| Welcome to Fire Emblem Fusion. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Organized Religion is the Bane of Mankind | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jan 8 2008, 02:49 AM (1,576 Views) | |
| Yzarc | Mar 5 2008, 01:59 PM Post #16 |
![]()
Coxian
![]()
|
I don't feel like there's really much to debate on what happened in the past, on whether or not religion was good. The crusades happened and they were bad and I don't think there's really any debate there. At the same time, as Soja brought up, religion did a lot of good for humanity. However, I feel that religion, today, is a detriment to society. In the past, it wasn't a detriment or a good thing - It just was. But today, religion stands in the way of a lot of important things. I'm talking about evolution, stem cell research, gay marriage. Basically, nearly everything the religious right stands for, I fundamentally disagree with. Seriously, when religious conservative want to teach creationism instead of evolution in science class? Even wanting to put the two side by side, to show "both sides" of the debate is ridiculous. There's no scientific debate. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| (*Jman*) | Mar 5 2008, 04:23 PM Post #17 |
|
Kakatte Koi!
![]()
|
QFT. Thank you Soja, it appears that no matter how many times I tell Lucas that it's the noobs who say "LOLOL BLOW YOURSELF UP AND YOU WILL GET 72 VIRGINS IN THE AFTERLIFE" that are misinterpreting a religion, it just doesn't sink in. No religion condones people who "threaten and persecute" others and all the rest of that nubbishness
Yes, because knowing about evolution really makes a big impact on daily life. Not a day passes where I don't think, "Damn, if it wasn't for evolution then I wouldn't be here". |
![]() ![]() Formerly Omni, Rosa, Terra, Serra, Captain Star Falco, Minamimoto | |
![]() |
|
| Psiwri | Mar 5 2008, 04:25 PM Post #18 |
![]()
Too Many Words
![]()
|
I don't think religions are bad, I just think they are incorrect in their symbolisms that so many try to put off as reality. |
![]() Please support my efforts in creating writing~ | |
![]() |
|
| Yzarc | Mar 5 2008, 05:00 PM Post #19 |
![]()
Coxian
![]()
|
I'm not sure what your point is. The fact still remains that the religious right thinks it's a good idea to feed false ideas into the minds of kids in science class, just because evolution goes against what they believe. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| (*Jman*) | Mar 5 2008, 07:46 PM Post #20 |
|
Kakatte Koi!
![]()
|
My point is that learning evolution is a waste of time too ;). LOL j/k. The point was that you said this and your support for that was Learning about evolution or not learning about evolution does not make religion a detriment to society. The religious right != all people who practice a religion. Oh, and the current theory of evolution has some problems with it too :(. |
![]() ![]() Formerly Omni, Rosa, Terra, Serra, Captain Star Falco, Minamimoto | |
![]() |
|
| Yzarc | Mar 5 2008, 08:31 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Coxian
![]()
|
It doesn't affect you immediately whether or not we have our kids learning truth or fiction in science class, you're right. The fact of the matter is, evolution was just one example I gave concerning the evil, evil things the religious right is doing. And I never did imply that all people of religion were a detriment to society. It's those in power that fuck things up. It's the pope saying stem cell research is immoral. It's the dumb states that mandate teaching creationism aka Intelligent Design. It's the ignorant people who hate homosexuality so much they don't want them to get married.
So does the theory of Relativity. So does fucking Atomic Theory. But you're gonna stand there and tell me that you think the scientists have it all wrong? You're no authority figure in the field of biology, geology or archeology. Nor am I. But I'm more inclined to believe a vast majority of scientists in that specific field than I am some religious people who are just pissed off that facts don't support their religion. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| (*Jman*) | Mar 5 2008, 11:28 PM Post #22 |
|
Kakatte Koi!
![]()
|
I'm fairly certain the point of this thread was not to argue about extremists.
Well then, you shouldn't say "I feel that religion, today, is a detriment to society." You should say "I feel that idiots, today, are a detriment to society"
Did I say the scientists have it all wrong? No, I didn't, and I used the frowning face, not :lol:. I said there are problems with the current theory and there probably always will be :(. Scientific "breakthroughs" have a tendency to disprove earlier "facts". |
![]() ![]() Formerly Omni, Rosa, Terra, Serra, Captain Star Falco, Minamimoto | |
![]() |
|
| Psiwri | Mar 5 2008, 11:51 PM Post #23 |
![]()
Too Many Words
![]()
|
I do hope I can be forgiven for posting this in debate...![]() Science is wrong all the time, but at least it tries to improve itself. |
![]() Please support my efforts in creating writing~ | |
![]() |
|
| Soja | Mar 6 2008, 12:51 AM Post #24 |
![]()
Gentle Water, Crashing Waves
![]()
|
How contrived. And offensive. Everyone can argue as long as they want about evolution. It cannot be proven merely because of the extraordinarily enormous amount of time that it allegedly takes for a mutation to become part of an organism's hard genetic coding, or for how long some of those mutations take to form. But that's not what this thread is about. I don't believe that science is inherently opposed to religion. Both can coexist, and even benefit, from one another. Religion provides meaning to our lives, as well as ethics, and morals. Without the latter, especially ethics, what would science become but a ruthless and unfettered field of study in which no experiment was out of the question? I am certain that we would learn much more about the universe, but at the cost of our humanity? To be fair, religion in its most extreme example polarized to the prior one about science, remains ignorant to even the most basic of physical knowledge because it wants to, not unlike how the stereotype insists that faith solely and totally is. The two can balance. I think it is vital that they do. Charles Darwin was a Christian, then a Deist Agnostic. But he was never an atheist. He didn't let his faith blind him to his work, but he neither let his work get out of hand. Then, to be fair, scientific pursuits couldn't go as far into forbidden territory as they hypothetically can today. |
Fusion Universe - FEF Fanfic Slayers Forth - Slayers Fanfic Smartest Member '06 & '07 & '08 & 'o9, Favored Debater '07 & '08 & '09, Most Popular '08, Manliest '08 & '09, Author of Nightmares, Scourge of the Luxon, Rules Lawyer, Nick's Former Hero, Crysta's Lover | |
![]() |
|
| Shinobi | Mar 6 2008, 03:23 AM Post #25 |
|
絶望した!!!
![]()
|
the misunderstanding that comes from religeon can start wars. but the goal of religeons is not to start wars. only when their belive and very reason for existance is mocked and spat on, do the believers fight back. but the typically, religeons (generalization) have one common simplicity. and it is NOT, join us or go to their form of Hell. i would like to think that each one teaches how to be kind to those around you. however, many people only see right and wrong. good and evil. light dark. religeon is like a hot girl you want to date. the idea of you together is great. but the real thing is a disapointment. |
Monk Profile
| |
![]() |
|
| Yzarc | Mar 6 2008, 10:03 PM Post #26 |
![]()
Coxian
![]()
|
Evolution can't be prove any more than relativity. Is evolution right? More than likely. Almost every scientist in the world agrees that evolution is fact. The few that don't believe in evolution don't base that on some crazy awesome scientific evidence - They base it on faith.
I believe that religion and science can coexist. But I don't believe that the religious right can coexist with scientific breakthroughs. Aristotle was all good because his scientific breakthroughs didn't contradict religion. But then there were people like Galileo who the church put on house arrest because he agreed with Copernicus! For the record, Copernicus was right. The world does revolve around the Sun. The earth is more than 6,000 years old. Humans do have the same ancestors as apes.
I agree. But I don't believe that this "religion" needs to be any particular religion. I definitely think that it needs to be a liberal, bendable religion otherwise science would probably continue to prove various aspects of it wrong. Deism, you brought it up, is an example. It's a very scientific religion because it's 100% faith based. It doesn't claim that any particular facts happened, at least not ones that can be disproved by science. I don't think religion is necessary anymore. At one point, yes, because it basically set morality. But even morality is not set in stone, as it differs from person to person. Today, people don't have to be religious to be good people. For the record, I consider Atheism a religion. People who are Atheist have to believe that there's absolutely nothing out there of a higher power. It's faith that nothing exists, just as Christians have faith that someone exists. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Break | Mar 9 2008, 03:09 PM Post #27 |
![]()
|
When your morals, ethics, "meaning for life", etc. is defined by religion, of course you need religion to uphold your humanity; it's circular logic. But I fail to see why upholding a moral code based solely on religion is the best thing to do for mankind. From what I've seen, a large part of Christian morality is the repression of perfectly harmless, human feelings, and I've yet to hear a reason for this that doesn't boil down to "because God says so". I'd be astonished if there was a Christian alive who has never been ashamed of something they've felt, simply be because their faith forbids it. Of course, the moral code of one religion does not equate the moral code of all of them, but it certainly doesn't help you to promote faith as a benefit to humanity, when that same faith may cause terrible emotional strife. Religion does have its bonuses, but it's not free from problems, especially when those bonuses can be obtained in other ways. And to say that without religion, scientists would become cruel and ruthless madmen who carry out horrific experiments without a care, well, it's quite a far-fetched conclusion to jump to. If the goal of science is to improve our understanding of the universe, and utilise that knowledge for the benefit of mankind, then I fail to see why human suffering would become irrelevent if there wasn't some dude in the sky telling us what we should and shouldn't do. |
![]() |
|
| Askio | Mar 9 2008, 04:27 PM Post #28 |
![]()
Crit McGee on Speed
![]()
|
I have had to write quite of few papers on religion in many AP classes, mostly history. Religion is simply born from a few individuals forming a group of similar beliefs. But religion both is and is not a bad thing. If you look at works of many people, most recently to me being Thomas Paine, you can see that many enlightened thinkers attacked organized religion, or at least those leading it. Also in times of slavery in America as well as other places in the world back throughout history. Those that say it is the people that are purely at fault, no offense to you, but thats only partially true. Most religions themselves are based off of times of violence. Christianity was accepted in a time split between poly and monotheistic religions, and was accepted by Rome by leaders purely out of a desire to side with the more ever growing powerful masses, Islam become prominent through bloodshep and Jihads against other tribes, and the Jews slaughtered the muslims when the apparent crossing through the sea led by Moses and did so to claim there holy land. While many people have made it much much worse through abusing its power as in some of the previously mentioned examples, but something had to be wrong with it in order for them to do so. As in these words... "Anything created by man will be flawed. Only gods can create perfection, and they choose not to for it may give rise to other gods....or demons." So while most know this, few choose to accept it. In my opinion, religions should exist, but they should have no power in government or military what so ever. If an exceptional can do so and is religious, so be it. But should religion be used as the sole guideline of a country, or even a major guide. Let the beliefs guide each individual to their own, then let it be left at that. BTW Lucas, over all, not bad at all. It could use just a tiny bit of cleaning up on clarity from here and there, but otherwise good, at least in terms of a paper for college goes. PS: One perfect example of the above post. The reason why preists were eventually forbade to have children most likely was in order for all assets to eventually go to the church instead of the children. That was both a loophole/flaw in the religion and mans greed. Basing morals purely off religion instead of experience as well is not the wisest thing to do. |
![]() Fire Emblem Online Askio: 9-1-1 | |
![]() |
|
| Soja | Mar 9 2008, 05:53 PM Post #29 |
![]()
Gentle Water, Crashing Waves
![]()
|
I wonder just how much about "morality" you know. First of all, all morality is derived from religion. All of it. Regardless of the alleged punishments attached to each violation, which may vary from religion to religion, religion is the baseline for standardized law outside "you cross my line, I crush your skull!"
Then you obviously don't know a lot about Christian morality and the reasons behind it. I don't know about you, but I find promiscuity, which is often cited as the most "harmless and human" feeling, to be far from beneficial. It is one of the most stressed tenets of Christian morality, to "remain pure." That besides, how much wrong and suffering has this harmless feeling, left unrestrained, caused? Bastard children? Unwanted children? Aborted children? Broken families? Sexual crimes? Sexual crimes against children? Very harmless indeed.
It is not the feeling that is forbidden, mate. It is the acting on the feeling without proper forethought. Every man and every woman will feel the urge to have sexual relations at one point or another. How well he or she is disciplined, and whether they are willing to take a very large risk for a very small reward, determines if they do or do not. I, myself, have had feelings for which I am ashamed for. But I have thought on them, and since I did not act on them, I have committed no wrongdoing. I am human, but that does not mean I have to make mistakes when I know better.
Oh boo-hoo. If it caused such terrible emotional strife, I highly doubt we would have religion today, after 2000 years, if its benefits weren't greater still. You know who the happiest people are in this world? According to one study, Buddhist monks. And they live the most strict, prudent lifestyles one can think of.
I never said religion was free from problems. Did I say that? No. Do explain the bonuses that religion offers that can be obtained in other ways. Please.
Not quite. If there were no higher authority holding the scientists responsible, I don't doubt that a few, or many of them, in the absence of either religion or government holding them accountable, would truly go that far, much in the same way that clergymen, in their ardent fervor and belief that they are absolute in their moral authority, went too far in the past, with some still going too far even in the present.
Science is a human creation. Therefore it is flawed. Therefore, that mission statement has no absolutism to it. That is all. |
Fusion Universe - FEF Fanfic Slayers Forth - Slayers Fanfic Smartest Member '06 & '07 & '08 & 'o9, Favored Debater '07 & '08 & '09, Most Popular '08, Manliest '08 & '09, Author of Nightmares, Scourge of the Luxon, Rules Lawyer, Nick's Former Hero, Crysta's Lover | |
![]() |
|
| Cephas | Mar 9 2008, 10:18 PM Post #30 |
![]()
Dies Irę , Dies ilia; Solvet sęclum in favilla
![]()
|
Proof of claim? Or are you trying to pass off your opinion as fact? You are ignorant. Simony has been a crime, is a crime, and always will be a crime, nor have you read the Catechism of the Council of Trent. Nor is being both a priest and father a pleasant task, since you have to take care of parishoners and kids.
Note that this was primarily written by Leonardo Marino, Archbishop of Lanciano; Muzio Calini, Archbishop of Zara; Egidio Foscarini, Bishop of Modena; and Francisco Fureiro, a Portuguese Dominican and edited by St. Charles Borromeo, Archbishop of Milan of the Catholic Church. So, how can a fully corrupt hierarchy produce such a document empahsizing having the right intentions in joining the priesthood? |
|
I do not like fools. Mozart's music is hax. Formerly: Voltaire FEs I've played and how much I like them. 1. FE4 2. FE6 3. FE8, FE3 4. FE7 5. FE5(I don't like it at all). Salve, Regina, mater misericordiae: vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamamus exsules filii Hevae. Ad te suspiramus, gementes et flentes in hac lacrimarum valle. Eia, ergo, advocata nostra, illos tuos misericordes oculos ad nos converte. Et Iesum, benedictum fructum ventris tui, nobis post hoc exsilium ostende. O clemens, O pia, O dulcis Virgo Maria. Amen. St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, cast into Hell, Satan and all the other evil spirits, who wander throughout the world, seeking the ruin of souls. Amen. | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Debate Forum · Next Topic » |




















1:28 PM Nov 23






