2248 replies to this topic

[Dohregard]

I'm sorry but I honestly don't think there is anything insulting about what I just said. Maybe some people will interpret me attacking ideas as attacking them, but it's just cognitive dissonance setting in and I can't avoid that. From the perspective of people with no dissonance I don't think I was even slightly insulting. And ultimately my aim is to try to to move people past the stage of dissonance and shed their condradictory ideas so they will feel harmony.

Agreed, but you catch the most flies with honey

Religious beliefs especially get a free ride where I believe they should not. Like political ideas or suchlike, religion should be subject to discussion too.

Big difference here, though I agree too an extent.

Political beliefs can be argued because everything about them is in the now, are usually tangible and have the ability to play out to one person being a victor. Religious beliefs are a lot more personable, in my opinion. Its like making fun of someone's acne or the color of their skin.... just a little easier to change.

Still though, religion is a great topic for discussion.

[dvide]

Political beliefs can be argued because everything about them is in the now, are usually tangible and have the ability to play out to one person being a victor. Religious beliefs are a lot more personable, in my opinion. Its like making fun of someone's acne or the color of their skin.... just a little easier to change.

Still though, religion is a great topic for discussion.

I agree but I think it differs from skin colour in that it 1) matters (ie beliefs matter, they can guide actions and lifestyles) 2) only feels 'personal' because of indoctrination, one is taught not to look at the matter critically.

Generally, I'd say besides the fact that I feel that all matter in the universe is connected to the same fate I'm quite aware that there is no afterlife.

I think that the only way there could be "absolute truth" is that if all possible variables have happened in one universe or the other, so I feel that all universes share an interdependency as well, so Its not like a "god" so much as a delicate formula.

I feel like the universe is itself if one giant organism in a sense, and us as sentient life are kind of the brain of it all. Exploring everything that it has to offer in a since to discover exactly how it all works.

As for this I'm not sure what it has to do with my quote above it, but ok.

[Dohregard]

I agree but I think it differs from skin colour in that it 1) matters (ie beliefs matter, they can guide actions and lifestyles) 2) only feels 'personal' because of indoctrination, one is taught not to look at the matter critically

Going Allegory of the Cave, eh?

That's something to think about. When I was about 12 I started noticing a lot about my Methodist/Baptist upbringing and how it seemed to contradict itself a lot.

"Love everyone... except if they don't believe in Jesus..."

That was the biggest one that took me from Christianity. I felt that just because they believe in something else isn't a justifiable reason to damn them to hell.

But on the flip side I've seen other people who start looking inward at their beliefs and they get stronger.. which is awesome, but I feel their is a line when religion becomes a weapon vs. a tool to help cope with the world.

Some people (such as yourself) don't need this tool. I don't really need it myself, though I just love rolling the ideas of my beliefs around in my head, because it makes since to me.

[dvide]

Going Allegory of the Cave, eh?

That's something to think about. When I was about 12 I started noticing a lot about my Methodist/Baptist upbringing and how it seemed to contradict itself a lot.

"Love everyone... except if they don't believe in Jesus..."

That was the biggest one that took me from Christianity. I felt that just because they believe in something else isn't a justifiable reason to damn them to hell.

But on the flip side I've seen other people who start looking inward at their beliefs and they get stronger.. which is awesome, but I feel their is a line when religion becomes a weapon vs. a tool to help cope with the world.

Some people (such as yourself) don't need this tool. I don't really need it myself, though I just love rolling the ideas of my beliefs around in my head, because it makes since to me.

Exactly. I think it is a good thing you did realise you are more moral than the God of Christianity.

But I would extend the analogy further and say religion is not a just any tool, but Dumbo's magic feather (from the disney movie) His magic feather, though a useful tool at first in establishing his confidence, was really just a plain old feather. How awesome is it when dumbo realises he can fly without it? That is what it felt like to me in becoming an atheist and sceptic.

Now I don't really think the feather is required, so don't get me wrong. I think we can teach children to be critical thinkers and happy and ethical without the need for lies. Dangerous lies even, in that many people unfortunately go on believing in the magic feather their entire life. And as you say, the feather can turn into a weapon that ultimatey acts against their own humanity.

[Extracheez]

Going Allegory of the Cave, eh?

That's something to think about. When I was about 12 I started noticing a lot about my Methodist/Baptist upbringing and how it seemed to contradict itself a lot.

"Love everyone... except if they don't believe in Jesus..."

That was the biggest one that took me from Christianity. I felt that just because they believe in something else isn't a justifiable reason to damn them to hell.

But on the flip side I've seen other people who start looking inward at their beliefs and they get stronger.. which is awesome, but I feel their is a line when religion becomes a weapon vs. a tool to help cope with the world.

Some people (such as yourself) don't need this tool. I don't really need it myself, though I just love rolling the ideas of my beliefs around in my head, because it makes since to me.

It was kinda similar for me. When I was wondering who and who does not go to heaven I kept reading shit, over here it would say everyone goes to heaven so long as you believe in jesus but then over here it would be like oh you go to hell for this. It seemed like there was a bunch of rules stating what would make us go to hell, then all of a sudden people were missreading other parts just so say noone would go to heaven if they just believe in jesus... It seemed a bit iffy to me.

[dvide]

Just to expand on my own upbringing a little, because some people have asked, I was actually brought up in what I can only describe as a cult now:
The Divine Light Mission

Although I don't really believe any of the ideas promoted by this cult were particulary harmful to me or my family, compared to other cults. But my family would almost literally worship Prem Rewat (The 'Perfect Master') and kiss his feet and shit like that when he would visit my country (UK). It never really settled well for me, but I used to try to accept it and imitated medidating like my parents would do sometimes

I used to believe in God too to an extent, even formed what we called 'The God Squad' with my friends (lmao) though only briefly until I started looking for sources that could articulate my internal feelings of doubt a little better than I could at the time.

[Smiley451]

My, my. There sure are a lot of atheists on here. It seems to me that your reasons are valid, to an extent.
There's a lot of conflict amongst religious people when it comes to interpreting their religion and book, and god, and so on. This gets really annoying because it causes division in a group that is meant to unite people under a common belief. I've encountered a lot of Christians who, in my mind, take it the wrong way.

<<<like this guy

To my, that guy is REALLY misinterpreting the words of the Bible. And he's giving christianity a bad name at the same time. But seriously, watch it. It's really amusing.
People who run into Christians and decide they don't want any part of that seem like they always run into "the wrong type" of Christians. By that I mean not my type of Christians. Do I sound like a bigot yet?
But seriously, it's annoying because people become atheists after witnessing a sect/or whatever of a religion that even I think takes it the wrong way. When that happens I think if that person would listen to my take on it, they would change their mind.
Basically, I'm saying that if you encounter a group of religious people that you totally disagree with, chances are that even people in that religion disagree with them, too.



also, Dvide, you keep saying that waiting to be married before having sex is a bad thing, that it's stupid, that its cultish, and so on.

wtf????????

how is sharing sex with the person you love most in the world and will spend your life with a bad thing? It makes your marriage stronger, it makes it that much more special, it makes you love each other more, it makes sex something more than a commodity.

[dvide]

also, Dvide, you keep saying that waiting to be married before having sex is a bad thing, that it's stupid, that its cultish, and so on.

wtf????????

how is sharing sex with the person you love most in the world and will spend your life with a bad thing? It makes your marriage stronger, it makes it that much more special, it makes you love each other more, it makes sex something more than a commodity.

I wasn't really saying it is a bad thing, or a stupid thing. But it's certainly not a 'good thing'. How can it be a good thing if you look at it rationally? And yes I think it is cultish in the sense that people are made to feel guilty and shameful about it... guilt tripped into sacrificing a wonderful part of their humanity for no good reason. Why wait? What is the reason for waiting? And by reason I literally mean reason i.e. logic. For I see none. Why not wait until marriage before you both eat your first bars of chocolate together too? Like chocolate, sex isn't magic. It's sensual, and it wont somehow taste better if you arbitrarily wait.

I'm not saying you should have sex with anyone and everyone, and by all means you should wait until you are both ready and willing, but to arbitrarily wait until a random time makes no sense. Feel no pressure from anyone but yourself to have it, and don't feel guilty for doing so when it comes along.

In all honestly I'm against marriage too. What purpose does it serve? Contracts etc are fine by me, by all means, but I don't need religion or the government to validate or officially recognise my intention to be with somebody. That doesn't make any sense to me. I don't see what calling yourself 'married' actually accomplishes. Though I am probably alone on this... I've never found many who agree with me on that one.

[Dohregard]

In all honestly I'm against marriage too. What purpose does it serve? Contracts etc are fine by me, by all means, but I don't need religion or the government to validate or officially recognise my intention to be with somebody. That doesn't make any sense to me. I don't see what calling yourself 'married' actually accomplishes. Though I am probably alone on this... I've never found many who agree with me on that one.

from a Governmental standpoint it makes a lot of since. You get a tax cut and a bigger incentive when you start popping out kids (at least in this country)

But ya, other than that I don't think there is a NEED to be married... but I still wish too at some point in my life.

[dvide]

from a Governmental standpoint it makes a lot of since. You get a tax cut and a bigger incentive when you start popping out kids (at least in this country)

What I mean is that this something I don't think should be the case. I think people should be free to get 'married', obviously, but only as a private mutual contract. And people should also be free to perform any religious ceremonies they wish... for me it would be none at all. I just don't think it should be any of the government's business.

[Smiley451]

So basically, you're saying that 2 people should declare themselves married, through personal and private means? With no legal stuff involved?
That's cool in my books. I don't really get the point of being legally married either. I don't know much about law and so forth, but my guess is that it has a lot to do with bank accounts, pensions, retirement funds, insurance, and that kind of thing.

A logical reason to wait for marriage before sex is that it will make your marriage a lot stronger, and increase your relationship and love between each other. I'm assuming that's not a good reason for you, but it's certainly a good reason for me.

[dvide]

A logical reason to wait for marriage before sex is that it will make your marriage a lot stronger, and increase your relationship and love between each other. I'm assuming that's not a good reason for you, but it's certainly a good reason for me.

It wouldn't make my relationship stronger. I don't think knowledge of my partners virginity or otherwise would have any effect on my feelings towards her. But you make a good point I guess, that might matter to some people.

But what if you are together as virgins for many years (say 10) before you actually get married? Is waiting intended to strengthen the 'marriage' once it comes, or the relationship? Because to me 'marriage' is just a word that doesn't really accomplish anything. Why wait to strengthen something that doesn't really exist? A figment of human concept. If it is to strengenth the relationship, well, you're already in a relationship before getting married. So what difference does it make to wait until you arbitrarily declare 'WE ARE MARRIED YAY' ?

[Smiley451]

But what if you are together as virgins for many years (say 10) before you actually get married? Is waiting intended to strengthen the 'marriage' once it comes, or the relationship? Because to me 'marriage' is just a word that doesn't really accomplish anything. Why wait to strengthen something that doesn't really exist? A figment of human concept. If it is to strengenth the relationship, well, you're already in a relationship before getting married. So what difference does it make to wait until you arbitrarily declare 'WE ARE MARRIED YAY' ?

I'm a bit confused, but I'll do my best to answer.

The point of a marriage is to say that I'm committing myself to this person, and this person alone. We'll live our lives together, love each other, help each other, and so on and so on. Here's the difference between a marriage and a relationship. A marriage is meant to last forever. A relationship is 2 people loving each other, but not completely committed to each other. They can still break up and fall in love with other people. Obviously, you can do that in a marriage too. But a marriage is meant to last, and you should do your best to keep it together. If you're in a relationship, you're still independent from each other. In a marriage, you become one entity. That's might also be a reason why there's the legal side to it.

I know I'm probably not answering your question very well, but do you sort of get what I mean?

[dvide]

I'm a bit confused, but I'll do my best to answer.

The point of a marriage is to say that I'm committing myself to this person, and this person alone. We'll live our lives together, love each other, help each other, and so on and so on. Here's the difference between a marriage and a relationship. A marriage is meant to last forever. A relationship is 2 people loving each other, but not completely committed to each other. They can still break up and fall in love with other people. Obviously, you can do that in a marriage too. But a marriage is meant to last, and you should do your best to keep it together. If you're in a relationship, you're still independent from each other. In a marriage, you become one entity. That's might also be a reason why there's the legal side to it.

I know I'm probably not answering your question very well, but do you sort of get what I mean?

You said it yourself, married people can and do break up too. I just don't see how because you are married it means you should strive any harder to keep it together than you did 10 minutes before you were married. If you are in an abusive marriage you should walk away, not cling on to it for the sake of the marriage. You are important, not the marriage.

If you want to mutually agree to share assets, sure thing... get a contract and it is sorted. You're free to form whatever unions you want. If you want to declare your undying love for one another, do it to one another. There is nothing stopping you. I just guess I would never consider it necessary to get married in order to declare to anyone else that I wish to spend my live with someone. It especially doesn't require governments and preists acknowledgment. And when it does require their acknowledgment you get bullshit like bans on gay marriage. So I guess because the government doesn't recognise gay couples they should not ever commit themselves to their partner? What the hell business is it of the government to say that?

The only person I should definitely declare my intentions to is my partner, if I so wish to be with her forever. But if my partner starts to despise me after a few years... yeah.. I'm going to end it because it's not healthy. I'm never going to just try to keep it together for the sake of it, married or otherwise.

And you know what I don't even limit this to 2 person couples. If three or four or any number of people in a polyamorous relationship want to mutually get 'married' and share assets they should do so. As I say they are free to form whatever mutual unions they want. I still don't see what calling themselves 'married' actually accomplies, but if they just wanted to declare their intention to remain a polyamorous relationship forever then what's stopping them? Obviously just because the government doesn't recognise them as a legitimate single entity (like gays), who cares? It doesn't stop them from living a happy life together.

[some dude]

I'm a bit confused, but I'll do my best to answer.

The point of a marriage is to say that I'm committing myself to this person, and this person alone. We'll live our lives together, love each other, help each other, and so on and so on. Here's the difference between a marriage and a relationship. A marriage is meant to last forever. A relationship is 2 people loving each other, but not completely committed to each other. They can still break up and fall in love with other people. Obviously, you can do that in a marriage too. But a marriage is meant to last, and you should do your best to keep it together. If you're in a relationship, you're still independent from each other. In a marriage, you become one entity. That's might also be a reason why there's the legal side to it.

I know I'm probably not answering your question very well, but do you sort of get what I mean?

chances are that no matter how much you love the person you marry, there will always be somebody else in the world that is a better match for you. sound familiar? it should (clerks 2 lol)

if two people love each other, then by all means they should be able to marry each other. they say "you can't help who you fall in love with". i really hate the view most religions take on divorce. especially in the case of the middle east, where the women will be disowned from their families and lose everything they have, including their children, if they decide to divorce their husbands. if you read the book "my feudal lord" it talks about a muslim women who put her life on the line to protect her children. she was locked in a marriage to an abusive husband (by abusing i mean he almost pistolwhipped her to death) who was cheating on her with her 15 year old sister. i just cant approve of that kind of a restraint in marriage.

and the argument against gay marriage is frankly, pathetic. if a man and a woman hate each other, they can get married anyway, but if two men or two women love each other more than life itself, they still cant get married? what kind of retarded logic is that?

[Smiley451]

As far as gay marriage goes, I just fundamentally think its wrong. I think humans were made to be together man and woman. Man and man, or woman and woman just takes that and destroys it. But there's already a thread for that.

I don't think that the bible says getting a divorce is wrong. I hope it doesn't, because if you don't love someone, you shouldn't have to live with them. And by the bible saying a divorce is wrong, I mean it blatantly says its wrong. A lot of religious folks take passages from their book and exaggerate them, and say "See, divorce is wrong!" But I have yet to find a passage in the bible that actually says its wrong.

Think about it this way. You can buy stocks in a company. This means you think the company is good, and you want to be a part of it. You think it has potential and you hope it works out. But if that company starts to preform poorly, or if you plain old don't want to be a part of it anymore, you can just sell your shares and be done with it. Now suppose you found a company of your own. You own and run the company, and you've dedicated decades of your life to its success. If it starts to not do well you aren't just going to sell the company or declare bankruptcy. You're going to do everything in your power to keep the company from failing, and set it back on the path of success.
That's how I see the difference between relationships and marriage.

[anatomy187]

hmmm so much for the christian belief of the omnipotent god...

my point about jesus was that hes a god and he founded a religion. You'd think if god made the religion, the religion would never change and never be corrupt, because it is the righteous way and god will always passively (since he never actually publically shows up to fix things) push it towards the good. If a religion founded by a god isnt that great, why would a religion founded by humans be any better?

By that logic than since God created everyone than everyone should be doing exactly what is right to begin with and never be corrupted. God gave the ability of free will, and the option to spend eternal life with Him...nothing on earth is free of corruption, including church. Obviously if God was interested in 'pushing' things toward good than he would step in and stop things like cancer and natural disasters, let alone worry about what path a religion is taking when part about said religion is having faith that God exists without needing to see proof by God actually interacting with things.

Not everyone sees things this way but imo God or no God he doesn't intervene into anything. If you believe in something like the divine plan then everything was decided a long time ago so he has no need to step in and guide anything, everything is already decided the way He wanted it to be, or possibly He didn't actually make a plan but just knows what is going to happen.

And I don't necessarily believe any of this stuff, I just like to be Devil's Advocate.

[dvide]

As far as gay marriage goes, I just fundamentally think its wrong. I think humans were made to be together man and woman. Man and man, or woman and woman just takes that and destroys it. But there's already a thread for that.

What did Jesus have to say about this? For what I am aware, nothing at all. So now who is counting Old Testament law? Didn't you dismiss it earlier? I guess you're cool with slavery too, as the old testament clearly endorses it and Jesus doesn't condemn it.

But actually I don't care to know what you simply believe in, but more why you believe it and why you think I should too. It doesn't make any difference stating the Bible is a fact. You simply lose me and most others at the first premise, and all other arguments fail epicly from there. Maybe any good moral lessons it holds is coincidental because human beings wrote it and just falsely attributed their own good will to God's absolute law. It also contains a lot of moral dictates that would not be acceptable to anybody anymore. But I'm going in circles, I've already said this. The last time I asked you why you accept the Bible you simply asked me why I do not.. bzzt time out ... you fail.

As for divorce I think we're sort of in agreement, it's just that I don't see the need to declare my intention to anybody other than my partner. When you buy stocks in a company it's a private transaction (and if there are examples where it is not so, it should be). I'm not talking about public vs private companies so please nobody even go there. I'm saying it should be a 100% private transaction, i.e. not public in the sense of the government having anything to do with it. Founding a company is also a private operation (or should be), trading on the free market doesn't require official recognition in any consensual mutual transaction.

And as an atheist, I deem the religious side to marriage unnecessery. I just guess with all that is left (a contract to allocate assets) I just don't know if you can really call it a marriage anymore.

[Starblaiz]

As for divorce I think we're sort of in agreement, it's just that I don't see the need to declare my intention to anybody other than my partner. When you buy stocks in a company it's a private transaction (and if there are examples where it is not so, it should be). I'm not talking about public vs private companies so please nobody even go there. I'm saying it should be a 100% private transaction, i.e. not public in the sense of the government having anything to do with it. Founding a company is also a private operation (or should be), trading on the free market doesn't require official recognition in any consensual mutual transaction.

And as an atheist, I deem the religious side to marriage unnecessery. I just guess with all that is left (a contract to allocate assets) I just don't know if you can really call it a marriage anymore.

I would like to pick up on this one and say I whole heartedly agree. Personally, I don't see why you need a piece of paper and a big ceramony to say you love someone. If God truly is everywhere and is all-knowing, then he knows how much you care for eachother anyway, so marriage is just showing off to everyone and saying "hay, look at us, we have lots of monies!"

I think marrage should stay where it belongs - in religion. I think it's wrong that you get special tax cuts and other assorted but unrelated advantages just because you signed a piece of paper that somehow makes your feelings "official". It's really an outdated concept and shouldn't be put up on a pedistal like it is in the modern world. Those are my thoughts on the situation.

[Myth]

By that logic than since God created everyone than everyone should be doing exactly what is right to begin with and never be corrupted. God gave the ability of free will, and the option to spend eternal life with Him...nothing on earth is free of corruption, including church. Obviously if God was interested in 'pushing' things toward good than he would step in and stop things like cancer and natural disasters, let alone worry about what path a religion is taking when part about said religion is having faith that God exists without needing to see proof by God actually interacting with things.

Not everyone sees things this way but imo God or no God he doesn't intervene into anything. If you believe in something like the divine plan then everything was decided a long time ago so he has no need to step in and guide anything, everything is already decided the way He wanted it to be, or possibly He didn't actually make a plan but just knows what is going to happen.

And I don't necessarily believe any of this stuff, I just like to be Devil's Advocate.

Which is one of countless contradictions of christianity. That supports my claim.