|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Hmm... (Reply to this comment)
by youngchinq
I'm not of any religion and I believe in the process of science and evolution just makes soo much sense to me. Having said that, it's hard to believe there is no God and no greater meaning. Life becomes more rewarding if you realize all the richness, miracles, and quirky coincidences is not just a result of chance. Anyways, I do disaprove of the Christian fundamentalists but I respect moderate Christians for having faith in something.
|
Jan 03 '08
11:40 pm PST
|
|
Re: Lanny, allow me to follow up with the notion that (Reply to this comment)
by rated-r
Hi Mike,
I'm not trying to be judgemental, because I understand that the words you have wrote to be true. Nobody should have their voices squelched. Not even here where the written word reigns supreme. I am not about burning the bible or any other holy text. Simply put, these things are mere words in a book.
Through the years I've seen a lot people get hurt within their own religion, and I have no doubt at what depth this pain was inflicted. I have also seen the pain and suffering of people outside of faith as well, and those wounds run even deeper.
To tell me to respect religion is like telling me to ignore a child beating and walking away.
Thank you for your many responses,
Lanny
|
Dec 21 '07
1:55 am PST
|
|
Lanny, allow me to follow up with the notion that (Reply to this comment)
by henry_thoreau
in any community there are bound to be folks--believers, atheists, or agnostics--who disagree with (or even frown on) my below-stated thoughts. But they should never forget that I'd always defend their precious RIGHT to disagree. Thank, er, goodness for a "free" society, wherein starkly differing individuals learn to be tolerant neighbors... or occasionally even tolerant friends. :-)
|
Dec 20 '07
9:34 pm PST
|
|
Re: Re: rated-r, (Reply to this comment)
by henry_thoreau
Hi again, Lanny, and thanks for your response. Keep in mind that everything I'll say basically emanates from the sensibility of someone who's neither a theist nor an atheist. I'm an agnostic. For present purposes, let's just take that to mean that I'm one who doesn't presume to possess ultimate knowledge regarding where we did (or did not) come from or where (if anywhere) we're headed hereafter. To me, it seems as though both "believers" and "atheists" are curiously unwilling (psychologically unable?) to fully embrace Confucius' dictum:
"To know that one knows what one knows, and to know that one doesn't know what one doesn't know, there lies true wisdom."
Or, as Socrates (more or less) put it:
"Wisest is he who knows he does not know."
Anyway! Let me now respond to some of your below words:
"First of all, I do not hold grudges...."
That's commendable! I'd like to think that everybody else at this site could honestly say that (and treat each other accordingly). ;-)
"It is not about how I respond, but why."
Hmmm. That seems to be a bit of sticking point between us. I myself tend to feel we all (not excepting myself!) occasionally forget the value of a little patience, tolerance, and courtesy when dealing with others--not least those with whom we might more or less disagree.
Still, given such historic evils as the Inquisition and, more recently, the former abuse of certain helpless youngsters at the hands of certain tacitly/institutionally "protected" nuns and priests in Ireland and America-- and sundry other things that could be mentioned, I'm not inclined to strenuously dispute it when you say:
"Consider the history of Christianity/Catholicism; those religions do not deserve respect."
On the other hand, given that my parents and the rest of my family were/are Catholic, and I myself was subjected to all the BS of Catholic school from 1959 (first grade) through 1965 (I subsequently rebelled and cast off all vestiges of that dross during my junior high and high school years in public schools), I know from long personal experience that the majority of modern American Catholics don't defend (and don't necessarily enjoy being reminded about!) those ostensibly "anomalous" events in their Church's history. In fact, the majority of fundamentally good and decent Catholics (and, I suspect, not a few good and decent Protestants, Jews, etc.) seldom pause during their hectic workweeks even to think about their "faith" until it's time to dutifully "show up" at their respective houses of worship each Saturday or Sunday. A number in each congregation secretly don't literally believe all the dogma but merely rely upon their religious affiliations to help impart "moral values" to their children and/or wield a measure of social leverage within their communities. Some others unapologetically relish the experience of basking in a comforting ambiance of "belonging" to a socially sanctioned group, regardless of whether they themselves literally "believe". Still others, of course, are simply timid, unquestioning sheep who can't imagine forsaking mommy's or daddy's expectations instilled at some impressionable age. But, bottom line, when encountered as ordinary individuals outside their respective institutions/clans, they are (with regrettable exceptions) good-hearted folks, all of whom, in my opinion, do deserve sincerely respectful, courteous, friendly treatment as individuals. Just because I myself (like you) no longer believe in archaic fairy tales or papal infallibility (or whatever) doesn't mean I feel inclined to look a fellow citizen in the eye and utter the word "stupid" (as you did vis a vis the first commenter in this thread). Methinks you'll not attract as many "converts" to your "cause" that way as you might do by consistently treating individual human beings with a modicum of basic social courtesy, even while you (justifiably) bash their misguided beliefs or institutions. In other words, though you (arguably) might be correct when you say "those religions do not deserve respect", I maintain that the average individual adherent to those faiths/institutions is entitled to a degree of old-fashioned politeness when you address him/her. And you certainly were not to that degree polite to "toolguy1963" during your reply to him (near the beginning of this comment thread) when you (essentially) called him "stupid". [Not that I meant to imply that toolguy1963 himself is, or is not, a "believer". That's his own business.]
Or could it be that I myself am no longer young enough or "with it" enough to relate to such, er, "direct", "New York-style" interaction? ;-)
Moving on, you also mentioned:
"the people who tell me I'm irrational for not believing in their god"
Indeed, nobody should call you "irrational" for disbelieving in a concept that can't be scientifically proved or disproved! No argument here, Lanny.
You also said:
"If you honestly seek out the truth about religion, and aren't afraid to speak out about it, then a person can be truly freed"
I couldn't agree with you more, Lanny. There's a certain psychological/emotional release (freedom) in finally relinquishing any pretense of knowing what one simply cannot know.
You also said:
"Religion is not good when place into the government itself."
I agree. Heck, even this nation's founders--however imperfectly--respected that worthy notion, which should be an axiom. However, elements of current presidential campaigning show just how deeply (and pathetically) much of America--even in this 21st century!--remains mired in archaic, irrational social conventions. We're perhaps finally on the verge of being able to accept a female or a black president (because there are far more crucial issues at stake today!); but are we ready to accept a president who's so calmly rational, honest and courageous as to not profess affiliation with any conventional creed?
You also said:
"What did you expect me to say?"
Well, frankly, I guess I "expected" you to retain within you precisely the same motivating sentiments while skillfully employing somewhat less of the "fire-and-brimstone" (as yet another Epinionator below put it!) rhetoric. Now, I realize that some of your readers will disagree with me because they themselves happen to savor "fire-and-brimstone". After all, this is the cultivated society that engendered Howard Stern's and Jerry Springer's enlightening shows (not to mention the plethora of highbrow reading adorning the racks along your average supermarket's checkout lanes!). Nonetheless, you could do even better than that, Lanny. Just for starters, consider that your piece could still have retained its essential "fire" if you'd merely eliminated the following elements (that I'll quote directly from your piece) that likely cause various other folks to turn a deaf ear and never fully imbibe your underlying message:
"If if [sic] you have to be a liar, be a damn Christian!"
"Talk about a crock of crap."
"Religion needs it's butt kicked, and kicked hard!"
Regarding that last line, I do realize that, were you to delete it, your piece's ending wouldn't be so delightfully amusing; moreover, the admittedly agreeable image of (for example) Pat Robertson flying unceremoniously through an exit door would be lost! ;-) Nevertheless, the concluding sentence of your preceding paragraph could have left the reader with a more significant (and potentially mind-changing) thought.
Hey, Lanny, even though you (as well as various others) are bound to disagree with some (all?) of what I've said here, I've sure enjoyed "chatting" with you. Too bad we weren’t all the while sitting in some bricks-and-mortar shop sipping coffee, tea, or something else. ;-) And I look forward to reading and rating your future posts, even if I might now and again privately quibble with the "means" that you evidently feel are justified by your atheistic "ends".
Mike
|
Dec 19 '07
11:22 pm PST
|
|
Re: rated-r, (Reply to this comment)
by rated-r
Hi Mike,
First of all, I do not hold grudges against any of the people who comment. That simply would be, fairly, self-destructive. It is not about how I respond, but why.
For some small reason people believe that all people need to respect their religion. I say hogwash to that. Consider the history of Christianity/Catholicism; those religions do not deserve respect, nor do the people who tell me I'm irrational for not believing in their god.
If you honestly seek out the truth about religion, and aren't afraid to speak out about it, then a person can be truly freed. It all has to do with closed-mindedness of zealots that are pushing their agenda down people throats. Religion is not good when place into the government itself.
I cannot think of a better cause in this world. Atheists have been apart of this cruel joke that we call religion as long as religion has been around. Shoot, there are dedicated website by Islamic people to kill Atheist first.
What did you expect me to say?
Lanny
|
Dec 18 '07
9:17 pm PST
|
|
rated-r, (Reply to this comment)
by henry_thoreau
It occurs to me that the first comment I posted below may, in its own way, have come across as "too downright harsh". Now that I'm long past having cooled off, I'll admit that part of what had initially riled me was seeing you basically use the word "stupid" (at one point in your reply to the first commenter below) to refer to another Epinionator who--however bluntly--had exercised his right to express his displeasure with your piece. That first commenter hadn't engaged in any "name-calling", and so I didn't see why you yourself needed to resort to any pseudo-name-calling during your reply.
In any case, life's too short to hold grudges (though, doubtless, some will always choose to do so at the slightest provocation). Therefore, I hereby say "Peace, for Gawd's sake!" (Just speaking loosely there, rated-r!) ;-) You’ve been on my WOT for a long time, and, as far as I'm concerned, a fleeting "spat" doesn’t change that.
Have yourself a happy holiday season even if we don't see completely eye-to-eye re the most appropriate manner in which to communicate our respective, underlying, philosophical views, which, ironically, aren't so terribly far apart.
Mike
|
Dec 18 '07
2:26 pm PST
|
|
Ummm....we have a horrible (Reply to this comment)
by jo.com
ignorant President. Vote in 2008 and make sure you let others know we need a change. Jo
|
Dec 11 '07
4:50 pm PST
|
|
Re: Re: Surely you can do better than this. (Reply to this comment)
by henry_thoreau
At least your piece is now more tolerably readable insofar as you subsequently updated it by implementing my below "grammar/spelling" suggestions. I'll give you that much.
Moreover, from the get-go there was little, if anything, wrong with the sentiment that presumably propelled your discussion. [Hey, I don't want George W. Bush, Pat Robertson or their ilk calling the shots any more than (presumably) you do!] So, I'll grant you that, too. :-)
|
Dec 11 '07
3:15 pm PST
|
|
Re: Surely you can do better than this. (Reply to this comment)
by rated-r
I appreciate the English lesson and I don't mind those things being pointed out, but I personally do not care what you have to say about the content of my message.
Lanny
|
Dec 11 '07
10:40 am PST
|
|
Surely you can do better than this. (Reply to this comment)
by henry_thoreau
I fear your present piece does a (modest) disservice to the "cause" of atheism [or perhaps even that of agnosticism, which more closely reflects my stance, not that anybody cares].
First, your title is illogical. "The one (i.e., "only") bane of society?" What about other religions (not only in America but elsewhere)? For example, do you seriously think the recurring (post-1947) 20th-century conflicts within Indian society were catalyzed only or primarily by Christianity? Your title didn't specify "American"--or even "Western"--society; in any case, it would be greatly improved if you were to replace the word "Christianity" with the word "religion".
Moreover, your piece is riddled with the most basic grammatical/mechanical mistakes (mostly the kind that a word processor won't highlight). In case you don't already know full well what I mean, here is but a handful of examples (I've "boldfaced" the words that are problematic):
"to spread their disease call Christianity throughout this nation" (replace "call" with "called")
"this nation allows you as and individual to believe" (replace "and" with "an")
"To forces religion down people's throats" (replace "forces" with "force")
"There is no better way to divide this country then to make a false claim" (replace "then" with "than")
"It is trying to convince people that evolutions is wrong" (replace "evolutions" with "evolution")
I hastily scanned your fairly short piece and noticed at least 14 comparable mistakes. Perhaps you yourself feel that "grammar and spelling" is a trivial, secondary issue; but do you seriously expect anybody else to pay much attention to a writer's message if he doesn't take the time and trouble to edit his writing more carefully than this (even in a forum like Epinions, where, admittedly, there's greater tolerance for such stuff)?
Finally, your ham-handed rhetoric and overbearing tone evince too little sophistication and subtlety. I suggest you revisit some well-written works by famous, erudite atheists (e.g., "Why I Am Not a Christian" by Bertrand Russell) and practice emulating not only their grammatical correctness but also their rhetorical approaches. By contrast, the approach you employed for the present piece frankly is akin to the rant of a high-strung high school adolescent who needs to pay better attention in English class and do his homework religiously.
Everything I've said was calculated not to offend but rather to prompt you to reconsider that, if you really want to reach readers, how you communicate can be virtually as important as the message you mean to convey.
|
Dec 11 '07
9:59 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: WOW. (Reply to this comment)
by rated-r
Yo updateghost,
Thanks for the read, rate, and comment.
My audience is other atheists, and it has already impacted a few people.
Lanny
|
Dec 11 '07
8:58 am PST
|
|
Re: WOW. (Reply to this comment)
by rated-r
Who urinated on your flower bush?
Aaaa, Christians telling me I'm going to burn hell and forcing ignorant religious ideas down people throats!
I really couldnt give a helpful or VH rating because this is more like a be-otch or complaint than any type of logical debate.
Most of my Atheists friends agree with me. By the way, it takes 2 or more to have a debate.
I have to wonder what angle your coming from?
Its defintely not christian or jew.
I'm atheist, and you're probably too stupid to understand that Christianity segments are trying to violate law to get what they want. So, my angle is separation of church and state.
True athiests are peacful and this sounds like war chant. Whatever it is you may want to look into your own creedo "Are you open-minded enough to consider whether your ideas might be wrong?"
Problem with that is Christianity is absolutely wrong. By the way, in what way did I say go kill people?
And before you get too wound up just remember the old saying. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.
I'm not asking for this crap, I'm totally against theocracies. That's why I wrote this!
We could all be living under the inflexible tyranny of Islam. Think about that.
I'm against that too, but Islam is not dominant in this country.
Try again with some more logic and less hate and I'll come back and bump my rating. Peace!
Considering where you're coming from, you don't understand the meaning of logic!
|
Dec 11 '07
7:56 am PST
|
|
Re: WOW. (Reply to this comment)
by updateghost
I agree. rated-r, I respect you, but you fire-and-brimstone just as much as those whom you condemn. It's preaching to the choir.
|
Dec 11 '07
2:51 am PST
|
|
WOW. (Reply to this comment)
by toolguy1963
Who urinated on your flower bush?
I really couldnt give a helpful or VH rating because this is more like a be-otch or complaint than any type of logical debate. I have to wonder what angle your coming from?
Its defintely not christian or jew. True athiests are peacful and this sounds like war chant. Whatever it is you may want to look into your own creedo "Are you open-minded enough to consider whether your ideas might be wrong?"
And before you get too wound up just remember the old saying. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.
We could all be living under the inflexible tyranny of Islam. Think about that.
Try again with some more logic and less hate and I'll come back and bump my rating. Peace! Don
|
Dec 10 '07
11:49 pm PST
|
|
|
|
