thedaywalker wrote:
jo fnord religion and science aren't two competing things its not like the believe in a god excludes you from believing scientific findings vice versa believing that we can know things scientifecaly doesn't exclude you from believing we can not know some things scientificaly
Not the point. Though on the other hand, many theists do seem to have the attitude that they are competing things. For example, how can one reasonably demand that the "controversy" between science and theistic creationism be taught, thereby giving the implication that they are in fact, competing theories of equal weight (obviously this is not the case); while simultaneously when asked what religion has done as a response to [Fnord's own] science thread, claim they are not competing theories and thus implying the thread question is fallacious?
mad_monkey wrote:
Atheism in of itself has done diddly squat
It's becoming the worship of irreligion
Of course it has done nothing. It is not a monolithic institution or any real organization. Did
Atheists do anything, probably. Religious people have probably done useful things as well. Irrelevant in any case as the question is "what has religion done" compared to "what has science done", not "what has atheism done". That is diversionary at best
GoonSquad wrote:
Absolutely...
Religion also has an advantage in that its douchebag zealots tend to eliminate themselves in explosions while atheism's douchebags just go on and on and on...
Why can nobody actually answer what religion has done, and instead deflect the discussion towards a "religion vs atheism" debate which is not even relevant to the discussion?
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do