Richard Dawkins

[Mayfuck]

Because libertarianism is literally evil.

[Eulogy]

Oh I misread the post. Absolutely that's true. Obviously. Sorry.

I read libertarian as liberal somehow.

[D.]

Give me that old-time religion,
Give me that old-time religion,
Give me that old-time religion,
It's good enough for me

[Elphenor]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

And for what reason would that be

We would have way more in common value wise

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Elphenor

We would have way more in common value wise

Yeah see my last post. I would too, for sure.

[Elphenor]

Oh I see

[MyOneAndOnly]

Originally Posted by Elphenor

Obvious point being that religion and liberalism are not mutually exclusive

So it's traditional and conservative ideas that are (mostly) bad and not religion really.

Basically a persons religion tells you nothing about them as two people can read the texts to have completely opposite meanings.

actually, no. Religious affiliation says a great deal about what people believe or are predisposed to. does it determine whether they're "good" people. No. that's subjective. But it is a huge indicator of their politics and what social/cultural norms they prescribe to.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/e...-new-research/

[MyOneAndOnly]

you can't separate religions from their teachings and practices. they are not just random stories people tell themselves. they are philosophical systems as well. People raised and trained in fundamentalist cults and religions have very different world views (from the mainstream), and their belief systems lead them to interpret information much differently than others.

it's a cop-out to claim that when people do something bad in the name of religion that it's not somehow religion that is the culprit, but instead it's some other negative human trait or other.

What other aspect of civil society is treated that way? None

[Dogfighter28]

god is empty just like me

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by scottytheoneand

you can't separate religions from their teachings and practices. they are not just random stories people tell themselves. they are philosophical systems as well. People raised and trained in fundamentalist cults and religions have very different world views (from the mainstream), and their belief systems lead them to interpret information much differently than others.

it's a cop-out to claim that when people do something bad in the name of religion that it's not somehow religion that is the culprit, but instead it's some other negative human trait or other.

What other aspect of civil society is treated that way? None

It's also a cop out to say that religion is the only culprit. If that's what you were even implying.

[Bread Regal]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

I mean sort of. At least he says what he thinks. I am kind of disappointed that you just run away when you don't know what to say.

Like "oh everyone thinks scotty is dumb so I don't have to actually defend the positions I take."

No. That is lazy. Don't do that. You're better than that.

when scotty wants to argue, he starts with an uninformed opinion and works his way backwards to try and justify his half-baked opinions.

like this:

Originally Posted by scottytheoneand

what does that have to do with anything?

this point's been argued several times already in this thread and scotty just ignores that and doesn't understand the concept of a counterexample. arguing with him is like trying to drive a car with a manual transmission without using the clutch. it generates a lot of noise and it doesn't get you anywhere.

[Mayfuck]

[MyOneAndOnly]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

It's also a cop out to say that religion is the only culprit. If that's what you were even implying.

no. I'm not.

And FTR I don't believe skeptics or atheists are either

[deadaswarhol]

Originally Posted by scottytheoneand

actually, no. Religious affiliation says a great deal about what people believe or are predisposed to. does it determine whether they're "good" people. No. that's subjective. But it is a huge indicator of their politics and what social/cultural norms they prescribe to.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/e...-new-research/

i am a christian and a hardcore leftist. tons of people at my church actually work in politics as democrats or whatever(not that that is really "leftist", but you get my point).

just because those are the larger trends even, doesn't mean you can pigeonhole someone's politics just based on that.

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by deadaswarhol

i am a christian and a hardcore leftist. tons of people at my church actually work in politics as democrats or whatever(not that that is really "leftist", but you get my point).

just because those are the larger trends even, doesn't mean you can pigeonhole someone's politics just based on that.

Non-denominational? Or what denomination?

[deadaswarhol]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

Non-denominational? Or what denomination?

i dont consider myself part of a denomination, but i go to a presbyterian church, so i assume most people there consider themselves presbyterian(i don't really jive with a lot of pres. theology but it rarely comes up int he teaching, if ever)

[MyOneAndOnly]

Originally Posted by deadaswarhol

i am a christian and a hardcore leftist. tons of people at my church actually work in politics as democrats or whatever(not that that is really "leftist", but you get my point).

just because those are the larger trends even, doesn't mean you can pigeonhole someone's politics just based on that.

you're talking about the individual. I'm talking about the tendencies of the group. Or the likelihood that someone in a particular religion would hold a specific socio political view (climate change, gay marriage, etc.). The article I linked to illustrates that in relation to climate science.

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by deadaswarhol

i dont consider myself part of a denomination, but i go to a presbyterian church, so i assume most people there consider themselves presbyterian(i don't really jive with a lot of pres. theology but it rarely comes up int he teaching, if ever)

But you'll admit that "I go to a Presbyterian church" and "I am a southern baptist" or "I'm a Mormon" give relevant clues as to potential socio-political stances, right?

[deadaswarhol]

sure but i mean, tons of my church friends aren't like that either. and would LOL at that climate-change-denial stuff.

and yeah i guess i maybe mistook the "their" and "people" stuff in your post to be more about individuals than a group as a whole, so i getcha. but not everyone is "that" kind of christian. and i mean, a lot of people that are, like, my mom would fit in that group, but (while I don't like to speculate too much about people's hearts if i don't know) I really think she's more like, "culturally christian" than anything. Like, she'd probably be adding to that data but to me she's always just seemed conservative, and "Christian" just kinda goes along with that. But like, she says like negative junk about homeless people etc etc that like, most of my friends would agree is really shitty and antithetical to Christianity, not even just not a part of it.

like, in my experience, there's a big difference between people of faith who actually spend time in service and mercy stuff etc and like, just having some cross-stitch bible verse on your wall and running around bashing gays and being pro-war etc etc. And I don't think distinctions like that really come across in polls/data, when they're a couple of distinctly different experiences and worldviews but both are claiming "Christian". maybe some denominational differences but even then I dunno.

[deadaswarhol]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

But you'll admit that "I go to a Presbyterian church" and "I am a southern baptist" or "I'm a Mormon" give relevant clues as to potential socio-political stances, right?

honestly yeah, and maybe it's telling that I still think so about 2 and 3, but less so about the first. and like, before I started going to one, I probably would have thought the same about the 1st, too. I mean, I've been surprised by the political leanings of enough people at my church that it's not really the exception at this point.

but also like, we're in DC, and I'd probably guess different if it were a rural church or whatever.

so yeah i'd agree to an extent broadly, but I'd probably hold those guesses loosely and not make judgements based on assumptions there, since those same "clues" would probably not lead you to believe i'm a super socialist pacifist vegetarian etc etc.

[Mayfuck]

Originally Posted by deadaswarhol

honestly yeah, and maybe it's telling that I still think so about 2 and 3, but less so about the first. and like, before I started going to one, I probably would have thought the same about the 1st, too. I mean, I've been surprised by the political leanings of enough people at my church that it's not really the exception at this point.

but also like, we're in DC, and I'd probably guess different if it were a rural church or whatever.

so yeah i'd agree to an extent broadly, but I'd probably hold those guesses loosely and not make judgements based on assumptions there, since those same "clues" would probably not lead you to believe i'm a super socialist pacifist vegetarian etc etc.

I would say most Christians today are of the deadaswarhol variety. "non-denominational" is the fastest growing religious identifier in the US today. So the idea that faith=conservative is murkier than ever.

But Eulogy and scotty's whole thing is that ideas are not justifiable if they come from religion, regardless if they are good or bad ideas, and regardless if they helped develop civilization and establish order and morality. However that is not to say all religions are good religions.

This country was founded on a particularly odious brand of Protestantism in Calvinism, which was largely influential in developing capitalism--where the priestly authority of churches such as the Catholic church are replaced with the authority of those who benefited off the acquisition and exploitation of capital and thus designated themselves spiritually superior. You can also see Calvinism in our vengeful justice system.

Today, religion debate in America is shallow and absurd because the argument is dominated by the two groups who understand religion the least: New atheists and christian fundamentalists. And it is extremely telling that Dawkins and his ilk use the exact same hermeneutics that creationists do. The reason lies in this ultimate irony: Dawkins, Hitchens et al are cut from the very Protestant and Calvinist cloth that was imported from their native England when this country was founded.

[killtrocity]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

It's also a cop out to say that religion is the only culprit. If that's what you were even implying.

[Mayfuck]

love that #based superstructure

[Eulogy]

Julio don't put words in my mouth please.

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Mayfuck

I would say most Christians today are of the deadaswarhol variety. "non-denominational" is the fastest growing religious identifier in the US today. So the idea that faith=conservative is murkier than ever.

But Eulogy and scotty's whole thing is that ideas are not justifiable if they come from religion, regardless if they are good or bad ideas, and regardless if they helped develop civilization and establish order and morality. However that is not to say all religions are good religions.

.

"None" and "non-denominational" are not the same. None is the fastest growing. And I've never said or implied that any idea that comes from religion is inherently bad. That's absurd and I have no idea what makes you think that's what I believe.

[Eulogy]

I've also never said or implied that faith = conservative.

[Disco King]

Originally Posted by FoolofaTook

wtf? you are either trolling or dumb as fuck (no other possibilities are possible!)

nato bombed Christians to save Muslims in Kosovo. Serbs=Orthodox Christians. Kosovars: Albanian Muslims.

Fucker.

My sentence could had been clearer, but I wasn't trying to state that Kosovo was such an example of the attitude I attributed to the neoconservative New Atheists. Just that, after those events, those are justifications Hitchen's used for aggressive American interventionalism in general.

[FoolofaTook]

thank you for the clarification. carry on.

[FoolofaTook]

i feel strongly about the land we once stole from others being stolen from us.

[FoolofaTook]

hence the hostility