# Too much God is never enough **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 26, 2002, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667 "2002-08-26T18:52:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/1 "2002-08-26T18:52:00Z")
Dear Great Debate Participants. Disconcertingly, G\_d has spoken to me, and in his all wise and wonderful and wrathful way has conveyed to me his displeasure with the state of GD. Specifically, he refers to the two threads not devoted to him, [FBI Abuses](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=132498) and [How truthful are the newspapers?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=131322) The almightly decrees that he is most displeased with the lack of faithful obsessiveness with the state of discussing all things godlike. For your convenience, he suggests the following debate topics. “Is the Godhead Circumcised?” and “Resolved: God be pissed!” God also said he’d be stoked if Cecil would give him his own Topic, so that His majesty might be divined without distraction from lesser topics. I asked him if too, it would be possible to get extra hamsters for our servers to better carry out his divine wisdom – I must go now to apologize to the landlord, for it appears he took this rather literally… ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/2 "2002-08-26T19:57:23Z")
😕 ---
**Author:** ![Mercutio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/51bf81/32.png) [@Mercutio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mercutio)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/3 "2002-08-26T20:02:56Z")
Crack kills. ---
**Author:** ![Exgineer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a88e4f/32.png) [@Exgineer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exgineer)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/4 "2002-08-26T20:03:42Z")
Just to be clear, **Ace** , are you complaining about the number of “religion” threads in GD, or are you just trying to confuse people? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/5 "2002-08-26T20:11:39Z")
Yes, the former. Is it religion week on the SDMB or what? Am I the only one who feels GD is completely saturated by religious debate? And why the hell is religion – Hello! It’s FAITH based! – even a topic of allegedly RATIONAL discussion? For what it’s worth, I was proposing, in my bemused and opaque way, that the religious debates get their own topic. ---
**Author:** ![Exgineer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a88e4f/32.png) [@Exgineer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exgineer)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/6 "2002-08-26T20:25:42Z")
The two “big” topics in life are religion and politics. Just about everything in GD can be reduced to one or the other. This week we happen to be a bit heavy in religion. Next week it’ll probably be all politics. What’s the problem? “Do you like raisins in your cookies?” belongs in IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![g8rguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/7cd45c/32.png) [@g8rguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/g8rguy)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/7 "2002-08-26T21:07:56Z")
Are you seriously trying to imply that one cannot have a rational discussion of religious issues, **Ace**? ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/8 "2002-08-26T21:23:21Z")
In that case I would stay away from GD for awhile. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/9 "2002-08-26T21:52:36Z")
I am quite serious to the point of stating, not implying, that something that is Faith-Based is at odds with notions of proof, cause and effect, and application of standard logic and causality necessary for a meaningful debate. It is no more reasonable to debate the best color, the existence of an afterlife, or what I did in my previous life. It is mental fiddling, unbuttressed by structures such as fact or deduction. “I believe it.” by itself, as a rationale, is dynamite to the bridge of argument. It is boring twaddle, with no more interest for me than a group of Bullfrogs, trying to determine the dominant croaker. It is mere argument by voluminous opinion, and should be relegated to it’s own Topic where the hot-air would obscure less of the interesting threads I come to read. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/10 "2002-08-26T22:00:48Z")
Well, I thought it was hilarious. ---
**Author:** ![zev\_steinhardt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/97f17d/32.png) [@zev\_steinhardt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zev_steinhardt)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/11 "2002-08-26T22:08:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ace0Spades \* > \*\*I am quite serious to the point of stating, not implying, that something that is Faith-Based is at odds with notions of proof, cause and effect, and application of standard logic and causality necessary for a meaningful debate. \*\* Firstly, **Ace0Spades** , one can have a Great Debate with a set of ground rules. For example, one can debate the effect of Adam and Eve’s sins on mankind today, taking it as a given for the sake of the argument that the event actually took place. Secondly, even if you don’t take it as a given, one can certainly compare and contrast different religions and even the practices of different sects and denominations within a reilgion in a factual manner. Furthermore, one can discuss religion as it applies to public policy. Valid questions (which can all be debated in GD) include (and are certainly not limited to): Should a town be able to put up a Christmas tree in public property? Should freedom of religion permit a Muslim to marry more than one wife in the United States? Is the banning of _schechita_ by certain European countries wrong? Is celibacy a virtue in other religions as it is in certain sects Christianity? Why or why not? In what forums, **Ace0Spades** would you think these topics (and others like them) should be discussed? > [@](#): > > \*\* > It is no more reasonable to debate the best color, the existence of an afterlife, or what I did in my previous life. It is mental fiddling, unbuttressed by structures such as fact or deduction. “I believe it.” by itself, as a rationale, is dynamite to the bridge of argument. \*\* Becuase unlike one’s favorite color, we are dealing with deeply held beliefs by vast numbers of people. And the existance (or non-existance) of an afterlife and reincarnation ARE valid arguments. > [@](#): > > \*\* > It is boring twaddle, with no more interest for me than a group of Bullfrogs, trying to determine the dominant croaker. \*\* Then don’t participate. Zev Steinhardt ---
**Author:** ![g8rguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/7cd45c/32.png) [@g8rguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/g8rguy)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/12 "2002-08-26T22:12:08Z")
Hmm… if you say so, **Ace** ; now prove it. After all, you’re the one who appears to believe that the ability to prove your point in a discussion is critical, and it would therefore be hypocrisy to make such a statement without proof, wouldn’t it? It is no doubt true that one cannot offer proof of the correctness of any one religion. It is also no doubt true that one cannot offer proof of the correctness of any political proposition that we discuss in GD; if we could prove ourselves correct on some issue, there wouldn’t be much of a debate, would there? What is not true that one cannot nevertheless have a rational debate about politics, nor is it true that one cannot have a rational debate about religion. That you feel otherwise is unfortunate but ultimately inconsequential, since the fact that there are rational discussions which include religion in GD illustrates that you’re wrong. As to religion being boring twaddle, so what? No one is forcing you to read any of those threads. Personally, I find that many of the political discussions show no more rationality, and are often just as boring, but I would be an idiot to suggest that such discussions don’t belong in GD. Besides, by my count, only 1/3 of the threads on the first page of GD are religious in nature to begin with; which should hardly be a great burden. (In preview: **zev** , I think **Ace** is proposing adding yet another forum for religion, under the misguided contention that it’s not possibe to have a meaningful debate about anything religious.) ---
**Author:** ![zev\_steinhardt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/97f17d/32.png) [@zev\_steinhardt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zev_steinhardt)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/13 "2002-08-26T22:18:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by g8rguy \* > \*\* > (In preview: **zev** , I think **Ace** is proposing adding yet another forum for religion, under the misguided contention that it’s not possibe to have a meaningful debate about anything religious.) \*\* True enough, but relegating them to another forum would, IMHO, make them “less than great” debates. I don’t think that that is the case. I firmly believe (believe, get it?) that religion debates can be just as “great” and belong with the rest of the GDs. Zev Steinhardt ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/14 "2002-08-26T22:33:28Z")
**zeb** , I was being my usual hyperbolic self. Of course there’s room for religious debates in GD as such you describe – they have three things is common: They’re meaningful, you can use facts to support your argument, and _they bear no relation to the threads currently being discussed on GD_: These were 7 of the top 10 at the initial rant: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints I’m So Glad I Found God and I Pray Someday You Will Too Welcoming His4ever, Our First Actual “Chick” Chick! If there was no god, could the void be filled by other means? Your Religious Belief - Culturally Predetermined Life continues beyond physical death. Is this proof of God’s existance What would convince Believers that they’ve been wrong all along? I’m all for factually based religious debates, I’m just not sure how many of these qualify. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/15 "2002-08-26T22:45:52Z")
And these weren’t in the top 10, but are still nonstarters: Prayers for the unbelieving? I’m So Glad I Found God and I Pray Someday You Will Too Would the Rapture Be Proof Enough? Is the J-C God evil? Cain’s Wife – this is Factual, though owing to no fault of the original poster. And no, I don’t participate – I lurk, generally, in GD, and like most people, I prefer signal to noise, and the threads above are poor in that regard, additionally they obscure and deflect thought and posters from other threads. Why not a Topic of their own? If, as **zev** says, you can state the ground rules, I see no reason why the location matters whatsoever. [on preview] If the title is the only sticking cavil, that’s easily remedied by changing GD to “Non-religious debates.” ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/16 "2002-08-26T22:57:40Z")
I’m fascinated to see that one thread was in the top 10 and at the same time _not in the top 10_; does it enjoy some sort of Heisenbergian uncertainty? ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/17 "2002-08-26T23:10:40Z")
Eh, well, I do notice that many of the religious threads seem to devolve into one poster clinging desperately to an irrational position while ignoring every valid criticism raised against it. They are not exclusively so, however, and I’m not sure that such things happen any less often in the social/political threads. I say, leave leave the religious debates where they are. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/18 "2002-08-26T23:13:32Z")
It’s Schroedinger’s thread, **'Tout**. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![zev\_steinhardt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/97f17d/32.png) [@zev\_steinhardt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zev_steinhardt)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/19 "2002-08-26T23:31:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ace0Spades \* > \*\* > These were 7 of the top 10 at the initial rant: \*\* I’m sorry, **Ace** , but these seem to be perfectly legitimate debate topics to me… > [@](#): > > \*\* > The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints \*\* A debate on the merits of the Mormon church and it’s practices, as well as whether or not it belongs in the general group of Christianity is a valid debate topic. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I’m So Glad I Found God and I Pray Someday You Will Too \*\* This one actually got started in the Pit and was moved to GD by the mods. > [@](#): > > \*\*Welcoming His4ever, Our First Actual “Chick” Chick! \*\* Jack Chick and his philosiphies are often reviled and ridiculed on this board. Having a debate on whether his views fall into normative Christianity and their potential impact on society in general is a valid debate topic. > [@](#): > > \*\* > If there was no god, could the void be filled by other means? \*\* Similar to the one below (What would convince believers). See my explanation to that debate. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Your Religious Belief - Culturally Predetermined \*\* Whether or not one’s culture helps to determine one’s relgious beliefs sounds like a valid debate topic to me. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Life continues beyond physical death. Is this proof of God’s existance \*\* Debates on the existance of God certainly sound like a valid debate topic to me. For while I don’t believe God can be proven in a phyiscal sense, He might be provable logically or through some other method. And even if not provable, you may be able to deduce that He probably does or does not exist. > [@](#): > > \*\* > What would convince Believers that they’ve been wrong all along? \*\* A great topic, IMHO. If one could show that the founding event of a religion is false, would the believers cease to believe in the religion. Assumes a premise, and a valid debate topic. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I’m all for factually based religious debates, I’m just not sure how many of these qualify. \*\* See above Zev Steinhardt ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2002, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667/20 "2002-08-26T23:32:50Z")
you have read the forum descriptions, have you not? Great Debates also states clearly that it’s the place for ‘witnessing’, clearly what is intended (or so the mod thought when it got moved) re: the thread about “I’m so glad I found God”. I had noticed the same thing, but my reaction was to shrug and move on. it all goes in cycles - at times you can’t shake a stick w/o hitting a political thread, which I’m sure is boring as hell to quite a few (who’ve not been charmed so far by my witticisms) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/too-much-god-is-never-enough/125667.md?page=2)