First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
Why should religion be banned, and how is that any different than the religious forcing conversion on secular society?
5206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M
Offline
Posted 7/21/16 , edited 7/21/16

GrandMasterTime wrote:


TheAngryLittleAlchemist wrote:


I was laughing at what the person said....(and they corrected themselves later)




Normally when I say "this lol" I'm saying that this is a response I agree with but anyways I wasn't having a go at you.




True.
11772 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / McDonough
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

rinrakuu wrote:


This is a theoretical question, but please, give us your feedback on this. How is a ban on religion for government officials, or anyone for that matter, different from religions forced conversion and crusading?


Enjoy.


It's not any different, anyone who would suggest otherwise is either using a train of logic that only they understand or are just angry at religion because life isn't perfect.

Religion has brought a lot of good things to the world (granted plenty of bad things as well).

While I believe politically powerful people have their right to their own religious beliefs, I don't feel that such beliefs should be used to justify laws or use of force. That's how you end up with the crusades

Religion is often used throughout history to justify violence (oh the irony) is the only reason for supporting a religious ban, that I can think of, that would actually make sense. But that's a very, very flimsy reason.
11772 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / McDonough
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

onemannation2012 wrote:


TheAngryLittleAlchemist wrote:

The way I see it a majority of religious people are nice, but mostly because they've been "western-ized". Same with most american muslims. I don't think we should outright ban religious beliefs, but stuff like taxing the church and making sure that goverment workers aren't biased because of a religious belief - that's important!


no sir no tax without representation founding fathers say that to British


The people of the church are allowed to vote, the officials they voted for implement a tax. That is representation. I'm not sure if you misread, were making a joke, or don't understand what "taxation without representation" means?
Posted 7/21/16 , edited 7/21/16

Elvikun wrote:


rinrakuu wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


But genocide happens for instance Soviet Russia?


onemannation2012 wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


not true look at stalin and mau of china killed 120 million without religion


Thanks.


Duh, this one is old as the world itself and still floats around. Do you not see the difference between killing in the name of X and being X and killing? There are religious people who kill, there are people who kill in the name of religion, there are people who are atheists and kill, but you cannot kill in the name of atheism, because it's not an ideology.


I wouldn't have thought of it as quickly, but yes, I did. He ninja'd me.

Whether ideology or no, you can kill in the name of anything or for nothing at all.
Posted 7/21/16

demo_Animation wrote:


onemannation2012 wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


not true look at stalin and mau of china killed 120 million without religion


Not really what I'm referring to...

The question was:


"This is a theoretical question, but please, give us your feedback on this. How is a ban on religion for government officials, or anyone for that matter, different from religions forced conversion and crusading?"


The US is not going to start executing officials en masse just because of their religion.


We'll see that it stays that way.
8603 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / F
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


LMFAO
15742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/21/16
-Historically religion has been forced upon people.
-Religion set back science by roughly 1000 years.
-Religion is almost always the reason for war.
-Some religions say we can't be "good" people without big brother telling us how to be.
-Religion is a business especially in the United States.
-Religion is full of inconsistencies and usually the claims it makes cannot be proven. Because when they are proven, it's proven to be false. (Ex. A donkey in the desert from the bible).


No matter how you look at it. Religion is bad, and the people don't need it. It's religion that needs the people, that should be a red flag even in the slowest mind.

Posted 7/21/16

-Dattebayo wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


LMFAO


^@ you

mind you not only Stalin, but Nazi (on the right) was atheist? So please laugh at your own fucking self pfft
Posted 7/21/16 , edited 7/21/16

descloud wrote:

-Historically religion has been forced upon people.
-Religion set back science by roughly 1000 years.
-Religion is almost always the reason for war.
-Some religions say we can't be "good" people without big brother telling us how to be.
-Religion is a business especially in the United States.
-Religion is full of inconsistencies and usually the claims it makes cannot be proven. Because when they are proven, it's proven to be false. (Ex. A donkey in the desert from the bible).


No matter how you look at it. Religion is bad, and the people don't need it. It's religion that needs the people, that should be a red flag even in the slowest mind.



Religion isn't bad, only those who kill in its name. There are many religious who don't kill, and don't force it on others. As for history, who cares? History changes.

Edit: also, what cannot be proven doesn't mean it might not exist. What happens after death can't be proven or disproven by mankind, it does not mean it might not exist.
19907 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / El paso Tx
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

rinrakuu wrote:


Elvikun wrote:


rinrakuu wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


But genocide happens for instance Soviet Russia?


onemannation2012 wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


not true look at stalin and mau of china killed 120 million without religion


Thanks.


Duh, this one is old as the world itself and still floats around. Do you not see the difference between killing in the name of X and being X and killing? There are religious people who kill, there are people who kill in the name of religion, there are people who are atheists and kill, but you cannot kill in the name of atheism, because it's not an ideology.


I wouldn't have thought of it as quickly, but yes, I did. He ninja'd me.

Whether ideology or no, you can kill in the name of anything or for nothing at all.


That cause I am smarter. Lol

Posted 7/21/16 , edited 7/21/16

onemannation2012 wrote:


rinrakuu wrote:


Elvikun wrote:


rinrakuu wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


But genocide happens for instance Soviet Russia?


onemannation2012 wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


not true look at stalin and mau of china killed 120 million without religion


Thanks.


Duh, this one is old as the world itself and still floats around. Do you not see the difference between killing in the name of X and being X and killing? There are religious people who kill, there are people who kill in the name of religion, there are people who are atheists and kill, but you cannot kill in the name of atheism, because it's not an ideology.


I wouldn't have thought of it as quickly, but yes, I did. He ninja'd me.

Whether ideology or no, you can kill in the name of anything or for nothing at all.


That cause I am smarter. Lol



No, that I was busy multitasking to respond as quickly, and had my mind in different places, so-to-speak. I don't care who's smarter or dumber on the internet, don't be childish
5206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

rinrakuu wrote:


-Dattebayo wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


LMFAO


^@ you

mind you not only Stalin, but Nazi (on the right) was atheist? So please laugh at your own fucking self pfft


Di....did.....did....did...did you just call Nazi's atheists? Are you.....retarded?

I don't know about Stalin but Hitler and the nazis? Hell No!

Beyond that, there's a difference here : Atheists have never started genocides over religious beliefs
15742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

rinrakuu wrote:


descloud wrote:

-Historically religion has been forced upon people.
-Religion set back science by roughly 1000 years.
-Religion is almost always the reason for war.
-Some religions say we can't be "good" people without big brother telling us how to be.
-Religion is a business especially in the United States.
-Religion is full of inconsistencies and usually the claims it makes cannot be proven. Because when they are proven, it's proven to be false. (Ex. A donkey in the desert from the bible).


No matter how you look at it. Religion is bad, and the people don't need it. It's religion that needs the people, that should be a red flag even in the slowest mind.



Religion isn't bad, only those who kill in its name. There are many religious who don't kill, and don't force it on others. As for history, who cares? History changes.


"As for history, who cares?"

This kind of thing right here is why nobody who is an atheist will take anyone who defends religion seriously. I'm not sure if it's ignorance or just plain denial about the reality of religion.
Posted 7/21/16

TheAngryLittleAlchemist wrote:


rinrakuu wrote:


-Dattebayo wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


LMFAO


^@ you

mind you not only Stalin, but Nazi (on the right) was atheist? So please laugh at your own fucking self pfft


Di....did.....did....did...did you just call Nazi's atheists? Are you.....retarded?

I don't know about Stalin but Hitler and the nazis? Hell No!

Beyond that, there's a difference here : Atheists have never started genocides over religious beliefs


Hitler stopped Catholic worship , fact, the nazi state was assumed atheist, rumoured to be pagan even, fact.
8603 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / F
Offline
Posted 7/21/16

rinrakuu wrote:


-Dattebayo wrote:


demo_Animation wrote:

I guess the biggest difference would be the lack of genocide...?


LMFAO


^@ you

mind you not only Stalin, but Nazi (on the right) was atheist? So please laugh at your own fucking self pfft


lol
that doesn't compare to the millions of war and genocides in the name of religion in the past

and yes the past matters because it's only going to keep on happening

I'm not saying religion should be banned because that's banning a form of expression, but religion is just a way to control people so they don't do this and that. And people LOVE to twist things so that it benefits their own ideals, so they can kill people whenever they want in the name of whatever they want. Religion is bull shit and the reason for many of the world's evil.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.