Religious+Tolerant

Post Reply New Topic

What if their different theory is that tolerant people should be shot in the head?



Given that I don't have a wife, I can't possibly have stopped. So, no, I haven't.

By god I see you use references that spell out a personal god and akin to the Abrahamic ones.

Understanding why people come to believe in god, and more importantly a personal god is vital to see the contradiction.

Additionally, reading the bible/Quran easily presented me with comprehension of the intrinsic intolerance first to other religions/gods and not least, the feverish intolerance to atheists/positive assertions that there is no god.
The Torah also provides disharmony, although I have not read enough of it personally to have a more complete understanding beyond the gist.

Now, if we move to a deist god, I then retract nearly if not all my views that support the intolerance factor. However, if a religion is then applied even then, there's room for the intolerance availability. This would not be the belief in a deist god itself, but to the dogma/doctrine they submit their will to that would then be closer to the source of the issue.

Religion poisons everything.
Theism poisons everything.
The reason people believe in god tends to poison everything.



Why is it wrong to fight?
Why is it wrong to discriminate by gender, ethnicity, etc.?

As for religion, I feel puzzled by your stance.
Read the Quran and do so with the context that you believe what is written is the inerrant word of god and those who are Muslim submit their will to the morality of that god/book.

Their religion tells them to fight, discriminate by gender, religion, lack of belief, etc.
To say you don't discriminate by religion is to not see how broad that term is as a whole.
Define religion and while there can be more or less benign dogma and doctrine, generally it parses their reality where it would have not been without. Religion disables criticial thinking, in some cases only in a few areas (i.e. it doesn't harm others in theory) and in other cases it rapes their mind to believe 2+2=5.



Belief there is a god isn't overall relevant in the sense that "god" is a rather meaningless word. It's what is ascribed to that god and how it allows for delusional thinking.
How is it wrong they are afraid so to speak of science? The beginning of humanity in the Abrahamic religions specifically declares science to be evil and to be shunned. Thinking for ourselves is wrong based on their mythos.



I've reached a point where the overall empty meaning of the word god is forcing me to make too many assumptions.
Define god.
Define the value of there being a god.
Explain what it would mean to you if you didn't believe in god.
How would belief in god or a lack of belief make any difference to your choices and views about reality and to if this would be a modifier for what you vote on.

If you have explained this elsewhere, please link me.

Thanks!


Do you have an example or two of those who think you have to be an atheist?


If you never had access to religious books, what then?


In case it's misunderstood here, I do not think you are an idiot or anything negative for your beliefs and thoughts. You are trying to make sense of these things.

The basis for most religions is that they claim to have absolute knowledge of the nature of reality. To request proof is generally considered an attack on this belief and when pressed for evidence most religions require belief without proof which is called faith. I find this intolerable.

I can sum up your question(s). I hope you will not take this as a barb at you. It is a simple explanation of my view on the matter.

When one is of moderate religious beliefs, and/or one is tolerant of religious beliefs, it fosters an environment where extremist religion can grow. The extremists of all religions are outgrowths and perversions of the more moderate religions. So when a child is taught "god is real" they are then partially conditioned for a later message like "god hates fags" or "your mom got cancer because she's a sinner" or "she got raped because she was asking for it, the immoral slut."

As for reasonable people like you, no, you are not trying to convert anyone. But you are standing in the middle ground, and unfortunately both sides likely see you as being on the wrong side(and you just want to be uninvolved).

Factually correct or morally correct? There is nothing stopping you from being as square with the facts as your mind and body permit. Moral correctness is a chimera. Morality is opinion, not fact. There are no moral facts in nature.

ruveyn

To be perfectly frank, some types of immorality are very seductive.

Does it not require just as much faith to believe that God does not exist without proof?

Is that any less intolerable?

Sensible people who have to deal with real problems live in a world of probabilities. When the actions of events have reliable causes and effects the probabilities of the existence of certain patterns which dictate certain responses point to believable and useful causes. None of the useful patterns of cause and effect insofar as utility is concerned require the action of any supernatural power. This does not deny absolutely that such a power exists, it merely means that it does not have to be taken into account. This is as far as denial goes to sensible people.When I discover a need for a god I will seriously investigate the possibility. Otherwise, pragmatically, I have no need to believe in one.

Will man tolerate a place in his heart for God?

I need a god in my heart about as much as I need an embolism there.

Poor ol' god needs a warm place to shelter. Wont you take him in?

Ok a person believes they should share their religion. Why not? That's cool. However, to get up in a person's face and be rude and ego like, kind of shows that they care more about show and numbers than you.

Last edited by LiendaBalla on 28 Feb 2010, 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Keep thinking. It leads to valuable conclusions if you do it properly.

I'm atheist, but I have no problem with religion. Sure, religion can be implicated in some bad things in history, but religion has also been responsible for a lot of good things.

I do dislike the intolerance with which some outspoken atheists view religion. It's pointless and gives us a bad name. Unfortunately, intolerant atheism is more entertaining than tolerant atheism, so it gets a lot more press, giving the false impression that most atheists are intolerant.

The same is true of the religious: most religious people are tolerant, but the intolerant ones get more press for the same reason that the intolerant atheists get more press.

I've met a lot of smart people in my life, and this is not true. At your average Ivy League university, for example, Catholics and Jews outnumber atheists. If there's any link between atheism and intelligence, it's not a very strong one.

. Why don't you 'think', before pressing "submit"?

Alright, stop thinking. Your choice.