Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

[duplicate]Atheism, Secularism and all that

Thread Locked

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:11pm

alfiedaredneck

alfiedaredneck

1 post

[i]Religion will always be debated on. It will also be the primary reason for many future wars. It is sad that something meant for a higher purpose can be down graded to the basis for violence

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:13pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

3,950 posts

I see your point that the US is not completely militant extremist christian, however, the politics become more and more influenced by religious opinions. If you look at the politicians who are successful at the moment in the US, they all are, in my opionion, rather radical christian.

That's because most settlers who founded America were Christian, whether it be Anglican, Roman Catholic, or Lutheran (Which isn't really Christian, but very close). Most politicians are openly Christian because they want to connect with a certain group. To my knowledge, elderly and middle-aged people make up the most vote count, and, call it old-fashioned, but most older people are Christian because that was the usual religion for a long time.

Also, creationism is not proven or even plausible in ANY instance observed. Instead, darwinian evolution is proved to be the most likely explanation for the genesis of life.

People are stubborn. A lot of people going to give up their beliefs under any circumstance. It's simply a fact of life. In time, religion may become more or less popular and accepted, but it will always exist in some way, shape, or form.

As an example, Germany, where I live, has a strict separation of church and state. We nearly do not have any religioiusly founded laws. Germany is an example of successful secularism. On the other hand, bush famously said: "NO SIR, I don't believe that atheists can be good Americans as they don't recognise the values this country was built upon."
I didn't say, there are more and more christians in america, I just say they become more and more radical.

Again, if the people are religious, the government is also somewhat religious. The people in the actual government aren't asked to mix religion and laws, but if the people want it, then it will happen. As for Bush, he was a republican, and republicans are generally christian, conservative, and won't give up their beliefs. Bush also came from Texas, where people's roots go all the way back to Europe in the 1600's when atheism was unheard of. That was just one man's opinion, and, AGAIN, the PEOPLE voted him in, if they are Christian, then they will most likely support his beliefs.

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:20pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

3,950 posts

A lot of people going to give up their beliefs under any circumstance.

Fatal mistake. It should be: A lot of people aren't going to give up their beliefs under any circumstance.

Religion will always be debated on. It will also be the primary reason for many future wars. It is sad that something meant for a higher purpose can be down graded to the basis for violence

You have a good point, but I think you missed the point of this thread.

Sorry for the lapse in response time. My hotspot died so I lost Wi-Fi for a few minutes.

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:20pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

Scientology isn't an actual "religion,"

actualy in the usa it has the official status of a religion.t
hats why they can act like they are a religion.

in most other countrys however it is unlabeled or officialy a sect.

because it is so biased against the other religions

it has it's own rituals and believes

your ignorance of the American government.

ignoring is different then disagreeing.
i simply do not agree whit it. like 1138 my government also has no religious based laws and about a half year ago. they made the exact same statement i made here. "religion should not be the base of any law" and i can't agree more.

Do you understand why the government can't do whatever the hell it wants?

i know that. but on certian areas like religion they should lead the country and not debate it. els we can just aswell give the government back the the church again. like those happy times you know... the middle ages... oh wait in the middle ages usa was nothing yet. my bad.
try it ;) lol

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:27pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

3,950 posts

actualy in the usa it has the official status of a religion.t
hats why they can act like they are a religion.

in most other countrys however it is unlabeled or officialy a sect.

I know that. It doesn't disprove my point, because it's just science.

it has it's own rituals and believes

I didn't say it didn't. I said it's biased against other religions, meaning it's against them.

ignoring is different then disagreeing.
i simply do not agree whit it. like 1138 my government also has no religious based laws and about a half year ago. they made the exact same statement i made here. "religion should not be the base of any law" and i can't agree more

You said the government should not listen to this and make their own decisions on the previous page. I told you that, in the USA, this will never happen. I understand that you don't agree with it. I'm merely saying this won't happen. /end.

i know that. but on certian areas like religion they should lead the country and not debate it. els we can just aswell give the government back the the church again. like those happy times you know... the middle ages... oh wait in the middle ages usa was nothing yet. my bad.
try it ;) lol

But in a Democratic society, the government cannot "lead" without debating first. Democracy came from the ideas of debating and doing what the country thinks is best- not what the government officials thinks is best.

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:47pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

if the people are religious, the government is also somewhat religious.

how come scientists can but politicians can't?
and how come our politicians can?

The people in the actual government aren't asked to mix religion and laws, but if the people want it, then it will happen.

the majority is not always right.
sometimes the government has to do things a favor of the minority.

where people's roots go all the way back to Europe in the 1600's when atheism was unheard of.

The word "atheist" appears in English books at least as early as 1566.
(ofcours the word was already used by then)

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:53pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

because it's just science.

i wonder if you even know anything about scientology yourself tbh.

meaning it's against them.

not sure what your pointing at. they surely have their own base ideas and rituals. that has nothing to do whit going against something.

You said the government should not listen to this and make their own decisions on the previous page. I told you that, in the USA, this will never happen. I understand that you don't agree with it. I'm merely saying this won't happen. /end.

and thats why i'm happy it's not my government. even tho they try to.

But in a Democratic society, the government cannot "lead" without debating first. Democracy came from the ideas of debating and doing what the country thinks is best- not what the government officials thinks is best.

i think i bolded the right tekst last post.

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 3:54pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

3,950 posts

how come scientists can but politicians can't?
and how come our politicians can?

They can. I'm just saying it wouldn't go well for them.

the majority is not always right.
sometimes the government has to do things a favor of the minority.

In that situation, it is the minority's duty to convince the opposing party that their ideas are right.

The word "atheist" appears in English books at least as early as 1566.

I meant it wasn't accepted into society. If you were atheist, you were hated.

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 4:19pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

In that situation, it is the minority's duty to convince the opposing party that their ideas are right.

and when ever did they agree whit something that they think is against the bibel?
they are simply not willing or able to change their views.

these debates are unneeded because 1 side will never change.

anyway if democrocy always works like how you say it, then why are you guys still paying taxes? no1 or atleast most do not like to pay taxes and would like them to be gone. still taxes are still there. ;)

 

Posted Jun 20, '12 at 4:27pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

3,950 posts

and when ever did they agree whit something that they think is against the bibel?
they are simply not willing or able to change their views.

these debates are unneeded because 1 side will never change.

The church accepted that the sun was in the center of the solar system in the 1960's. That's change, isn't it? The church also believed that Jesus was born 2012 years ago, when our modern day calendar started, but now the church accepts that Jesus was most likely born 4 years before our modern day calendar begins... 2016 years ago. There are more things, but I haven't the time to find them. Just use Google.

anyway if democrocy always works like how you say it, then why are you guys still paying taxes? no1 or atleast most do not like to pay taxes and would like them to be gone. still taxes are still there. ;)

Taxes pay for everything the government does. We try our best not to borrow from other countries. Taxes pay for roads, schools, water, plumbing, garbage facilities, recycling facilities, government dpt. (i.e. department of motor vehicles), electricity, poverty assistance... need I go on?