Ban organized religion, says Elton John

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Azure

"Guns don't creat conflict..religion does"

Right? So every single conflict in this world has been started because of religion? The Cold War was based on religion? All those proxy wars? Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan?

US against the USSR? A religious conflict? Or a conflict over weapons(guns) and technology?

Um no I didn't say every conflict ever was started by religion in fact I stated that money and race started conflict too. Don't put words in my mouth I was just stating that religion was another reason for conflict. I also didn't say that I supported a ban of religion.

oh and if you think that the cold war was a fight over guns and technology then you need to read some more books.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I'm sorry but, I believe you are confusing facts of nature with facts of evolution. Organisms showing a limited ability within their environment to change doesn't demonstrate evolution. Fossil tell us that there hyas been mass extinction. Fossils are not found conveniently in obvious layers of rock. They are found randomly. They generally are found in groups that correspond to size and buoyancy. There is no accurate way of aging them. The genetics of genetic code show all kinds of relationships to one another. That doesn't prove they evolved from one another. I could argue that it proves that they came from the same designer. I would be wrong and so are you. Those observations prove neither.

That's why it's called the theory of evolution, because there's a theory of how it happens and a bunch of evidence, observations, predictions and confirmations, etc.. just like all other scientific theories.

Organisms showing a limited ability within their environment to change doesn't demonstrate evolution.

Any change in an organism is called evolution, that's the meaning of the word. You contend that changes stay within a species. There's no mechanism to stop those changes from crossing any artificial boundary (such as the species boundary). If your theory predicts that there is a way to stop these changes then its up to your theory to make predictions about what is to be found and to confirm those predictions. I haven't seen any such thing.

Fossil tell us that there hyas been mass extinction. Fossils are not found conveniently in obvious layers of rock. They are found randomly. They generally are found in groups that correspond to size and buoyancy.

In general incorrect. There has been mass extinctions, but none by a global flood. The amount of evidence for this provided by creationists is small, while the evidence provided by science is tremendous. The fossils aren't found randomly, they are extremely well sorted. (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-...html#georecord) This isn't evidence provided by one or two guys writing a book, it's evidence by tens of thousands of scientists, all operating independently, submitting their work to rigorously reviewed journals.

Never mind the non-biological evidence, fossil layers demonstrate the accuracy of the lunar cycles accounting for changes in the moon's distance over millions of years, as well as the earth spinning more quickly in the past (the moon saps the earth's rotational energy). All of the observations line up with astronomical predictions; kind of hard to do with a global flood.

There is no accurate way of aging them.

The relative age of strata was determined before evolution came along. Dating is a huge topic, a good resource is here: http://www.tim-thompson.com/radiometric.html

The genetics of genetic code show all kinds of relationships to one another. That doesn't prove they evolved from one another. I could argue that it proves that they came from the same designer.

No you couldn't. You claim that same forms AND different forms come from the same designer, so you can't use similar forms as evidence of a designer; that's simple logic. When does the intelligent designer use similar forms and when do they use different forms? ID should be able to predict when one is used and the other and then observe to confirm, but it doesn't or can't. Evolution has made that prediction, and what is observed similar and what is observed different matches what evolution predicts. That's scientific method.

Those observations prove neither.

Of course, there's no such thing as absolute proof. That's the difference between science and creationism. In creationism, the absolute answer is predetermined and the goal is to work backwards from observation to come to the desired answer.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

My ex-pastor's middle daughter just received her doctorate in immunology. She has endured professor who belittled her beliefs and has had to stay clear of others who would have failed her if they knew her beliefs. Yes some scientists ridicule religious people.

Just as some unnamed religious people on this forum ridicule non-religious. That doesn't have anything to do with science or evidence.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Who would fund such research? Not the government. The only funding one could get to fund the question of the possibility of intelligent design is from religious organizations. This happens on a small scale but, even then the research is ridiculed because of it's source rather then evaluated.

Well there's no lack of money in the church to fund that sort of thing. And there are plenty of journals that will accept anything on its merit; who cares if a scientist ridicules it. It's not a popularity contest! Publish good science and it gets published.

Or maybe the ridicule is there because the evidence is so conclusive that running against it is like saying you've made a perpetual motion machine. You can only deal with so many free energy quacks before it becomes tiresome and they all look the same.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

What the heck does that mean Azure? LOL...Isnt ATHEISM the lack of theism? So how do Atheists not fall into that quagmire?
Do you think Atheists sit around and preach to their children? Do you think we sit and have Kumbaya's with fellow Atheists?

Do you think theists sit around and preach to their children? Most theists I know...have allowed their children to figure out themselves what they believe.

Sure..its not right to force feed a child Christianity...but its a two way street...

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Sowa

Um no I didn't say every conflict ever was started by religion in fact I stated that money and race started conflict too. Don't put words in my mouth I was just stating that religion was another reason for conflict. I also didn't say that I supported a ban of religion.

oh and if you think that the cold war was a fight over guns and technology then you need to read some more books.

"Guns don't create conflict, religion does."

Your own words Sowa...don't call me a liar.

The Cold War had NOTHING to do with religion. Nothing. Same with all those proxy wars the US fought against the USSR..and vise versa.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Azure

Do you think theists sit around and preach to their children? Most theists I know...have allowed their children to figure out themselves what they believe.

Sure..its not right to force feed a child Christianity...but its a two way street...

I enjoy debating with you Azure...you are one of the better people on this board...but that post wasnt very accurate as far as Im concerned. Most theists do in fact teach their children their particular flavor of religion. Through, baptismals, communions, Sunday School, Camps, Bible studies etc etc etc the list goes on and on...children have no choice but to learn this stuff.
Atheists have none of the above...although there are some summer camps popping up teaching kids things like science.
I would suggest any theist who doesnt teach their kids their beliefs are not true theists in the 1st place. Perhaps agnostics with a capital A.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

I enjoy debating with you Azure...you are one of the better people on this board...but that post wasnt very accurate as far as Im concerned.

Different POV, I guess.

Most theists do in fact teach their children their particular flavor of religion. Through, baptismals, communions, Sunday School, Camps, Bible studies etc etc etc the list goes on and on...children have no choice but to learn this stuff.

Now you assume that theists automatically follow an organized religion. Which isn't exactly true. I do agree that Christian parents will take their children to church...sunday school, etc, etc....but if you understand religion...or Christianity for that matter...you'd know there is a whole lot more to that belief then just going to church.

Atheists have none of the above...although there are some summer camps popping up teaching kids things like science.
I would suggest any theist who doesnt teach their kids their beliefs are not true theists in the 1st place. Perhaps agnostics with a capital A.

Yet atheists can tell their children...there is no God..I don't believe in God...I won't tell you that a God 'could' exist..etc, etc. Just like a Christian can tell their kids...God is this...God is that.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Azure

Different POV, I guess.



Now you assume that theists automatically follow an organized religion. Which isn't exactly true. I do agree that Christian parents will take their children to church...sunday school, etc, etc....but if you understand religion...or Christianity for that matter...you'd know there is a whole lot more to that belief then just going to church.

Yet atheists can tell their children...there is no God..I don't believe in God...I won't tell you that a God 'could' exist..etc, etc. Just like a Christian can tell their kids...God is this...God is that.

Point #1 first...although organized religion is changing rapidly and numbers associated with organized religion is also falling...a 2001 study found...

52% of Americans identified themselves as Protestant.
24.5% are Roman Catholic.
1.3% are Jewish.
0.5% are Muslim, followers of Islam

14.1% do not follow any organized religion.

So based on the "actual" numbers...yep I do believe that the vast majority of theists follow an organized religion. That study does suggest that by 2042 non-christians will outnumber christians...but thats a ways away yet.

Religious ID

Now the 2nd point...There are literally hundreds of religions that dont believe in Gods as well....Im sure they tell their children they dont believe either. This is not a simple Atheist vs Christian topic.
An Atheist does not have to prove or disprove a God...we simply dont believe, so we dont get into the discussion. My kids rarely if ever bring home a religious topic unless its something a classmate brings up....but that something is usually trivial...like Noahs Ark, or Adam and Eve. My kids are living eyes wide open....they see those for the fairy tales they are.

Here is a good video...1 in a series of 6...find the other 5 if you like.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Having grown up in the church with hardcore christian parents this issue is close to me. I stopped going when I was 18 and have progressed to the point where I could never again believe in it.

For all those interested I think Nietzsche has some very interesting things to say about christianity, the psychological origins of it and things along those lines. The first couple essays in On The Geneology of Morals are fantastic, I'm actually surprised that Cheese has not posted some of Nietzsche's views, perhaps he is not familiar with them. A lot of his points hit home for me having grown up in the church.

I'm signed up to take a Humanities Critique of Religion class next semester and the focus will be on Christianity. The texts used will be Freud's Future of an Illusion, Feuerbach's Essence of Religion, the Marx-Engels reader and Nietzsche's Twilight of the Idols and Nietzsche's The Anti-christ. I'll be happy to let everyone know how it goes

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Azure

"Guns don't create conflict, religion does."

Your own words Sowa...don't call me a liar.

The Cold War had NOTHING to do with religion. Nothing. Same with all those proxy wars the US fought against the USSR..and vise versa.

I didn't say religion causes all conflict, but it does cause conflict... I don't understand how thats hard to understand especially since i went on to say money and race are two other things that cause conflict....

Here I will spell it out for you

Guns have not been a reason for war that I can think of... Religion has caused some wars..... Therefore religion causes conflict guns do not... By saying that I don't mean every war ever has been because of religion...

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Yes as a matter of fact he is the same guy? Why CBA? Do you disregard his findings because hes a scientist?

He's a Paleontologist; Not a social scientist.

What qualifications does he have that makes him better able to interpret statistical data than you or I?

Answer: None!

What motivation would cause him to leave his chosen field and attempt to compile other people's statistical data and make conclusions regarding the effect of Christianity on society?

Answer: He has the same hatred as you do for the Christian faith. Seems to run strong in you atheist types.

Why would Time magazine misrepresent this guys qualifications and publish his research?

Answer: They have had a history of bias against fundamental christianity. Perhaps their editor went to the same journalistic school as Dan Rather.

Why do you keep promoting this guy?

Answer: Because you Believe what he's saying is true.

Did this guy say compare data from China or Japan to that of America? How sure was he that the data was accurate? It's not uncommon to have nations under report violent crime. If you looked at the numbers of domestic abuse cases before 1960 in Canada or the United States you would find very few. That doesn't mean there wasn't a problem. What factor has easily available drugs and weak enforcement of drug laws had on crime in the United States?

Answers: I don't know and neither do you. But that won't matter. You like this guys findings and believe them with all your heart. I mean if you didn't you wouldn't be a positive Atheist. Keep the faith Cheese! Keep the Faith!

[Crazy Flamer]

I grew up in a religious family, and I still hold some fo the beliefs that were taught to me. But most of my friends will tell you I am one of the most liberal "religious" people they know. I even hesitate to use to use the word religion because I do not think it accurately describes my beliefs.

I also have a 5 year old son, and I believe I have the right to teach him what I like and share my beliefs with him. Is it brainwashing? NO! No more than it is to brainwash your kids to have manners. But while I choose to share my beliefs with my son, I also make a very conscious decision to tell him there is more than one way to see this world and I will be very mindful to encourage him to draw his own conclusions as he gets older.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Sowa

Guns have not been a reason for war that I can think of... Religion has caused some wars..... Therefore religion causes conflict guns do not... By saying that I don't mean every war ever has been because of religion...

No war at all?

US against North Korea...is about what? Nuclear weapons. An expansion of guns. Sure...there hasn't been any direct bloodshed...but things are certainly escalating.

Religion has caused many wars...but there are many, many other things...culture..weapons..technology...racism...e tc, etc...that have also led to conflicts.

[Azure]

14% is quite high Cheese...I didn't even know there were that many.

You obviously have a problem with parents influencing their children with a religious viewpoint. Maybe I have a problem with you influencing your children with an atheist viewpoint.

Like I said...two way street. Brings me back to my belief that both sides should be presented. Of course....not many people believe that...but I do.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

He's a Paleontologist; Not a social scientist.

What qualifications does he have that makes him better able to interpret statistical data than you or I?

Answer: None!

What motivation would cause him to leave his chosen field and attempt to compile other people's statistical data and make conclusions regarding the effect of Christianity on society?

Answer: He has the same hatred as you do for the Christian faith. Seems to run strong in you atheist types.

Why would Time magazine misrepresent this guys qualifications and publish his research?

Answer: They have had a history of bias against fundamental christianity. Perhaps their editor went to the same journalistic school as Dan Rather.

Why do you keep promoting this guy?

Answer: Because you Believe what he's saying is true.

Did this guy say compare data from China or Japan to that of America? How sure was he that the data was accurate? It's not uncommon to have nations under report violent crime. If you looked at the numbers of domestic abuse cases before 1960 in Canada or the United States you would find very few. That doesn't mean there wasn't a problem. What factor has easily available drugs and weak enforcement of drug laws had on crime in the United States?

Answers: I don't know and neither do you. But that won't matter. You like this guys findings and believe them with all your heart. I mean if you didn't you wouldn't be a positive Atheist. Keep the faith Cheese! Keep the Faith!

And your buddy Kent Hovind is what? A brain surgeon?

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Azure

14% is quite high Cheese...I didn't even know there were that many.

You obviously have a problem with parents influencing their children with a religious viewpoint. Maybe I have a problem with you influencing your children with an atheist viewpoint.

Like I said...two way street. Brings me back to my belief that both sides should be presented. Of course....not many people believe that...but I do.

So if its not a theist viewpoint then what is it? If we stop teaching children Christian or any other theistic dogma until they are of an age to fully comprehend anything, what would you call it?
You see the paradox here dont you?

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Azure

14% is quite high Cheese...I didn't even know there were that many.

You obviously have a problem with parents influencing their children with a religious viewpoint. Maybe I have a problem with you influencing your children with an atheist viewpoint.

Like I said...two way street. Brings me back to my belief that both sides should be presented. Of course....not many people believe that...but I do.

Id actually put it much higher....the church has a habit of calculating anyone that was baptised within its walls whether or not that person is still involved with them or not.
Id be willing to bet that its as high as 25% if not greater.

Other stuff...

The fastest growing religion (in terms of percentage) is Wicca -- a Neopagan religion that is sometimes referred to as Witchcraft.

There are more Americans who say they are not affiliated with any organized religion than there are Episcopalians, Methodists, and Lutherans taken together.

A USA Today/Gallup Poll in 2002-JAN showed that almost half of American adults appear to be alienated from organized religion. If current trends continue, most adults will not call themselves religious within a few years.

Some religions count every person that has been baptized into the denomination as a member. Many individuals change their religion later in life and thus may be double or triple-counted.

Some religions, like Christian Science and the Church of Satan have a policy of not releasing membership statistics to the public.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

So if its not a theist viewpoint then what is it? If we stop teaching children Christian or any other theistic dogma until they are of an age to fully comprehend anything, what would you call it?
You see the paradox here dont you?

Again...you can take your child to a Baptist church for 18 years...but what do they learn?

Eventually...each child needs to make a decision on their own. Same thing with atheism.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Id actually put it much higher....the church has a habit of calculating anyone that was baptised within its walls whether or not that person is still involved with them or not.
Id be willing to bet that its as high as 25% if not greater.

Could be.

Also...many people go to church somewhere...but don't exactly declare themselves Baptist/Catholic/etc, etc.

[Antithesis]

Ideally every person would be allowed to form their own thoughts and feelings on the issue of faith and belief. I hope to allow my future children this right ... if everyone were allowed to do this, it would probably lead to much more acceptance from both sides of this type of debate.

While I'm sure that its been discussed before, regarding the issue at hand, isn't Elton John's so-called musings on this matter just as exclusionary (if brought to their conclusion) as the 'anti-gay' beliefs of some faiths he is railing against? Kind of hypocritcal if you ask me.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by Cheese

So if its not a theist viewpoint then what is it? If we stop teaching children Christian or any other theistic dogma until they are of an age to fully comprehend anything, what would you call it?
You see the paradox here dont you?

I think what Azure means to say is that if you think parents should not teach their kids about God untill they are 18, parents also shouldn't tell their kids taht there isn't a God.