Bothered By Religion

Post Reply New Topic

In the absence of ample evidence, it makes a lot more sense to not assume anything at all, and I ask why having certainty of the nonexistence of something that lacks evidence of to be more rational than assuming otherwise, or even the mere possibility, if that's the case then perhaps both would be "irrational", heck, if the motivation for such belief is emotional, unbelievers can't get away with that, when they show to be biased. It seems to come down to cognitive prejudice, in the end.

An analogy, presented as a koan:

Q: How many people does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Four.

One to change the bulb.

One to not change the bulb.

One to both change and not change the bulb.

One to neither change nor not change the bulb.

The first one represents those who have always believed - Religionists.

The second one represents those who deny belief - Atheists.

The third one represent those whose beliefs are lie somewhere between two extremes - Agnostics.

The fourth one represents those who are ignorant of and/or indifferent to religion - people known variously as "Heathens," "Pagans," "Unsaved," et cetera.


This is not absolutely accurate, but it works for me.

Not really.
I have no evidence that there are land mines in my garden and no evidence that there are not land mines in my garden as I have not searched it.
If I assumed I did not know then I would feel the need to dig up the garden and check each time I went to walk in it.

Oh wait, here's another one

Dimitri: Thats a fun little book.
Tasso: Yes, although I thought it trod the line between being funnyy and going into details a little uneasily.
Dimitri: The jokes are still good!

I think in a sense it's the opposite as far as security goes. Religious people in general are extremely insecure about their faith, which is why it's in general a problem to discuss the subject in the first place. And as far as having a problem with it goes, I don't care what people believe but when it's in my face constantly or effects the way I can live my life and happens to really be that ridiculous it becomes a little annoying.

I find it irritating that intelligent, well educated people can harbor such outlandish, outdated superstitions.

Bearers of religion very often have the (bad) habit of imposing their beliefs on others. Simple atheists do not believe in the prevailing gods in their societies. Atheism, generally, is not a belief, but a lack of belief.

In the United States, bearers of religion have advantages not given to atheists. Their organizations (qua religion) do not pay taxes, but receive services that the rest of us pay for. There is a bias pro religion and against atheism. For example, in a court of law the clerk sticks a bible in my face when I take the oath of truthfulness. I have to humbly beg the judge to take the oath by affirmation, rather than by swearing in the name of deity I have little regard for. All oaths should be given by affirmation. Affirmation binds the one who affirms to the laws against perjury just as strongly as an oath in the name of the Ghost in the Sky. There is also the obnoxious presumption that a person who is not part of a religion cannot possibly be ethical or moral. That is down right insulting. I am ethical and moral out of a reason-based conviction that societies can exist and function only if people respect each other's life and property and are bound by contractual obligations freely taken on. To a reasonable man his word is his bond. It says in the Talmud that our yes should mean Yes and our no should mean No. We are bound by our pledges and we don't need the fear of a Sky Demon to understand our obligations.

In the U.S. an overt atheist is dead on arrival politically. In order to hold an office in this country, an atheist must either not even try or be prepared to lie and deceive. Not a pretty choice in what presumably is a democracy.

ruveyn

Am I bothered by religion?

Not really... but it's not just a yes or no question.

Religions themselves don't bother me. I just view them as more cultural things with interesting stories that reflect history.

It's the people who use religion that bother me. They lack common sense, do such stupid things because their religion excuses them to do so, use religion to try and make public policy or as a litmus test for who can be elected or not, or who can have this right or not. Religious people bother me cause they are ridiculous.

You're trying the old "If it can't be proven to not exist, then it must therefore exist" fallacy.


Not at all. By your logic, you tried to hang me and failed.


Amen, Brother! Amen!

I also find it irritating when unintelligent, ignorant people claim that I must be more stupid than they are for not adhering to their "outlandish, outdated superstitions."

Bumped up from page one:

That's what you took from that?

I don't think we have anything else to say to each other.

Well they're unintelligent and ignorant, what are you supposed to expect?

Last edited by z0rp on 07 Jan 2009, 12:46 am, edited 2 times in total.

Uhh ... cold beer, Akron, and "Poor, poor thing"?

True, that shows that as humans it's impossible to live by accepting verified evidence only, as we have to take some things for granted and make few assumptions, but then, the possibility of a land mine to exist in a place that haven't being verified is there, even if it's small, the chances of it would never be zero until proven, in this example, the assumption would be for convenience.

It also has caused more wars than anything else...