What god looks like

[d000hg]

Xog,

Your arguments are irrational. You can't believe in a higher power and believe It has told to act a certain way, and then sit on it because someone ignorant to The Truth tells you religion should be a personal thing. That's not logical. Those people might be delusional, but to them your argument is nonsensical because in their reality, it is simple logic.

As far as "we can't have a fair debate on X since people want to bring religion into it." Anything involving ethics or morality is hugely subjective and not scientific, so trying to pretend otherwise is not realistic. These are human concerns and religion is a fundamental part of humanity.

[minestrone]

I do. But I save my venom for those who promote those scams to make money out of them. They need locking up to protect the gullible, the naïve and the ignorant from themselves.

I take it you hate Dawkins.

[ThomasSoerensen]

What do you get out of insulting religious people?

I was just making an observation.

If you feel insulted it lies more in your defensive interpretation.

And you must admit that being a faithful believer in a religion cuts down on the unanswered questions and on the issues where you have to figure out your own moral standpoint since many answers are found in "the book".

Ctrf-F is easier than internal argumentation.

Right?

[thunderlizard]

And you must admit that being a faithful believer in a religion cuts down on the unanswered questions and on the issues where you have to figure out your own moral standpoint since many answers are found in "the book".

I don't really think it does. The Bible for instance is fearsomely difficult to understand and seems to contradict itself all over the place. Try figuring out a system of business ethics even from just the gospels - you've got the moneylenders in the temple, the labourers in the vineyard and the Parable of the Unjust Steward to contend with just for starters.

[minestrone]

We get goons walking up and down the street all summer long telling us what we should be believing in.

They have not grasped the concept that religion is a personal choice and no amount of flute playing and drum banging will change that.

[RichardCranium]

I take it you hate Dawkins.

Is that Richard Dawkins? All I know about him is his name; I have never read anything he has written or seen him on telly. But I get the impression he is an anti-JW; that is, a tedious devout atheist, the sort that gives us reasonable atheists a bad name. Am I right?

[TimberWolf]

Anything involving ethics or morality is hugely subjective and not scientific, so trying to pretend otherwise is not realistic. These are human concerns and religion is a fundamental part of humanity.

There's no reason why ethics and morals can't be studied scientifically, and indeed no doubt many branches of science do so. Granted there are many solutions to ethics and morals, within a common framework, but there's nothing mystical about them or the reasons for having them.

[nomadd]

Is that Richard Dawkins? All I know about him is his name; I have never read anything he has written or seen him on telly. But I get the impression he is an anti-JW; that is, a tedious devout atheist, the sort that gives us reasonable atheists a bad name. Am I right?

No.

[xoggoth]

d000hg

That first para is an argument that applies as much to to the Taliban or Spanish inquisition as more reasonable sorts. Given "...in their reality" I suppose one can't argue with it, it's just not a reality I want imposed on me thanks and I will oppose any who try and do so.

As for ethics or morality being subjective I have said before I don't much believe in either. If they are subjective, ie not agreed by many and possibly wrong, what value do they have? I believe in guiding principles based on realities of human needs (as expressed rather well in the US constitution Life, liberty etc) and practical laws based on human nature.

[minestrone]

d000hg

That first para is an argument that applies as much to to the Taliban or Spanish inquisition as more reasonable sorts. Given "...in their reality" I suppose one can't argue with it, it's just not a reality I want imposed on me thanks and I will oppose any who try and do so.

As for ethics or morality being subjective I have said before I don't much believe in either. If they are subjective, ie not agreed by many and possibly wrong, what value do they have? I believe in guiding principles based on realities of human needs (as expressed rather well in the US constitution Life, liberty etc) and practical laws based on human nature.

SO if xoggoth rules the land we do not get religion?