Welcome to Gaia! ::

Worldwide, Abrahamic religions are the most conspicuous. That is incontrevertable. It has nothing whatsoever to do with my background. These three monotheistic religions are the most dominant and the loudest religions in the world and they cause the most problems worldwide, not just in their area of origin. As far as I'm aware Hindus and Jains do very little to effect world events, which is a good thing, no news is good news.

Atheism unlike religion cannot be critisized by bringing up fascist dictators who followed it. Just because Stalin was atheist that does not mean that his actions were fuelled by atheism, since atheism has no moral book to twist or delude him, his actions cannot be blamed on his atheism, rather his own moral fault. Stalin, I think it is safe to say, was a complete freaking nutjob.

Anyone at all whose only reason not to kill is because of fear of god is morally sick and is just as sick as an atheist who sees no fault in murder.

I come from a liberal, secular country, faith and politics have no place together whatsoever. Yes politics covers faith, but faith should not intefere with politics. Secular government is needed to bring about a fair and truly equal society. A wonderful example of a complete ******** up of this is America, America is the only country in which this is explicitly written... and look what's happened neutral

You bring up Mao, Stalin and Castro.

Their similarities are not their atheism, blatantly.

They are all communist dictators.

Now I find it incredibly ironic that you believe that democracy and atheism will not and can not integrate, and that somehow a dictatorship must be required to enforce atheism. Democracy is centered around secularity.

If you do not see the detrimental effects that religion is inflicting upon society, then for all your knowledge of history and the details of holy scriptures you have sacrificed your reason and modern awareness. The only reason that countries based on religion have lasted longer than those "atheist" countries you mentioned is because those countries were communist dictatorships, and it's not exactly like Russia was very strong before the communist revolution. In fact, the communists for all their faults achieved quite a deal in such a short amount of time, if only they focused their goals on something a little more loving and ethical.

But I digress, most modern democratic countries are secular, therefore, the politics are atheist, in fact, it is those non-secular democtratic/non democratic countries that are the center of current world problems.

I have never said that it takes a political dictatorship to support atheism. Nor will I advocate it, in fact I support the separation of Church and State wholeheartedly, that way no imposition of ones beliefs will have to be imposed on another's. However you prove my point exactly. You say that Stalin, Castro, and Mao were only following what they believe is right yet they were all atheists however atheism in itself should not be blamed for these tragedies. It is the very same argument that you presented against me saying that religions were the source of the evil and that it twists children into thinking these things. It is not religions that fuel these people, it is their background and their sufferings. Religions and atheism are then in the same brand of being blamed for bringing in morally corrupt power hungry people. Therefore your arguments that religion twist a child's mind and turns him corrupted eats itself based on your argument that their atheism did not fuel their hatred.

Communism, you speak on the point that they did these things based on Communism. Marx's and Engels' Manifesto yet again twisted around into something that it was not supposed to be. Thus proving my point again, it is not the books that tarnish life it is the people who twist things to their advantage. Also the politics of many countries are far from atheist, if they were the questions of gay marriage and abortion would not be even a question on the table. Roe vs. Wade would have been ratified long ago and we as a people would be living a more whole life choosing what we want to believe, however that is not and will never be the case with organization like the Church, the Satanists, the Caliphate, the Mormons, and many others existing today.

I digress to my original argument this that I have read in an interesting book; No religion is perfect after man has had his hand in it.

Now my phrasing to it would be this; No belief, is perfect once man has had his hand in it. Thats my argument.

In America it is a major question, a debatable one based on religions. Also I will have you know that because of atheism millions have died. Because Armenians both Christian and Muslim would not renounce their faith they were killed, sent to reeducation camps, or sent to death camps religious leaders were massacred based on the Marxist belief that religious bodies will destroy the government, in China during the Cultural Revolution the same occurred, those who did not desert Confucianism Taoism, and even some Abrahamic religions they were killed or faced harsh oppression. The same came with Vietnam with the oppression of Buddhists, Castro's butchering of devout Catholics and priests. To say that atheism did not play a role in the death of those people is almost as insane as saying that you shouldn't have the right to choose who you should love. It did play a role based on Marx and Engle's Manifesto, and again it was twisted as many people do with great writings.

Why follow something that has time and time proven to be slightly more oppressive added with a bit of a superiority complex and has no standards and ethics to follow? Atheism is far from perfect and representatives of it have again and again proven that it is easily as twisted as religions are. As I have said I do not follow a set religion and I encourage people to follow their own path and discover their own answers, so that question I really shouldn't have to answer for myself.

Is it appriopiate for them to try and make discions such as Harry Potter is the devil and should be banned?
No because, like religion, it is someone's personal belief that it should be banned. It's not EVERYONE'S belief. It's hardly the majorty.

Do they have a good or bad effect on society?
I think it's bad because of how many different religions there are. If there was only one, then, depending on what it is, it would be okay.

Should children be forced to follow their parents religion?
Once the children grow up, then no, of course not, but before they form their own opinion about religion they should at least be educated about it.

Should people be perscuted for enforcing their religion on other people?
Well, it really depends on how far it goes. If it goes as far as the Holocaust then of course. If it's completely peaceful, then no.

How believable are they?
It just depends. Obviously main religions are believable, otherwise they wouldn't have lasted as long as they have.

Why did people start religions?
It depends. Some were created to show people how to live and others were to show how people were created.

Do they make a person feel more secure?
Yes, because it is human nature to hate not knowing something. These religions told things that humans didn't know. The proper way to live. How the Earth was created. How and when humans came to be. It aslo gave people something to believe in. Something to live for. For instance, going to Heaven when you died. Motivation to live, and live well.

Do they promote free thinking or do they just surpress people?
It depends on the religion. It also depends on who's living at the time. Again, Hitler, for instance. He didn't give the Christians free thought when it came to the Jews. Or anyone who didn't look like the same. He was able to smoothly convince the Christians that the Jews should die, even though before that, they were all friends. They had absolutly no problem with each other.

[[Hope I didn't go too off-topic there...]]

Does society need them?
Yes, for reasons explained in the "Do they make a person feel more secure? " question. Even so, that doesn't give them the right to put everyone else's beliefs down.

Why do people follow a particular religion?
They think its the right way.

Do they accomplish their goals?
Sometimes, but not all of them.

Is it appriopiate for them to try and make discions such as Harry Potter is the devil and should be banned?
No, and I hate them for thinking it.

Do they have a good or bad effect on society?
Depend on what their message is.

Should children be forced to follow their parents religion?
No, they should follow a religion that best they believe

Should people be perscuted for enforcing their religion on other people?
Yes, its not for them to decide what is what.

How believable are they?
In my opinon, not very.

Why did people start religions?
So they can have something to believe, even if its completly rediculous.

Why do people give their "system of beliefs" a title?
I'm don't know.

Do they make a person feel more secure?
For some people, yes, for others, no.

Do they promote free thinking or do they just surpress people?
They supress people into thinking the same way they do(if I wanted that I'd joi the government).

Is the system they use to evaluate scripture working or should it be changed?
Depends on which religio your talking about

And most importantly: Does society need them?
No. I will say this in hope this debate will stop. There is only one God, almost every version of his/her story by each culture has its facts and fiction. It is the same story, different version, and all are true.

So you think the world would be better if everyone just followed the same religion believed the same thing? I'd rather have my freedom of religion.

And you bring up the Holocast completely ignoring that most of Germany believed the Jews were the reason for anything wrong. The Holocast was a nationalistic movement not a religious one. Hitler persecuted ANYONE he considered and "undesirable" including Homosexuals (which if Christianity got it's way they would do to) Gypsies and anyone else who didn't fit his perfect German mold.

Kids are "just educated" about them now but you can't just educated them about something without forcing them to believe it. They would have to say "the bible says" or "The religion believes this way" before everything they said. And then argue against themselves that the bible could be just a load of bull because it constantly contradicts itself.
Obviously? It couldn't just be that religion inforces forms of Satanophobia (fear of Satan), theophobia (fear of God), and Uranophobia (fear of the heavens). And that people raised from birth to believe something generally don't question it? Look at how long it took to prove that the universe didn't revolve around earth. People don't generally question what they are born to believe.


There are more than just monothestic religions. Do you know your Greek/Roman mythology at all? I find irony in the fact that we mock their religion by calling it a myth and yet we still believe that one of the thousands of religions currently competing for supiority is true.

I know that. I was contradicting her "There is only one god" statement. There are polythestic religion involing multipule gods. Neptune, Zeus, and Hades were all gods. There isn't only one god according to their religion.

And now that I think of it, if there is only one god, why does every religion have a different version of him. He is one bi-polar dude. I mean calvinists believed in predestination and only one god, the same god that catholics believe doesn't have predestination.