You are forgetting that Jesse “The Body’s” position was easily debunked in Hollywood Hogan’s book: Suplexed by Jesus. Not to mention the seminal works of Rowdy Roddy Piper, the greatest thinker of our time.
obidiah, my apologies. While I don’t think I have anywhere accused you of asserting that all wars are always caused solely by religion, I understand why you might have chosen to interpret my words that way. Perhaps I’m conflating your and Chubbs opinions overmuch–I assure you, that’s not my intent.
Nevertheless, you have said:
and
Now, perhaps you do not intend those for a literal reading. But in the list of US conflicts I submitted, not a single one has a basis in religion. Before you get annoyed with me for not reading your posts, please make sure you read mine as well. I said, “Looking over US history, we can see that in addition to the above, religion was not a cause of nor a factor in our participation in” that list or wars. It’s not that religion wasn’t the sole cause, it simply wasn’t any cause at all. The statement that most, if not all, US wars have had a basis in religion appears patently incorrect. Whether US wars are representative of the rest of the world’s wars is another matter, of course.
While I think it’s a stretch of credibility to claim that the Salem Trials were a war, or the mere existence of the KKK indicates a war, I’ll willingly and wholeheartedly concede the point that religion has been used as a justification for all sorts of heinous and despicable acts.
You’re certainly welcome to believe that I have a pro-religion agenda. You’d be completely wrong, but you’re nontheless welcome to believe that. 
Check out this site.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/curr_war.htm
I can’t recall any other wars beside these that are going on right now. One of the key words in my OP is “today” though in the past religion did play roles is some wars. It was not the main reason for going to war. But nowendays it seems like religion is a way to justify killing fellow humans or killing oneself in the name of God. IMHO that is wrong.
Choose your words carefully, Chubbs, sometimes up means down, left means right, but if you’re not willing to placate the weak-minded… well, you’re wayyyyyyyy out of line.
Ask them about the bible. Evidently, it has almost nothing to do with being a Christian, except of course, that little part about Jesus being God(I mean if you can’t see how not ridiculous and not lacking in perspective that claim is… well… you’ll see.)
Hey, look, the dopers are stroking each other off again. How unexpected.
That one trick is getting a little old, pony.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by andros *
**Nevertheless, you have said:
In all honestly, this quote didn’t come from me, andros!
I shouldn’t have brought that assertion into this debate. From personal experience I have noticed some people get touchy when dealing with the topic of religion (it seems like I am one of those people,too!)
I think we are in agreement, just approching it from different angles.
My only point in all this is religion is entertwined with huumanity, as is war (or the waring concept). War and religion have humanity in common and cannot be separtated.
Silly lolo,
All religions have something like “Heaven” or “Hell” in order to reach “Heaven” you need to follow the rules in the book, be it Bible, Quran, or what have you. My point is if there was no religion you wouldn’t have to worry about how people interpret “the book” to reach that goal. Thus no fights over holy lands since there wouldn’t be any.
Now for the million dollar questions.
Did we ask God to place us here on earth?
Depending on where you are born and raised determines what God you believe in. Who know which one is the right one. So discredit them all and carry on.
and Jesus is his name-O!
not so silly
I was on your side, but I suppose I’ll leave you to a life of lonely chubbiness.
be good.
In reality though, how many of the religious people that you know personally want to kill, make war or die in the name of their religion, compared to those who want to love their neighbour?
Actually, not all religions have a concept of “heaven” or “hell”. Judaism, for example, is ambiguous about the concepts of heaven and hell, and there have been Jewish groups/sects, such as the Sadducees and the Kariates, that explicitly denied the existance of an afterlife.
Some sects of Buddhism also reject the concept of the afterlife, and the Buddha himself was agnostic on the concept.
Shinto also has no afterlife, I believe.
Other religions, like those of ancient Rome and Babylon, while believing in an afterlife, don’t seperate it into “heaven” or “hell”. All the souls of the dead are treated the same, existing in underground catacombs, feeling no pleasure or pain, and existing with almost no self awareness or understanding.
And, Lolo, the quote is by Homer, and the full quote is
are you sure?
I can’t find any sources where the quote is the same.
I think, perhaps, the line was used more than once and was said by different characters which is why I simply wrote --the simpsons.
I remember it in a Kent Brockman voice.
where did you get your quote from?
I got the quote from the episode “Lisa the Skeptic”, which is interestingly enough, about science, religion, skepticism and faith. It’s the episode where the town of Springfield finds a skeleton that looks like its from an angel. Lisa doubts that it is, and so she sends a sample to be tested. The following dialogue commences:
It’s the one with Stephen Jay Gould . . . and where Smithers, thinking the world’s about to end, gives in to his yearnings and kisses Mr. Burns.
Not a bad episode.
Captain,
do you own copies of the screeplays?
did you pull that off some site on the net?
Let me know.
Just for the sake of argument, Chubbs, let’s asssume that every SDMB regular agrees the world would be a better place if we were all atheists (I happen to think your theory is not only false but demonstrably silly, but I’m willing to humor you for a second).
Now that we’ve agreed, what exactly are we supposed to DO about it? Until such time as EVERYONE on Earth denies the existence of God, the Utopia you imagine would result from worldwide atheism remains a pipe dream.
Just how do you propose to turn everyone on Earth into an atheist? Maybe you think you can just fly into Teheran and start handing out antireligious tracts, at which point the Shiites will see the error of their ways? Or perhaps you could parachute into Afghanistan, and try to convince Osama Bin-Laden that religion is merely the opiate of the masses?
Oh, I know! Maybe the ayatollahs will log on to the SDMB, read Chubbs’ posts, and embrace secular humanism!
Okay, I belabor the point, but by now, I hope even Chubbs sees how silly and futile his quest is.
Here’s another dilemma: isn’t is possible to believe one thing with all your heart, but still see the practical advantages to believing something completely opposite? For instance, there is some sociological evidence that devoutly religious people are physically healthier than non-believers. So, since there seems to be a practical benefit
to believing in God, should atheists start worshipping the God they don’t believe in, in order to reap medical benefits?
I’m sure Chubbs would laugh at that notion. But it’s no sillier than HIS proposal. I’m a Catholic, so obviously I believe in God. Can I see, purely as a practical matter, that religion can have terrible results? Sure. So, should I immediately abandon things I firmly believe in, simply because there may be some immediate practical benefit?
Of course not.
My advice is, contemplate, study, and pray… and THEN decide whether you believe in any given religion (or no religion). Once you’ve arrived at a sincere conviction, stick with it, even if there seem to be some material benefits to believing differently.
Did you notice that the site you referenced is titled “RELIGIOUSLY-BASED CIVIL UNREST AND WARFARE”? Talk about selective sources.
Maybe you should take a look at this list of current wars. Out of 50 conflicts listed, only three are religious. (Note: I am not endorsing this site, as it is somewhat dated. I also see that they list American inner cities as a site of minor conflicts. However, it is clear that there are plenty of wars going on around the world which are not based on religion).
I’d also like to hear you explain how the American Revolution, the American Civil War, the war between America and Japan during WWII, or the American involvement in Vietnam would not have taken place if there were no religion.
I agree with you 100% that using religion as a way to justify killing fellow humans or killing oneself in the name of God is wrong. However, most religious people do not do this. It would be nice if we could eliminate war by eliminating religion, but it simply won’t work.
First, as we have been trying to demonstrate, even today there are plenty of other reasons for war besides religion. From my cite above: territory, independence, border disputes, democracy, poverty, control of resources, and ethnic strife (just because people have the same beliefs doesn’t mean they don’t have other conflicts – again, the American Civil War is an example).
Second, there is absolutely no practical way to turn billions of believers into atheists. I personally would fight rather than give up my beliefs (and believe me, there aren’t a lot of causes for which I would go to war). So any attempt to rid the world of religion is bound to start more conflicts than it ends.
Honestly astorian, you haven’t thought this trough have you?
You start by telling people what to think; you have to impress upon them the bare naked facts, to do this you might have to distribute a lot of literature and maybe call on doors and advertise on TV.
It might also help if you gathered everybody together once a week to keep them in line and instruct them (Sunday might be the best day for this).
If this fails, then you may need to apply pressure by discrimination; use every opportunity to highlight the fact that atheists are the best people and are following the right and true path, try to establish a clear divide with no fence on which to sit.
When you’ve whittled it down to the hard core of theists who won’t abandon their beliefs in favour of reason, there is no alternative but to remove them from the community at large, lest they contaminate the righteoous with their polluted thinking.
Of course, for large gatherings of resistant believers, there may be no alternative but to use deadly force.
Now, can’t you see that this would be better than what we have at the moment.
the definition of “straw man” isn’t relevant here. I am showing your ultimate authority to be ancient nomadic shepards. If they were not that please re-educate me. Abraham was a shepard without a land, hence Nomadic Shepard.
Nope, sorry, my ultimate authority is God, who, as far as I know is only a shepherd in the metaphorical sense.
“Oh yes”, you say, “but you learnt about him from some holy book like the bible”.
Actually no, I had a series of personal and striking experiences of God (which suggestion you will no doubt find laughable and pathetic), only afterward did I start looking at things like the bible, so anyway, I think it’s fair to say that long-dead nomadic shepherds didn’t play a huge part in the process; I think this is the case for a significant majority of theists.
So I still think the “faith is just based on dusty books written by dead ancients” position is a straw man.