Religion, Politics, and Control.

[Tr0n]

I don't really know how to start this thread off, but here it goes.

I have been wondering for a while why many of you dislike/hate religion so much.I understand why some of you hate it which relates to the title of this thread...Control/Politics.

What I want to discuss is why most of you say it should be seperated from the goverment and why ya'll always think it starts wars.Yea sure it has been used in the past to do horrible things at the hands of corrupt leaders, but what about the good things that came out of it?Don't ya'll ever look at that side?

Like I said in a thread before...

Religion in the wrong hands can control.
Religion in the right hands can free your mind and body.

Now I for one ain't religious...I was raised a christian, but a bad life happend and well...I saw the bigger picture.I'm a deist now...so yea.

Please don't turn this into a bash christanity type thing.

So please discuss.

 

[willyd]

I personally think their are values to all religions. I believe in a divine being. I just don't llike it when people are too literal with their religious texts and dont understand while the basic message may still be there, much has been changed and it was written by people to begin with.

Im also a believer in the theory that god has spoken to different people differently but the core is all the same.


edit: like you dont have to be a christian to go to heaven because the values taught in Islam or whatever are the same.

 

[Tr0n]

I personally think their are values to all religions. I believe in a divine being. I just don't llike it when people are too literal with their religious texts and dont understand while the basic message may still be there, much has been changed and it was written by people to begin with.

Im also a believer in the theory that god has spoken to different people differently but the core is all the same.


edit: like you dont have to be a christian to go to heaven because the values taught in Islam or whatever are the same.

Well what about it being related to politics...Do you think religion is in some ways just bad because it can be easily used to control?

 

[pomegranate]

What I want to discuss is why most of you say it should be seperated from the goverment

Well, a big problem is that if the government and religion are NOT seperate, what religion is chosen to be the state religion? Choosing a particular religion jeapordises (sp) democracy in a multi-faith country, as the government will be biased towards ideas and ethics in one particular religion.

 

[KoreBolteR]

basically i hate it when religion gets 'used', for terrorism. Politics has to adapt to religion from all around the world, if the politicians say something 'wrong', the religious people will go mad. and that could decide a election/ perhaps. i dont mind people who jus love thier beleifs and keep to themselves, and enjoy it.

but people who use it for thier political beliefs and kill innocent people to spite a countries politics, pisses me off. its always the innocent.

i hope that makes sense.

 

[Tr0n]

basically i hate it when religion gets 'used', for terrorism. Politics has to adapt to religion from all around the world, if the politicians say something 'wrong', the religious people will go mad. and that could decide a election/ perhaps. i dont mind people who jus love thier beleifs and keep to themselves, and enjoy it.

but people who use it for thier political beliefs and kill innocent people to spite a countries politics, pisses me off. its always the innocent.

i hope that makes sense.

Yea I see your point.

Yea it is used as a tool...but why blame religion itself tho?It's like the gun thing...the gun is a tool, but it's the human that pulls the trigger.You get rid of the gun...the human is gonna find another tool to kill with.

Some people just hate religion for that reason.

 

[Raziaar]

I've always wondered why the people on these forums are always so eager to viciously attack religion, especially Christianity and those who practice it. <shrugs>

 

[willyd]

Yea I see your point.

Yea it is used as a tool...but why blame religion itself tho?It's like the gun thing...the gun is a too, butl it's the human that pulls the trigger.You get rid of the gun...the human is gonna find another tool to kill with.

Some people just hate religion for that reason.

Well definitely, its not the religion that first cause of terrorists. Its the awful conditions of the country and the leader who gains from the terrorism.

 

[KoreBolteR]

then people go and say 'why have guns in the first place' and 'its so easy these days to get a gun'.

so i suppose people would like to see religion scrapped altogether, so that these evil people cant 'use' it as a tool...

but that would be selfish to the people who worship thier religion correctly and innocently.

i also see priests these days not making a good name for themselves, i always see different priests in the news, on how they have gone with kids, raped, and accused some country or person. i dno...

with the gun situation, i think your right..

 

[Tr0n]

I've always wondered why the people on these forums are always so eager to viciously attack religion, especially Christianity and those who practice it. <shrugs>

Well thats what we are gonna find out with this thread...or at least try to.

 

[Edcrab]

Ah, but conversely people do blame guns. And removing guns from certain aspects of society would improve matters.

Just as banning particular people from abusing religion for their own agendas would help the planet as a whole. Then certain people might be forced to explain why they're happy to let you wear the bomb while they tell everyone else to do the same from the safety of their living room.

Ethical nuke IMMINENT.

 

[KoreBolteR]

sometimes i suppose you could say the evil people who use religion.. 'the gun',

while calling the religion 'the victim.'

 

[Tr0n]

Our founding fathers stated that this goverment should be completly seperated from religion.

Now how I see it is that even tho our dollar bill has God on it and our pledge of allegiance has "One nation under god"...that doesn't mean our goverment is supporting religion.

You can still be spiritual and believe in god and prayer.I don't understand why everyone says just because it has god in it or has to do with prayer automatically makes it related to religion.

Most of the founding fathers were deist and christian...and I think 3 was atheist.

So yea....

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I've always wondered why the people on these forums are always so eager to viciously attack religion, especially Christianity and those who practice it. <shrugs>

I dunno about other people, but for me it's not christianity.

It's how a trememndous portion of christians, american especially, desire nothing more than to merge church and state.
I don't care if you're christian, but I totally hate all those thousands of groups with "family" in the name whose goal in life is to make all entertainment as inoffensive as Barney. I hate people who would ban gay marriage, and I hate every little thing that is being done to de-secularize the government. I hate the attempted convertion, and I hate my life being called meaningless just because i don't drink wine for sunday breakfast. I hate evolution being thrown out of schools.

But most of all, I hate how this religion is abusing it's majority status, creating a culture where first and foremost christianity must be appeased.
At this rate, we will never see a non-christian president. We will never see a thousand groups limiting TV to muslim standards. We will never see textbooks forced to replace evolution with the aboriginal myth of the world sprouting from the shell of a massive turtle.

Basically, I hate that most christians are pushing for, and getting, the ability to control my life and the lives of every group that doesn't share their faith.

No group should be handed so much power and so many special favours simply because they reproduce faster.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Ah, but conversely people do blame guns. And removing guns from certain aspects of society would improve matters.

http://www.ranting-gryphon.com/Rants/2rant-guns.mp3

No, it most definately would not. The amount of those killed from violence would still be the same or higher with guns out of the picture, then with guns in the picture.

Without guns, the responsibility of killing someone becomes much more personal -- therefore, encouraging people to actually seek out victims as opposed to debating wether or not to shoot someone. Further, you dont think someone would master the art of sticking someone with an arrow launched from bow? C'mon -- you pick up 100 objects each day that make killing easier.

You take away guns -- there going to use bats -- you take away bats -- there going to use knives -- you take knives -- there going to use Kappa Mega to snap each others necks -- you take away martial arts -- then your also going to have to take away there arms and legs -- and when they dont have any arms or legs, there going to be rolling blobs biting at each other.

Stopping violence at its core, does'nt mean blaiming inanimate objects -- it means blaiming yourself and taking personal responsibility for the crimes that happen in a day. Stopping violence at its core, would really mean stopping people from believing violence is an answer; AND encouraging others not be violent in the first place.

If you dont do that, then no matter what you remove, people are still going to be finding ways to kill each other. Violence is not the answer -- make that choice instead.

I dunno about other people, but for me it's not christianity.

Not a lot of people would believe me when I said this, but I agree with what you stated.

 

[CptStern]

I dunno about other people, but for me it's not christianity.

It's how a trememndous portion of christians, american especially, desire nothing more than to merge church and state.
I don't care if you're christian, but I totally hate all those thousands of groups with "family" in the name whose goal in life is to make all entertainment as inoffensive as Barney. I hate people who would ban gay marriage, and I hate every little thing that is being done to de-secularize the government. I hate the attempted convertion, and I hate my life being called meaningless just because i don't drink wine for sunday breakfast. I hate evolution being thrown out of schools.

But most of all, I hate how this religion is abusing it's majority status, creating a culture where first and foremost christianity must be appeased.
At this rate, we will never see a non-christian president. We will never see a thousand groups limiting TV to muslim standards. We will never see textbooks forced to replace evolution with the aboriginal myth of the world sprouting from the shell of a massive turtle.

Basically, I hate that most christians are pushing for, and getting, the ability to control my life and the lives of every group that doesn't share their faith.

No group should be handed so much power and so many special favours simply because they reproduce faster.

quoted for emphasis


people who are outspoken in terms of same sex marriage rights, de-secularization of state, abortion, contraception etc are always labeled as "hating" religion ..usually by the religious. The truth in the matter is that most areligious people are areligious because they feel it has no relevance in their lives. You dont hate what you dont care about ...sure they may hate particular issues with religion but really ..we dont care

 

[Raziaar]

We will never see textbooks forced to replace evolution with the aboriginal myth of the world sprouting from the shell of a massive turtle.

What does evolution have to do with christianity? I only ask because you were focusing much on christianity in your post, then jumped to that.

 

[Raziaar]

quoted for emphasis


people who are outspoken in terms of same sex marriage rights, de-secularization of state, abortion, contraception etc are always labeled as "hating" religion ..usually by the religious. The truth in the matter is that most areligious people are areligious because they feel it has no relevance in their lives. You dont hate what you dont care about ...sure they may hate particular issues with religion but really ..we dont care

Heh. I certainly don't label people who have those opinions as hating religion. I label them that when they come on these forums and post "Religion sucks" which they do, in far more words. lol

 

[CptStern]

yes but those types of people are prone to knee-jerk reactions. Most people who are areligious have strong convictions as to why they're areligious

 

[Absinthe]

What does evolution have to do with christianity? I only ask because you were focusing much on christianity in your post, then jumped to that.

The fundies would have you believe that the theory of evolution has been debunked and that Creatonism, by its common definition, is how we arrived on this Earth.

 

[Raziaar]

The fundies would have you believe that the theory of evolution has been debunked and that Creatonism, by its common definition, is how we arrived on this Earth.

Did you read what he said though? He said evolution would never be forced to replace itself with something else... and that it is somehow bad? Everything else he was talking about was a shame, and so if the trend was continuing in what he was saying, then what he was talking about was that it was a shame that evolution would never be forced out of the text books. I ask where the problem in that is?

What I was saying was... christianity is certainly not a factor in keeping the evolutionary theory *IN* the text books.

 

[Absinthe]

I'm pretty sure he just made a mistake.

 

[Canadian Gunner]

Ok, going back to politics, I learned in history class that between the 30's and the 50's, in Quebec, they had a premier who was really something. "History remembers him as anti-union and anti-communist, as someone who had little time for civil liberties, who created a thriving political patronage system and was so close to the clergy he could boast he had the bishops eating out of his hand. Heaven, Duplessis used to say, was blue, the Union Nationale colour; hell was Liberal red." (from http://www.wednesday-night.com/Duplessis.asp)
I just found this interesting how he controled the people through religion.

 

[baxter]

Religion in the wrong hands can control.
Religion in the right hands can free your mind and body

Rather than start a raging argument I would like to stick to the original thread. What you said is true.

The reason, I believe that people dislike or mistrust religion is because of it’s used as an excuse for extremism. Extremism in any form is a dangerous thing and coupled with religious fanatics, as has been shown it can be deadly.

All things in moderation is fine, including religious beliefs but when people start commits atrocities in the name of God, any God for that matter, it turns people against it.

If people have strong religious beliefs than good luck to them, who am I to knock their beliefs? but when their beliefs are all consuming to the point of death and destruction, it is frankly is sickening. There has to be tolerance for other people’s beliefs and views, including religious views, but I feel that so much damage has been done to this world and its people by extremism religious views that most people now naturally view religion with distaste.

It is a sad state of affairs but religion has sow the seeds of its own destruction

 

[Edcrab]

Kereberos: when I said "certain aspects of society" I meant purely keeping guns out of the hands of the criminal element- which would be impossible. It wasn't meant to be at all insightful or representative of the state of America.

It's a fact, for example, that crime is clearly more to do with attitude than the availability of any kind of weaponry. Take Britain- we just have a lower level of gun crime in proportion to our populace, and an expanding wave of knife attacks. So yes, taking firearms from the US wouldn't really change the mindset of particular people and thus wouldn't make much difference...

Religious bound politics were essential for laying down sensible, common-sense morality in the old days- effectively using the threat of eternal damnation as law enforcement- but nowadays it's just been used to further different agendas. It'll always be an "easy-answer" for someone to abuse, regardless of how many people follow it acceptably.

 

[kirovman]

I am a scientist, and I was born a Christian, but I haven't been to a church for about 8 years.
I don't dislike religion, and it did give us the underlying laws for today's society, most being sensible, and I hold in high regard all the religion which teaches about tolerance and respect for other peoples and anything that contributes positively to society.

What I don't like is people who manipulate it for the purposes of their own agenda...and those that loudly preach everyone else is wrong, every other religion is wrong, etc. And loudly proclaim they are 100% right, there is no way they could be wrong in their beliefs.

I am very accepting that I could be wrong, there are many things in life I have been 100% sure of how right I am, only to be proven wrong.
So I don't think anyone could be so sure they are right about this (although I could be wrong on this one).

I do enjoy a good debate with religious types though, if anything it expands both partys' knowledge further (or at least it does to mine).

I think in a lot of cases people could benefit from a bit of spiritualism.

 

[Black Ops4]

My parents are Christian, but I tend to lean more towards Buddhism now that I am older.

I don't hate religion, I just hate the way some people 'use' it. A lot of people who claim to be Christian and spend a lot of time in church are really aweful and don't usually follow the teachings of the Bible anyway.

In my opinion, religion should be kept away from politics all the time (unless the government is a theocracy, obviously), especially in countries like America, a lot of Europe and Australia which are supposed to be multicultural. If some people have different religion to the majority and the government, they may feel very uncomfortable living there and voting, particuarly if many reasons to vote for a particular candidate are religious.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I believe that religion shouldn't be restricted by the government or laws made that force people to do something religious. The door swings both ways, a lot of people, for some reason, see that as a way to RESTRICT religion.. no idea how but they do.

I've found that I get bashed quite a bit for my religion by athiests. I've learned there is a difference though. There are athiests, who just generally don't believe the same things I do and are happy to do as they please and the same for me, and there are "activist athiests" who are determined into getting me to renounce my beliefs or simply want to bash what I believe at every opportunity.

 

[Tr0n]

OT:Wow...I'm very surprised this thread hasn't gone too hell in a hand basket yet.


Anyways it's very interesting to see everyones opinion on this...doesn't seem like ya'll differ much on the fact that goverments should try to stay seperated from religion.

 

[Raziaar]

I believe that religion shouldn't be restricted by the government or laws made that force people to do something religious. The door swings both ways, a lot of people, for some reason, see that as a way to RESTRICT religion.. no idea how but they do.

I've found that I get bashed quite a bit for my religion by athiests. I've learned there is a difference though. There are athiests, who just generally don't believe the same things I do and are happy to do as they please and the same for me, and there are "activist athiests" who are determined into getting me to renounce my beliefs or simply want to bash what I believe at every opportunity.

And most of the athiests that come on message boards such as these, are those very same 'activist athiests', eager to bash.

 

[PvtRyan]

Completely agree with Mecha.

I think that personal beliefs are okay, but I oppose organized religion. Of course you shouldn't force organized religion away, but it should be relieved of all power it has. Unfortunately, a lot of that power is generated by its followers.

I believe the new EU constitution will contain no reference to God or anything. Which I think is a good thing, you shouldn't base a constitution on religion.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

And most of the athiests that come on message boards such as these, are those very same 'activist athiests', eager to bash.

Yeah I find that true, too.

In real life, all the athiests I know, didn't know they were until a question came up that had them saying they were. They're pretty nice.

On the internet I'm bashed a hell of a lot about my religion from activist athiests. And not the 'idiotic' bashing by people without an agenda but just trying insults, these are activists trying to get me to renounce it. Just isn't cool, it's the same as rude evangelicals.

 

[clarky003]

Without guns, the responsibility of killing someone becomes much more personal -- therefore, encouraging people to actually seek out victims as opposed to debating wether or not to shoot someone.

that kinda makes it more difficult to kill someone..

picking up a gun and shooting someone is way more simple and as wimpy and dishonourable as you can get, if you know how to use it, which is often the case, all you need to do is pull the trigger, bam, the person doesnt get a chance to defend themselves unless they have a gun too.. if its more personal you dont need a boom stick to try to defend yourself effectively.. you sound like your arguing to keep guns , not because what you say is nessersarily true, but because youve grown up around them? and are used to it, and perhaps even like the idea of having a gun?, ask the majority here , and you'll probably find they would agree that removing guns makes crimes, and killings much harder to commit. If you want to defend yourself, dont pussy around with a weapon, go learn some kung fu , or some type of self defence martial arts to defend against idiots with baseball bats. and knives.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

that kinda makes it more difficult to kill someone..

picking up a gun and shooting someone is way more simple and as wimpy and dishonourable as you can get, if you know how to use it, which is often the case, all you need to do is pull the trigger, bam, the person doesnt get a chance to defend themselves unless they have a gun too.. if its more personal you dont need a boom stick to try to defend yourself effectively.. you sound like your arguing to keep guns , not because what you say is nessersarily true, but because youve grown up around them? and are used to it, and perhaps even like the idea of having a gun?, ask the majority here , and you'll probably find they would agree that removing guns makes crimes, and killings much harder to commit. If you want to defend yourself, dont pussy around with a weapon, go learn some kung fu , or some type of self defence martial arts to defend against idiots with baseball bats. and knives.

If someone is breaking into my house to harm my family, I'm not worried about honor, I'm concerned with causing them to fall dead that exact instant.

 

[Tr0n]

Hey this about religion and politics...not guns and gun control.

Don't de-rail my thread please.

 

[clarky003]

sorry, my bad. Knight rider is my religion at the moment, but ill probably be over that in a few weeks and onto something else.

 

[Zorrander001]

One point, you cannot take religion out of politics. Politics is made up of politicians who for the most part can be considered human beings and religion, or atleast a fundamental belief in a higher power, is an intrigal part of human nature. Most politicians are religious, and their policies will ultimately be affected by their beliefs. This isn't right or wrong, it just is. We are by and large a species that believes in God/gods.

Second, since we are by and large a species that believes in God/gods, I'm not entirely sure we shouldn't reflect that in our policies and government. What is so bad about "a nation under God"? Why remove the word God from goverment documents? It is there for a reason, because it represents a prevailing aspect of human nature. And to add to that, most governments are products of religious philosophy. Do you really think our government would resemble what it is now if Christianity wasn't the predominate belief system among the founders? Ofcourse not. Sure the government should not endorse any particular religion, but I don't see how reflecting the general belief in higher powers among the human race in the founding of institutions designed to govern the human race is a bad idea, nor does it endorse any particular religion.

One nation under Jesus = endorses Christianity.
One nation under God = simply reflects an intrigal aspect of our nature.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

One point, you cannot take religion out of politics. Politics is made up of politicians who for the most part can be considered human beings and religion, or atleast a fundamental belief in a higher power, is an intrigal part of human nature. Most politicians are religious, and their policies will ultimately be affected by their beliefs. This isn't right or wrong, it just is. We are by and large a species that believes in God/gods.

Second, since we are by and large a species that believes in God/gods, I'm not entirely sure we shouldn't reflect that in our policies and government. What is so bad about "a nation under God"? Why remove the word God from goverment documents? It is there for a reason, because it represents a prevailing aspect of human nature. And to add to that, most governments are products of religious philosophy. Do you really think our government would resemble what it is now if Christianity wasn't the predominate belief system among the founders? Ofcourse not. Sure the government should not endorse any particular religion, but I don't see how reflecting the general belief in higher powers among the human race in the founding of institutions designed to govern the human race is a bad idea, nor does it endorse any particular religion.

One nation under Jesus = endorses Christianity.
One nation under God = simply reflects an intrigal aspect of our nature.

I'm against laws forcing religion. Of course the policies of any western nation are derived from morals of major western religions like Judaism and Christianity. There's a difference between that and something along the lines of "Law Code 4526 stating you MUST PRAY AT SUNDOWN!"

 

[willyd]

One point, you cannot take religion out of politics. Politics is made up of politicians who for the most part can be considered human beings and religion, or atleast a fundamental belief in a higher power, is an intrigal part of human nature. Most politicians are religious, and their policies will ultimately be affected by their beliefs. This isn't right or wrong, it just is. We are by and large a species that believes in God/gods.

Second, since we are by and large a species that believes in God/gods, I'm not entirely sure we shouldn't reflect that in our policies and government. What is so bad about "a nation under God"? Why remove the word God from goverment documents? It is there for a reason, because it represents a prevailing aspect of human nature. And to add to that, most governments are products of religious philosophy. Do you really think our government would resemble what it is now if Christianity wasn't the predominate belief system among the founders? Ofcourse not. Sure the government should not endorse any particular religion, but I don't see how reflecting the general belief in higher powers among the human race in the founding of institutions designed to govern the human race is a bad idea, nor does it endorse any particular religion.

One nation under Jesus = endorses Christianity.
One nation under God = simply reflects an intrigal aspect of our nature.

Oh wow, I've never thought about it that way and I agree with you.

Is it me or is everyone pretty much agreeing with everyone else in this thread? This is the politics board there should be like everyone getting mad at everyone and quoting a billion sources.

 

[Zorrander001]

I'm against laws forcing religion. Of course the policies of any western nation are derived from morals of major western religions like Judaism and Christianity. There's a difference between that and something along the lines of "Law Code 4526 stating you MUST PRAY AT SUNDOWN!"

Obviously I wouldn't disagree with you here. It is wrong to force anyone to believe or participate in any religion.