Will religion die out?

Post Reply New Topic

Secular Humanism doesn't claim to be different.

It's either something you believe in or you don't.

But there's no mystical father figure standing over it threatening punishment for non-compliance.

Does non-compliance go unpunished, then? Wherever there's an organizational power structure, there is punishment for non-compliance. Humamisn is no escape from the bad things that plague religious organizations these days. Wherever there is power, there will be abusers of that power. Whose banner it is, doesn't matter. It's just human nature.

The problems you refer to lie in the human organizations that house religion, not in religion itself.

Public sphere violations of Secular Humanism are punished, in the courts of law of this country. The fact that sometimes certain sects are able to codify their dogma into law violates this precept.

Many of the things that are currently punished in our legal system wouldn't be a crime under a purely Secular Humanist code of ethics. Non-violent drug offenders, prostitution, etc...

You're right.... power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Our government is as guilty of this as any religious organization. The difference is, we actually have the ability to change our government if we don't agree with it. Judges, Sheriffs, Mayors, Governors, Senators, Presidents...... they're all subject to an election to keep their jobs, and if we live in a place where we don't agree with the majority, we're free to move.

There's practically nothing in the Bible about drugs; that came up in the US itself by fringe movements, such as the Temperance Movement...


One of my favorite quotes of all time...


Except that the system is circumvented by anybody that has significant amounts of money, and political structures exist to keep a small group in power over a long period of time...

Temperance may have been a secular movement, but it arises from the same place as religion in the hearts of those who preach it.

Regardless, Drug use is a victimless crime, unless you get behind the wheel of a car, or steal to get the drugs. Legalize it and tax it, you not only eliminate a major portion of the criminal element, give drug companies something to profit off of besides getting people addicted to depression meds, and can use that money to fund universal health care.

It's an extension of the abortion debate really. It should be each individuals choice what is done to their body.

But we digress.



To your second point - yes, that is the unfortunate consequence of our society, because the same people that own the media companies are the ones with a vested interest in the status quo, so information is carefully controlled to maintain the illusion among the populace that their interests are being served by their elected officials. It's the two party political system we live with that allows this to continue. In a series of winner takes all elections across the nation, a third party barely stands a chance of gaining any say in our government, so dissident views are effectively eliminated.

In this aspect, I prefer the basics of the British Parliamentary system, smaller groups can actually gain seats in the parliament, and can form alliances to pass legislation important to their constituents. It's still not a perfect system, but I think it's better then the American system.

define what you mean by religion please.

People with a certain hard-line idea are going to twist the religion to suit their ideals... the KKK did that, after all...


But... but... if we do that, then the conservative base will lose half of its political clout! If everyone is covered by health care than the health insurance companies aren't making any money! And if the criminal element dies out then we don't have a reason to keep a police state anymore!



Yeah, hardliners of all political orientations like to think they know what you should do with your life better than you do... that's my primary problem with them...


It's not necessarily the media companies that have an interest in the status quo (a rapidly changing political landscape would allow for more interesting reports to be made and therefore ratings). The primary interest in the status quo is anyone making more than $250,000/year, since these people would be the ones that make more money under the current rich get richer/poor get poorer system...



I actually did a research paper on electoral college reform... some interesting topics came up (I think I advocated something between what you suggest and the current US system...)

The news segment possibly, but look at who owns the corporations? Rockefeller, Murdoch, Buffett.

I mean, just look at Fox News to see what kind of effect a politically active owner can have on a "news" station.

Better ratings don't matter to Rupert Murdoch, what matters is convincing his viewers that his version of reality is the truth, and hypnotizing the undecided into following along. Fox News could operate at a loss, and it wouldn't matter, because it's essentially a PR tool for Conservative political ideals. (I.E. Rupert's views) Rupert makes more from the continuation of those policies then he does from the channel itself.

And I'll be fair here and admit that Buffett's media outlets are more likely to take a liberal slant on things.

Ditto.

As "fluid intelligence", ( concerned with ascribing agency, assigning cause, pattern recognition, and creating meaning out of "chaos" ), evolved in humans so did the need to believe in god, a higher dimension, or something similar. It is possible to partially, or temporarily, suppress/disguise this need, with various activities, but many people who ask questions, seek answers, etc, find that nothing but belief in god/a higher dimension quite satisfies this need.

We will never be able to comprehend the whole of the universe with science and other objective tools. There is always the "objectively unknown/unknowable".

I made the decision, this year, to believe in god/a higher dimension, not because I think that god exists in an objective sense, but because the belief itself has an effect on me/my life, an effect which I all of a sudden understood that I "needed". And it is very interesting how this belief is functioning like a ladder to new experience/insight/knowledge.

I don't see religious belief disappearing for so long as humans have a built in tendency, ( fluid intelligence ) to seek meaning, assign agency and cause, etc. It is a field of subjective knowledge as vast as the objective one explored by science.

.

To ask.. "Do you think religion will die out?"

Is like asking.. "Do you think justice will die out?"

I'm not a historian.. but has there ever been a time that justice (fairness) ever existed in our world.. ?

For something to die out.. it must first exist.

Religion.. like justice.. may seem fine on paper.

The question is.. will either ever be put into practice.. ?

---

"For the entire Law stands fulfilled in one saying, namely: "You must love your neighbour as yourself." If, though, you keep on biting and devouring one another, look out that you do not get annihilated by one another."

Galatians 5:14

-

The world is not entirely without justice or fairness. These things exist now. But they are countered by injustice, unfairness, suffering. Religion definitely exists, but not in its ideal form. I thought I had you figured out, Accelerator, but now I am not sure. Do you qute the Bible as much as you do just to sneer at it? I don't understand you.

Yes, I think it is inevitable so long as humanity does not suffer any catastrophic setbacks any time soon. Religion is born with ignorance and will die with ignorance.

I voted no.

I actually think the current bubble of secularism will actually pop and that, as the purity of Darwinian evolution falls off that the atheists and theists will be forced into a much more mutually respectful dialog. I can definitely see both atheism and theism becoming far better honed and the ignorant aspects and emotional arguments falling off more but no, I really think if anything we'll see a resurgence of religion and the commonly accepted idea of society as fundamentally atheist and religion to be something only practiced in one's home will also dissipate.

I don't think religion will ever die out, but eventually there will be few religious people.

Wrong.

You fail.