam Harris.
Out of interest, have you gone out of your way to read any of the replies to the New Atheist books?
Could you recommend some?
not at all,
work on the sabbeth = not cool
change religion (big with a few) really not cool
disbelieve anything - ooo careful now
Then change what the magic book says to adjust to modern living to keep the punters coming in (sales 101) - good idea.
Give it a real go, why is religion awesome?
I'm not limiting to christianity, defend the lot, one wins the other lost etc. which one is right? Lets all kill each other to find out and while we are at it persecute people who both don't believe or have no moral and legal rights to be bound by the teachings of somebody who may or may not have been misquoted 2000 years ago.
Specifically on marriage the christian church has no ownership of the concept and it would prove a beautiful IP case with the nords, romans and greeks having a go on prior on that one.
So which part of religion is awesome should I pick to follow, it's examples of slaughter and persecution over history are not the best reading.
There are indeed a good many intolerant atheists on here, who, it seems to me, need to repeatedly voice their belief of their denial of a God with much mutual backslapping and hurrah's.
Whereas, those who do have a faith, do not appear to have the same need... Or perhaps it's the knowledge of the abusive bullying that will certainly arrive by those oh so tolerant, open minded and secure atheists?
Maybe it has everything to do with the size and performance of one's genitalia? 😉
May I, while ICBA to post on a religion thread, take this opportunity to also congratulate you all with your use of the 'flat bat' "prove it by science" response, well done! Has any scientist yet disproved the existence of a God?
Closed minded intolerant people are fools, be they theist or atheist. Live and let live, be nice to each other and so long as your beliefs make you a better person, then they are right for you. 😀
Could you recommend some?
Happily. I'm afraid my knowledge is limited to Christian Apologetics though.
Keith Ward is particularly clear and has a strong interest in science, so I think many of the STW massive might enjoy his books. "Is Religion Dangerous?" is his reply to Dawkins.
Alister McGrath can also be good value, especially "The Dawkins Delusion?"
Many of the New Atheist arguments aren't actually that new so earlier writers like C.S. Lewis continue to be relevant, such as "Mere Christianity". My personal favourite is a Russian writer called Nicholas Berdyaev whose works have been retranslated and republished recently.
I should be clear - I'm not sure of anything - but I have found the whole question of Religion far more stimulating since I opened up my reading to those who reply to the New Atheists, as well as the New Atheists themselves.
Whereas, those who do have a faith, do not appear to have the same need... Or perhaps it's the knowledge of the abusive bullying that will certainly arrive by those oh so tolerant, open minded and secure atheists?
Got to admit, this is hilarious considering religions history.
Think of militant atheism as a reaction to thousands of years of persecution by your lot. Now you know how we feel when we are stopped by religious loons in the street to be preached to.