Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Well, on a personal note, I don't tell my parents for the sake of keeping my family together, it's one less thing they have to worry about in the already crumbling state we're in, and it's nobody's business but my own what goes on there, thanks :)

Also, I never said the religious lacked individuality, but I refused to let my own be disrupted by anything. The religious obviously don't feel objectified by what they believe, which is why we believe the things we do. When I said I live as if religion never existed, it's not that I don't acknowledge that it does, I was saying I don't let it affect my choices anymore like it used to. I'm just saying we should all live how we like but keep it just like that, live how 'you' want and let others live how 'they' want.

/= I feel like i'm writing an essay so i'm gunna stop, and to avoid anymore conflict i'm going to stop coming back to this thread, I was only speaking my mind after all.

Religion does both i think, on the one hand it has helped produce what could be called a cultural revolution during the Renaissance with all the art, philosophy and general ideas it has inspired(These days it has gotten kind of stagnant) but on the other hand you have all negative things but mainly holy wars/extremeism having been done for the sake of such beleifs.

Personally i don't care for religion but it has produced some of the very things i am interested in when it comes to each religions mythos(Norse gods kick ass) and some of the values/cultural roots that alot of people care for today.

That said though i think in this day and age we don't have much more we can gain from religion, then again in a few centuries people may look back at this age and fnd something of value.

At 7/25/11 02:31 AM, X-Centurian wrote: /= I feel like i'm writing an essay so i'm gunna stop, and to avoid anymore conflict i'm going to stop coming back to this thread, I was only speaking my mind after all.

Respond to a fraction of my charges against you, the ancillary or lesser, without acknowledging the actual contradictions being highlighted, by restating a sentiment you'd already well established - and do it all under the guise of brevity and persecution.

Nice.

At 7/24/11 10:02 PM, djack wrote: -Insert text here-

You seem to overlook the actual argument I'm using.

"They used religion as a justification".

That's the one thing I'm complaining about here. I'm not saying religion is the cause of anything, I'm saying it have been widely used as a justification in history, and even today, with the Jesus Camp example (Which was closed, but not by the government... And It will most likely reopen in the near future).

And for your Evolution example, I highly doubt that. I haven't seen a lot of incidents where people claim they did anything bad and tried to justify it by evolution. But then again, we're not discussing whether or not believing in evolution hinders our advancements as a race.

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

You're ignoring my argument. You might not be pointing the finger at religion but you do claim that people wouldn't justify wrongdoing if they didn't have religion which is just plain wrong. Also the Nazis used evolution to justify eugenics and to convince the people that the Jews were genetically inferior to their "superior Aryan race" so there is historical precedent of using evolution as justification. People using religion as a justification does not hold humanity back, it is the actions they are justifying which they would do anyways so it's not like religion has anything to do with why these people do bad things.

At 7/25/11 10:52 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

Crap cut from Expelled

Social Darwinism =/= Evolution.

At 7/25/11 06:34 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:52 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

Crap cut from Expelled

Social Darwinism =/= Evolution.

That had nothing to do with expelled, social darwinism, or evolution. Go troll somewhere else dumbass.

Expelled looks like the most shit retarded movie ever made. It should be illegal to even attempt to classify that shit as a documentary. Just seeing the cover on Netflix made me shudder and feel dirty.

At 7/25/11 09:49 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 06:34 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:52 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

Crap cut from Expelled

Social Darwinism =/= Evolution.

That had nothing to do with expelled, social darwinism, or evolution. Go troll somewhere else dumbass.

Read my post. Then read your post. You said Nazis used Evolution to justify the Holocaust. Nazis didn't use Evolution to justify the holocaust. That would assume the used some sort of Science or something pertaining to Evolution to justify it. They didn't. They used a philosophy of superiority called Social Darwinism.

At 7/25/11 10:08 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:49 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 06:34 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:52 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

Crap cut from Expelled

Social Darwinism =/= Evolution.

That had nothing to do with expelled, social darwinism, or evolution. Go troll somewhere else dumbass.

Read my post. Then read your post. You said Nazis used Evolution to justify the Holocaust. Nazis didn't use Evolution to justify the holocaust. That would assume the used some sort of Science or something pertaining to Evolution to justify it. They didn't. They used a philosophy of superiority called Social Darwinism.

1) Nazis had German scientist show "evidence" of genetic inferiority and claimed that the Jewish people were inferior from an evolution standpoint. 2) My post was about humans justifying their actions by any means necessary. CcZero was claiming that religion was bad because people use it to justify their actions, my point was that those people would justify their actions by any means necessary. You would know that had you actually been reading my posts instead of looking for an opportunity to act like a dumbass and you would know that it had nothing to do with Expelled had you actually watched the movie instead of just reading a bunch of bullshit reviews by other people who never watched the movie. So stop acting like a dumbass troll or get lost.

At 7/25/11 10:15 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:08 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:49 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 06:34 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:52 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

Crap cut from Expelled

Social Darwinism =/= Evolution.

That had nothing to do with expelled, social darwinism, or evolution. Go troll somewhere else dumbass.

But Expelled makes the same insipid "Evolution caused Nazism" argument.

1) Nazis had German scientist show "evidence" of genetic inferiority and claimed that the Jewish people were inferior from an evolution standpoint.

"From an evolution standpoint" What does that mean? If German Scientists claimed that Jews were genetically inferior, what does that have to do with evolution?

:2) My post was about humans justifying their actions by any means necessary. CcZero was claiming that religion was bad because people use it to justify their actions, my point was that those people would justify their actions by any means necessary.

That's all fine and dandy, but you're wrong so it undermines your point. Perhaps using a different anecdote would benefit your point?

:You would know that had you actually been reading my posts instead of looking for an opportunity to act like a dumbass

Name calling is classy. Makes you sound more legitimate.

:and you would know that it had nothing to do with Expelled had you actually watched the movie instead of just reading a bunch of bullshit reviews by other people who never watched the movie. So stop acting like a dumbass troll or get lost.

I refuse to acknowledge a movie that used the writer Richard Weikart, the writer of the book From Darwin to Hitler as a legitimate source of information. But of course, you, having watched the movie, know everything and Roger Ebert being the biased Liberal motherfucker who obviously never watches the movies he reviews is definitely wrong. This is the last time I'm going to talk about Expelled because there's no reason to jack a perfectly good thread with that movie's dumbfuckery.

I implore you to pick up a new talking point, there's a legitimate point to be made here, you just aren't making it.

At 7/25/11 10:33 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:15 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:08 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:49 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 06:34 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:52 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 09:09 AM, CcZero wrote: Pointless crap about justification being related to causation.

Crap cut from Expelled

Social Darwinism =/= Evolution.

That had nothing to do with expelled, social darwinism, or evolution. Go troll somewhere else dumbass.

But Expelled makes the same insipid "Evolution caused Nazism" argument.

1) Nazis had German scientist show "evidence" of genetic inferiority and claimed that the Jewish people were inferior from an evolution standpoint.

"From an evolution standpoint" What does that mean? If German Scientists claimed that Jews were genetically inferior, what does that have to do with evolution?

2) My post was about humans justifying their actions by any means necessary. CcZero was claiming that religion was bad because people use it to justify their actions, my point was that those people would justify their actions by any means necessary.

That's all fine and dandy, but you're wrong so it undermines your point. Perhaps using a different anecdote would benefit your point?

You would know that had you actually been reading my posts instead of looking for an opportunity to act like a dumbass

Name calling is classy. Makes you sound more legitimate.

and you would know that it had nothing to do with Expelled had you actually watched the movie instead of just reading a bunch of bullshit reviews by other people who never watched the movie. So stop acting like a dumbass troll or get lost.

I refuse to acknowledge a movie that used the writer Richard Weikart, the writer of the book From Darwin to Hitler as a legitimate source of information. But of course, you, having watched the movie, know everything and Roger Ebert being the biased Liberal motherfucker who obviously never watches the movies he reviews is definitely wrong. This is the last time I'm going to talk about Expelled because there's no reason to jack a perfectly good thread with that movie's dumbfuckery.:

I implore you to pick up a new talking point, there's a legitimate point to be made here, you just aren't making it.

Sorry about the double post, hopefully I fixed the formatting issue this time.

At 7/25/11 10:35 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote: But Expelled makes the same insipid "Evolution caused Nazism" argument.

So because the same argument is made by someone else, I'm automatically wrong for using it and using them as a source? Try some Nazi newspapers in which the results of German "research" were publicly released claiming that the Jewish people were inferior and that the Aryan race was genetically the most advance form of human life.

1) Nazis had German scientist show "evidence" of genetic inferiority and claimed that the Jewish people were inferior from an evolution standpoint.

"From an evolution standpoint" What does that mean? If German Scientists claimed that Jews were genetically inferior, what does that have to do with evolution?

I suppose you would call them more fit, or better suited to survive. Those scientists claimed that the Jews were genetically inferior and that allowing them to exist in the gene pool would slow the evolution of humans. That was their entire claim that eradicating all forms of human life except the Aryans would speed up the process of evolution, sort of an extreme natural selection much like eugenics which was also used in Nazi Germany.

2) My post was about humans justifying their actions by any means necessary. CcZero was claiming that religion was bad because people use it to justify their actions, my point was that those people would justify their actions by any means necessary.

That's all fine and dandy, but you're wrong so it undermines your point. Perhaps using a different anecdote would benefit your point?

How am I wrong? What evidence do you have that people won't justify their actions without religion? And if you read my posts like your supposed to before commenting you would see that I also included Soviet Russia as an example but anytime Nazis get mentioned that's all that people like you seem to focus on believing that any mention of Hitler or Nazis automatically invalidates an argument which only shows that you are acting like a dumbass once again.

You would know that had you actually been reading my posts instead of looking for an opportunity to act like a dumbass

Name calling is classy. Makes you sound more legitimate.

I call 'em as I see 'em and as long as you continue to claim that I'm wrong just because I used a valid example in an entirely separate thread you definitely look like a dumbass.

and you would know that it had nothing to do with Expelled had you actually watched the movie instead of just reading a bunch of bullshit reviews by other people who never watched the movie. So stop acting like a dumbass troll or get lost.

I refuse to acknowledge a movie that used the writer Richard Weikart, the writer of the book From Darwin to Hitler as a legitimate source of information. But of course, you, having watched the movie, know everything and Roger Ebert being the biased Liberal motherfucker who obviously never watches the movies he reviews is definitely wrong. This is the last time I'm going to talk about Expelled because there's no reason to jack a perfectly good thread with that movie's dumbfuckery.:

If you didn't want to jack the thread why would you bring it up in the first place. I didn't mention expelled you did.

I implore you to pick up a new talking point, there's a legitimate point to be made here, you just aren't making it.

Or I am and you're just ignoring it because you're still upset about the FSM thread. Why would you even comment on my post and only focus on that one small part of the argument if you actually had anything worth saying? If I truly am wrong and people would never justify doing bad things with reasons other than religion then prove me wrong, don't just attack me in general. I'm giving you an opportunity to prove you're not a complete idiot but my patience and optimism are running thin.

At 7/25/11 11:21 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:35 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote: But Expelled makes the same insipid "Evolution caused Nazism" argument.

So because the same argument is made by someone else, I'm automatically wrong for using it and using them as a source? Try some Nazi newspapers in which the results of German "research" were publicly released claiming that the Jewish people were inferior and that the Aryan race was genetically the most advance form of human life.

No, you're wrong because premise itself is incorrect. Evolution did not cause or even relate to Nazism. Expelled made the same argument and it is equally wrong. Having seen the movie, I assumed you derived some of your argument from there.

1)

"From an evolution standpoint" What does that mean? If German Scientists claimed that Jews were genetically inferior, what does that have to do with evolution?

I suppose you would call them more fit, or better suited to survive. Those scientists claimed that the Jews were genetically inferior and that allowing them to exist in the gene pool would slow the evolution of humans. That was their entire claim that eradicating all forms of human life except the Aryans would speed up the process of evolution, sort of an extreme natural selection much like eugenics which was also used in Nazi Germany.

That's not Evolution. That's Social Darwinism. There is a difference. You're mincing words, Eugenics does not correlate to evolution. More likely, the Nazis believed that the Jews were of an inferior race, and just like you said, were dirtying the pure German gene pool. However, that is not any sort of Natural Selection, and it would not cause any sort of Evolution. It's like saying that if I had a pack a Great Danes and another pack of mutts, if I killed the mutts that would cause the Great Danes to Evolve faster.

How am I wrong? What evidence do you have that people won't justify their actions without religion? And if you read my posts like your supposed to before commenting you would see that I also included Soviet Russia as an example but anytime Nazis get mentioned that's all that people like you seem to focus on believing that any mention of Hitler or Nazis automatically invalidates an argument which only shows that you are acting like a dumbass once again.

Well Invoking Godwin's Law automatically makes you open to suspicion. You just misunderstood what I said because I wrote it vaguely. What I should have said is: You're wrong because the example you are using is incorrect, thusly invalidating your otherwise legitimate point.

I call 'em as I see 'em and as long as you continue to claim that I'm wrong just because I used a valid example in an entirely separate thread you definitely look like a dumbass.

But you didn't use a valid example, and that's what this is all about.

If you didn't want to jack the thread why would you bring it up in the first place. I didn't mention expelled you did.

I made a passing reference to it. That doesn't entail any sort of serious discussion about it and therefore I am distancing myself from it.

I implore you to pick up a new talking point, there's a legitimate point to be made here, you just aren't making it.

Or I am and you're just ignoring it because you're still upset about the FSM thread. Why would you even comment on my post and only focus on that one small part of the argument if you actually had anything worth saying? If I truly am wrong and people would never justify doing bad things with reasons other than religion then prove me wrong, don't just attack me in general. I'm giving you an opportunity to prove you're not a complete idiot but my patience and optimism are running thin.

....Why would I be upset about the FSM thread, seriously? I've heard a lot of strange things said in Politics Forum, this is one the strangest. You got completely gang-raped by everyone in the thread to the point where you had to leave. So you think the Politics forum only operates to disprove your main point? Hell no. If the point you are making consists of poor evidence, you're going to be called out on it. Yeah, people will use anything to justify their actions, that's a fucking given, really there's no arguing against that. But If I go out and say:

"Yeah those fucking Klansmen used Creationism to justify the persecution of the blacks"

I'm going to be called out on it, because it's wrong.

At 7/25/11 11:58 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 11:21 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:35 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote: But Expelled makes the same insipid "Evolution caused Nazism" argument.

So because the same argument is made by someone else, I'm automatically wrong for using it and using them as a source? Try some Nazi newspapers in which the results of German "research" were publicly released claiming that the Jewish people were inferior and that the Aryan race was genetically the most advance form of human life.

No, you're wrong because premise itself is incorrect. Evolution did not cause or even relate to Nazism. Expelled made the same argument and it is equally wrong. Having seen the movie, I assumed you derived some of your argument from there.

It was used as a justification and was part of the propaganda used to turn the general public against the Jewish people. This isn't from expelled it is from my studies of history both in school and in my private time. The premise is incorrect and if it isn't you have yet to give any reason why other than you're say so whereas the newspapers I mentioned you can find with a google search.

"From an evolution standpoint" What does that mean? If German Scientists claimed that Jews were genetically inferior, what does that have to do with evolution?

I suppose you would call them more fit, or better suited to survive. Those scientists claimed that the Jews were genetically inferior and that allowing them to exist in the gene pool would slow the evolution of humans. That was their entire claim that eradicating all forms of human life except the Aryans would speed up the process of evolution, sort of an extreme natural selection much like eugenics which was also used in Nazi Germany.

That's not Evolution. That's Social Darwinism. There is a difference. You're mincing words, Eugenics does not correlate to evolution. More likely, the Nazis believed that the Jews were of an inferior race, and just like you said, were dirtying the pure German gene pool. However, that is not any sort of Natural Selection, and it would not cause any sort of Evolution. It's like saying that if I had a pack a Great Danes and another pack of mutts, if I killed the mutts that would cause the Great Danes to Evolve faster.

According to E1EE7 who you claim "raped me" in the FSM thread it would cause the great danes to evolve faster.

How am I wrong? What evidence do you have that people won't justify their actions without religion? And if you read my posts like your supposed to before commenting you would see that I also included Soviet Russia as an example but anytime Nazis get mentioned that's all that people like you seem to focus on believing that any mention of Hitler or Nazis automatically invalidates an argument which only shows that you are acting like a dumbass once again.

Well Invoking Godwin's Law automatically makes you open to suspicion. You just misunderstood what I said because I wrote it vaguely. What I should have said is: You're wrong because the example you are using is incorrect, thusly invalidating your otherwise legitimate point.

Godwin's Law is a cheap out for those who can't actually prove someone is wrong and you have yet to give a valid reason for why my example is wrong.

I call 'em as I see 'em and as long as you continue to claim that I'm wrong just because I used a valid example in an entirely separate thread you definitely look like a dumbass.

But you didn't use a valid example, and that's what this is all about.

Once again, you don't give any reason why my example isn't valid, you just say it isn't and claim I'm wrong.

If you didn't want to jack the thread why would you bring it up in the first place. I didn't mention expelled you did.

I made a passing reference to it. That doesn't entail any sort of serious discussion about it and therefore I am distancing myself from it.

No, you attempted to claim my entire argument was invalid because you think I was using expelled and you dislike it.

I implore you to pick up a new talking point, there's a legitimate point to be made here, you just aren't making it.

Or I am and you're just ignoring it because you're still upset about the FSM thread. Why would you even comment on my post and only focus on that one small part of the argument if you actually had anything worth saying? If I truly am wrong and people would never justify doing bad things with reasons other than religion then prove me wrong, don't just attack me in general. I'm giving you an opportunity to prove you're not a complete idiot but my patience and optimism are running thin.

....Why would I be upset about the FSM thread, seriously? I've heard a lot of strange things said in Politics Forum, this is one the strangest. You got completely gang-raped by everyone in the thread to the point where you had to leave. So you think the Politics forum only operates to disprove your main point? Hell no. If the point you are making consists of poor evidence, you're going to be called out on it. Yeah, people will use anything to justify their actions, that's a fucking given, really there's no arguing against that. But If I go out and say:

"Yeah those fucking Klansmen used Creationism to justify the persecution of the blacks"

I'm going to be called out on it, because it's wrong.

Everyone in the thread consisted of E1EE7 and occasionally you. E1EE7 repeatedly posted links to the same "evidence" of evolution which I had already refuted and, just like you, claimed I was wrong but failed to give a valid reason as to why other than people who believe the same thing he did said I was wrong. By admitting that I was right that people will justify anything you proved 2 points, 1) you didn't actually read my posts and 2) you're only here to act like a dumbass. I'm done arguing this with you, if anyone has something valid to say on this thread fine but you I'm ignoring.

At 7/26/11 12:30 AM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 11:58 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote:

At 7/25/11 11:21 PM, djack wrote:

At 7/25/11 10:35 PM, ImaSmartass2 wrote: .

It was used as a justification and was part of the propaganda used to turn the general public against the Jewish people. This isn't from expelled it is from my studies of history both in school and in my private time. The premise is incorrect and if it isn't you have yet to give any reason why other than you're say so whereas the newspapers I mentioned you can find with a google search.

If you can actually find something that says "Jews are slowing Evolution" in Nazi literature, please tell me. Because I have searched diligently and found nothing.

According to E1EE7 who you claim "raped me" in the FSM thread it would cause the great danes to evolve faster.

Well first off, E1EE7 is not that ultimate authority on Evolution. Secondly, I had to reread that entire thread and am very disappointed because he said no such thing are you are merely trying to waste my time.

Godwin's Law is a cheap out for those who can't actually prove someone is wrong and you have yet to give a valid reason for why my example is wrong.

Godwin's Law isn't used in lieu of an argument. And I have. You just ignore it.

Once again, you don't give any reason why my example isn't valid, you just say it isn't and claim I'm wrong.

I don't need to repeat what I already said. Social Darwinism. Is. Not. Evolution. Has nothing to do with Evolution.

No, you attempted to claim my entire argument was invalid because you think I was using expelled and you dislike it.

No that's just a flat out lie. I mentioned it once, then you escalated it, causing me to realize that this was going to get out of control and derail the thread if I kept trying to argue it. But it is straight from Expelled and you fucking know it.

Everyone in the thread consisted of E1EE7 and occasionally you. E1EE7 repeatedly posted links to the same "evidence" of evolution which I had already refuted and, just like you, claimed I was wrong but failed to give a valid reason as to why other than people who believe the same thing he did said I was wrong. By admitting that I was right that people will justify anything you proved 2 points, 1) you didn't actually read my posts and 2) you're only here to act like a dumbass. I'm done arguing this with you, if anyone has something valid to say on this thread fine but you I'm ignoring.

You're, quite frankly adorable. You cry about me picking on you, pretend to defeat my arguments by repeating what you said, a baseless statement not backed by any evidence and when prompted by me to prove what you said with empirical evidence you try to waltz out the thread because you realize that you can't prove that Nazis used evolution as a justification.

"You're ignoring my argument. You might not be pointing the finger at religion but you do claim that people wouldn't justify wrongdoing if they didn't have religion which is just plain wrong. Also the Nazis used evolution to justify eugenics and to convince the people that the Jews were genetically inferior to their "superior Aryan race" so there is historical precedent of using evolution as justification. People using religion as a justification does not hold humanity back, it is the actions they are justifying which they would do anyways so it's not like religion has anything to do with why these people do bad things. has anything to do with why these people do bad things. "

I fucking read it. It basically says "People can and will use anything to justify bad actions, therefore religion shouldn't be condemned for it". Get your head out of your ass and realize that I read you fucking post and that I am legitimately attempting to correct a part of your argument that is wholeheartedly untrue. If you don't want to make a sincere effort to support your argument, stay the fuck out of the Politics forum.

I feel that because almost all Religions teach to help other's, and to pray or meditate often, I would say that Religion encourages people engage in progressive activities. You said that religious people may be less inclined to help people in far away places, because they feel that they will go to heaven anyways. However, keep in mind that belief in heaven is not necessarily a universal idea in all Religions. Also, most religions have a concept that doing good things for others will be better for both the world, and ones self. Buddhism has Karma, Catholicism has good works, etc... People who do not believe in any Religion, will have to make their own mechanism for when to help others, and this often makes them only help people when they can get something back. Most religions also have a form of prayer. Prayer is something that has very strong effects on the human mind, and makes it easier to think clearly. Prayer is also very comforting to most people. While religious conflicts do come up quite often, such as those in the middle east, In the end Religion does not hold us back, but pushes us forward. In my own life, when I have questions, Catholicism holds the answers. I am a Catholic, and my Religion has always helped me through hard times.

At 7/25/11 10:15 PM, djack wrote: 1) Nazis had German scientist show "evidence" of genetic inferiority and claimed that the Jewish people were inferior from an evolution standpoint.

the theory of evolution is not based on genetic inferiority or superiority.

bam; line of discussion over, back to whatever this thread was about.

I believe that god does does actually hold us back, in a good way. On the basis of ethics the belief of god provides people a reason to actually do right and maintain restraint amongst others or themselves. If we didnt have a morally rightous entity to believe in, based on "merit" we would react just on impulse to any arbitrary thought no matter how dark, violent, or twisted it was. Ask yourself this question, of all the barbaric tribes that raped, pillaged, and burned a village which of them had a spiritual being in their life?

I think it definitely holds us back as a species, especially when it comes to discovering new things. And mapping the great unknown, which is anything we don't know. It causes lazy thinkers to just say "god did it" instead of pushing us forward to find a solution.

It shackles in backwards beliefs invented by bronze age sheep herders that frankly didnt know any better.

Oh and the most important part of it is that it's most likely untrue so why bother with such a ridiculous belief?

At 7/29/11 04:40 PM, d0znatz wrote: I believe that god does does actually hold us back, in a good way. On the basis of ethics the belief of god provides people a reason to actually do right and maintain restraint amongst others or themselves. If we didnt have a morally rightous entity to believe in, based on "merit" we would react just on impulse to any arbitrary thought no matter how dark, violent, or twisted it was. Ask yourself this question, of all the barbaric tribes that raped, pillaged, and burned a village which of them had a spiritual being in their life?

That is entirely untrue, morals are totally unrelated with religion, if anything religion corrupts morality. Because you will refrain from doing evil acts in fear of punishment and not just because they're bad things. Not only that but studies have shown atheists and religious people to react in similar ways when in front of a moral dilemma. The difference is that religion in some cases makes people accept horrible things in the name of a religion.

At 7/30/11 10:06 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: It causes lazy thinkers to just say "god did it" instead of pushing us forward to find a solution.

Ah yes, cause answers to these questions have ANY bearing on how we live our lives on a day to day basis...

It shackles in backwards beliefs invented by bronze age sheep herders that frankly didnt know any better.

The people hold the backward beliefs that they use religion to support, not the other way around.

Oh and the most important part of it is that it's most likely untrue so why bother with such a ridiculous belief?

Really? Proof? Oh, wait, you DON'T HAVE ANY.

At 7/30/11 11:53 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Ah yes, cause answers to these questions have ANY bearing on how we live our lives on a day to day basis...

Yes they do, or at least they should. You should always questions phenomenons and be curious about stuff, have genuine admiration for nature's laws. Not just be like, well god did it derp. Now of course I am not asking something as ridiculous as wanting you to be amazed 24/7 but it should definitely impact your life to some extent.

The people hold the backward beliefs that they use religion to support, not the other way around.

No, actually shientists made experiments with I believe it was palestinian children asking them about this bible a story, and I don't remember the details now, but if you want further details I'll provide them to you later. So Basically this story talks about this guy invading a city in the name of god and the dude in commands says they shall destroy everything and kill everyone in the name of god but keep the gold, silver, bronze and iron. Now most kids were asked: This dude, which names elude me, were his actions moral?

The kids had 3 choices of answers: basically yes, no or maybe. Most of them said yes for religious reasons, that it was moral because it was something god asked of him and because he killed non-believers. And the small minority that said no stated reasons like: they should have kept the city for their use etc. But then they made the same experiment with different but similar children but replaced the name of the guy and the place with General Lee and China, or other generic names. And most children did react like you would expect, the great majority saw these acts for what they were, horrible genocide.

So yes, religion can make you accept the unnaceptable.

Really? Proof? Oh, wait, you DON'T HAVE ANY.

What do you mean "proof"? I don't have to come up with a proof, you do. YOu are the one asserting this ridiculous hypothesis. And of course you cannot prove a negative, so I cannot prove god does not exist, I can however show how improbable his existence him. It's like Russel's Teapot.

God doesn't hold us back...it is impossible for something that doesn't have any interest or contact with this planet & its people to hold us back.

We do that ourselves.

We allow some people to use religion(s) & have for thousands of years to control others. Then there is the truely sad & pathetic religious wars where one group of deluded imbecils fights, destroys & kills another group of deluded morons,...all of them fighting because they believe their all powerful ,invisible creator of the universe is better than the other groups all powerful invisible creator.

Truely a monumental waste of potential . How anyone can agree with one side over the other is completely beyond my grasp, because both are fucked !

Its that simple.

At 7/25/11 11:21 PM, djack wrote: I suppose you would call them more fit, or better suited to survive. Those scientists claimed that the Jews were genetically inferior and that allowing them to exist in the gene pool would slow the evolution of humans. That was their entire claim that eradicating all forms of human life except the Aryans would speed up the process of evolution, sort of an extreme natural selection much like eugenics which was also used in Nazi Germany.

People picking beneficial biological traits of another and selecting them to continue the population while discarding the rest is called artificial selection and is not a part of the evolutionary process.

But even so, evolution refers to biological change, not religious orientation. Unless you're claiming that religious belief is genetic and in which case, everyone of them should have been classed as inferior.

At 7/31/11 09:41 AM, The-universe wrote: But even so, evolution refers to biological change, not religious orientation. Unless you're claiming that religious belief is genetic and in which case, everyone of them should have been classed as inferior.

Do not confuse natural selection and evolution. Also beliefs or memes "act" in a similar manner and could be compared to "evolution".

At 7/31/11 06:19 PM, VenomKing666 wrote: Do not confuse natural selection and evolution.

It seems that you are actually the one confusing them, because you can't have evolution without natural selection, or else it would be merely a mutation or defect and not an evolution.

At 7/23/11 06:16 PM, Korriken wrote: My belief in god is the only thing keeping certain people (like my evil ex step dad) safe from my wrath.

lucky bastard... to put him out of my misery would be SO easy. and yet, to do so will guarantee my eternal damnation.

hell of an aggression inhibitor.

If the idea of a god is the only thing holding you back from murder, you need to check into a mental asylum.

As for the main question, Yes. Religion holds back rationality, freedom of speech, freedom of thought and logic in general, and all these things are required if we want to move forward as a species.

I'm sorry for the double post but i just want to point out that above I'm talking about organized religion

At 7/31/11 07:24 PM, micky315 wrote:

At 7/23/11 06:16 PM, Korriken wrote: My belief in god is the only thing keeping certain people (like my evil ex step dad) safe from my wrath.

If the idea of a god is the only thing holding you back from murder, you need to check into a mental asylum.

What micky said. You have to be pretty fucked up in the head to seriously want to commit murder.