How i think about religion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeonGod

The best part of that is that without religion, there would be no real outlet for everyone to understand what "the right thing to do" really is. It might be able to work now, but only because religions have put their mark on moralism. Religion, is after, an expression of the beliefs of the society's people.

I disagree, however, as I'm sure people of other religions or cultures might. "All the good things taught by religion(sic)" aren't good to everyone, and neither are the bad things.

---

Moralism existed before Christianity and was unrelated to religion. I refer you the Platonic school of thought which in turn influenced Saint Augustine who made this so called moralism fit for Christianity.

Moralism itself is based on the emotional side of the brain unlike law-setting which is based on the logical side. I don't trust moralism and I never will. When I was a Christian I was a complete psychopath and thought killing people was OK, when I became an atheist I realized how wrong that would be because it is illigal. Isn't that ironic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uesugi Kenshin

People are already learning to live without it, at least in the West religion is losing ground quickly. Although the religious are getting fewer they seem to be getting louder and more "pious".

---

i don't know. america is still pretty religous

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

Moralism existed before Christianity and was unrelated to religion. I refer you the Platonic school of thought which in turn influenced Saint Augustine who made this so called moralism fit for Christianity.

Moralism itself is based on the emotional side of the brain unlike law-setting which is based on the logical side. I don't trust moralism and I never will. When I was a Christian I was a complete psychopath and thought killing people was OK, when I became an atheist I realized how wrong that would be because it is illigal. Isn't that ironic?

---

~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused: hmmm. ok what you want BP

I never said America was not still pretty religious, but church attendance is down a lot and a lot of people are either turning away from devout religious practices or becoming what I like to call apathetically religious, they are people who call themselves Christian or whatever but do not prectice the religion except a bit on holidays.

hmmm. agreed. (do i say anything else)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

Moralism existed before Christianity and was unrelated to religion. I refer you the Platonic school of thought which in turn influenced Saint Augustine who made this so called moralism fit for Christianity.

Moralism itself is based on the emotional side of the brain unlike law-setting which is based on the logical side. I don't trust moralism and I never will. When I was a Christian I was a complete psychopath and thought killing people was OK, when I became an atheist I realized how wrong that would be because it is illigal. Isn't that ironic?

---

lol And your Western thought process is revealed. I never said "Christianity" in that post. Religion has existed as long as moralism has. They're the same thing!

The logic in the second part of your post is a little bit wonky. "It's illegal, so it's wrong" isn't different from "god doesn't want me to do it, so it's wrong".

People can be moral without being religous, I assure you. Not saying that you said that they can't, but being religous does not make someone neccasarily moral, or being unreligious doesn't make someone immoral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

People can be moral without being religous, I assure you. Not saying that you said that they can't, but being religous does not make someone neccasarily moral, or being unreligious doesn't make someone immoral.

---

Indeed. But really, what purpose does religion serve if not to impose morals? A man who doesn't believe in Jehovah but still acts and thinks like a Nazarene is still a Nazarene.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeonGod

lol And your Western thought process is revealed. I never said "Christianity" in that post. Religion has existed as long as moralism has. They're the same thing!

---

I said Christianity because the Platonic influence. Plato lived in a time where Paganism was dominant, which means pretty much anything was moral. Ancient greeks had no morals at all until the philosophers came with their ideas of good and evil.
"The theologians Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and St. Augustine were early Christian exponents of a Platonic perspective. Platonic ideas have had a crucial role in the development of Christian theology and also in medieval Islamic thought"

Quote:

---

The logic in the second part of your post is a little bit wonky. "It's illegal, so it's wrong" isn't different from "god doesn't want me to do it, so it's wrong".

---

You don't know what god wants because he doesn't exist and never has, but the law does exist on a piece of paper and if you don't obey you really pay the concequences in this world, not an imaginery next one.

wooooooooh he has a point. but what about warfare. what's the difference of going to war to slaughter muslims and going to war to get some oil. in the dark ages religion could get people in a frenzy, today it is the socalled wish for freedom and democracy. but who are you to say that your vision is good for everyone. maybe those people don't want to a christ or live in a democratic country. that does not mean that if the situation is so bad that you can't do else than interupt (sp), you shouldn't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

I said Christianity because the Platonic influence. Plato lived in a time where Paganism was dominant, which means pretty much anything was moral. Ancient greeks had no morals at all until the philosophers came with their ideas of good and evil.
"The theologians Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and St. Augustine were early Christian exponents of a Platonic perspective. Platonic ideas have had a crucial role in the development of Christian theology and also in medieval Islamic thought"


You don't know what god wants because he doesn't exist and never has, but the law does exist on a piece of paper and if you don't obey you really pay the concequences in this world, not an imaginery next one.

---

How do you know they had no morals at all? There were still taboos and faux-pas within Pagan Greek society, perhaps more than other forms of Paganism because of the complex religious structure built up around their beliefs.

A written is a written law, regardless of "who" wrote it. The effect is the same: you obey the law or face certain penalties. Whether or not these penalties makes no difference. The idea behind the law is to discourage. By obeying a secular law, you are still accepting an imposed view of what is right and what is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeonGod

By obeying a secular law, you are still accepting an imposed view of what is right and what is wrong.

---

Then apparently you don't know what secular means.

Secular: not concerned with religion: not controlled by a religious body or concerned with religious or spiritual matters

There you have it. Ancient Greece having some taboos like anal sex between men(for exaple) doesn't make Plato's morality connected to any religious thought.

Anyways if you disagree so wholeheartidly with every thing I have to say then don't respond. The conversation is getting old and quite boring now.

ease BP chill out.

Ancient Greeks certaintly had morals before Plato, just as all people did from that time period Scythians to the Celts, regardless of their religon. People before and after also had morals.
Morals certiantly might not have been the same as today, but every society has a set of what's wrong or right, which may or may not be related to their religous beliefs.

Quote:

---

By obeying a secular law, you are still accepting an imposed view of what is right and what is wrong.

---

Agreed. By not doing drugs for the sole purpose that it is illegal, or not screwing a prostitute because it is illegal, or not cheating on a test because it is not allowed in school, you are accepting society's views that they are "bad".

Quote:

---

Indeed. But really, what purpose does religion serve if not to impose morals? A man who doesn't believe in Jehovah but still acts and thinks like a Nazarene is still a Nazarene.

---

It may have some religons purpose perhaps, but a relgion does not always impose morals, even on people regarded as pious. Crusaders and Jihadists were not always spring flowers. Some religous warriors were good, or at least tried to be, but being religous does not always make one into a wonderful moral person.

Quote:

---

By not doing drugs for the sole purpose that it is illegal, or not screwing a prostitute because it is illegal, or not cheating on a test because it is not allowed in school, you are accepting society's views that they are "bad".

---

No you're not. You might just not want to get punished.

OK, good point. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big King Sanctaphrax

No you're not. You might just not want to get punished.

---

And you would get punished because drugs are bad for your health and they are addictive. I don't need morality to figure that out. You pro-moralists are stretching it.

Quote:

---

And you would get punished because drugs are bad for your health and they are addictive. I don't need morality to figure that out. You pro-moralists are stretching it.

---

Pro moralists? ~:confused:
Sorry, not all illegal drugs are addictive, and a lot of legal things are just as bad for your health. It's because the government knows that the pharmecutical and tabacco and alchol companies that they get money from wouldn't be able to compete with other drugs.
I don't want to turn this into a drug agrument. It was a bad example, and I appologize. But don't say that the government care about the people, cause then it would outlaw cigaretes and alcohol as well, as well as never starting any wars.

And by outlawing drugs, they are attempting to enforce their morals on the people, who should not have to follow those morals if they choose not too. As Big King pointed out, even though someone doesn't do drugs, they might not agree that those drugs are neccasiarily immoral. However, that is the purpose of those particular laws: to impose the government's morality on the people.

All drugs no matter how addictive they are seriously affect your mental health. Therefore taking recreational drugs (any drug not used when told to by a doctor) will mess up the chemical balance in your brain and can leave you very out of it and messed up. I for one highly value my mind the way it is, clear. So I will not take alcohol or any other drug because when somebody is not sober they tend to do stupid stuff. The laws and their penalties are a secondary incentive to not take drugs.

Morals have always been around, they have just been in different forms. They have been around with or without religion. Even immoral people have some morals and moral people can lack certain morals, even the religious ones. For example my Grandfather on my mother's side was out having an affair with my current step-grandmother while my Grandmother was in a hospital dying of lung cancer. He took a trip to Florida with my step-grandmother when he knew his wife was dying. He is a devout Roman Catholic. Chrisitan morals win again.

wow we're miles of topic

Well I apologize. My point was that certaint laws attempt to enforce morality just as much as religous beliefs do.

Laws are not there to protect moral fabric of society. Laws are there to protect PEOPLE from harm. Look at gay rights, abortion, freedom of speach. All would be null and punishable by death if we lived ina theocracy. Look at Iran, perfect example of what a completely Christian state would be like.

Society is formed so that everyone can prosper and live peacefully in hapiness and laws are why that's even possible. Without laws, with just morals, we'll be back in the dark ages where people were hung for saying there's no god or that the Earth is round(I know, how christian of them).

Sorry, not all laws are there to protect people. Gambling anyone? How is that to protect anyone? Prosititution? People would be more protected if it was legal...
I won't add in drugs again, but many laws are only there to inforce the leader's morality onto the people. Not all of them are bad (outlawing animal sacrifice is good, even if it is based on certaint morals), but the fact is that some laws are indeed morality based.

Again you misconcive this. Prostitution is illigal because for one thing it spreads deseases, for another human society has a certain structure, which means two people have to get married eventually and create a family. How does prostitution fit into this?

Gambling is not illigal everywhere, I heard Las Vegas is doing pretty well. Well one reason to keep it illigal where you live is that gambling is addictive and destroys communities, nothing to do wht good and evil as far as I can see. I can't even find anything in the Bible that makes gambling immoral anyways so where did that idea spring in your head?

Quote:

---

(outlawing animal sacrifice is good, even if it is based on certaint morals)

---

Animal sacrifice being illigal is plain stupid. We kill billions if not trillions of animals for our own consuption every year. What's the difference, oh wait I know, one is based on the so called morality of "other" religions. :laugh:

Let me repost something to clarify things even more:

Laws are not there to protect moral fabric of society. Laws are there to protect PEOPLE from harm. Look at gay rights, abortion, freedom of speach. All would be null and punishable by death if we lived ina theocracy. Look at Iran, perfect example of what a completely Christian state would be like.

don't get mad BP. it looks like you fell oy your chair out of anger

Again I disagree strongly. Prostitution, if legal would be far safer, as they could check and work with the prostitutes to prevent diseases. Gambling is illegal only due to morality. It only adversley harms a few, and that is there fault. Besides, if someone is a gambling addict, they'll do it anyway.

Quote:

---

Animal sacrifice being illigal is plain stupid. We kill billions if not trillions of animals for our own consuption every year. What's the difference, oh wait I know, one is based on the so called morality of "other" religions.

---

Perhaps. But anyone that sacrifices animals in this day and age is a monster, just as anyone that tortures animals for fun. Is my view of this based on my Christian upbriging? Probably. It doesn't mean that the law isn't neccasary, or that the law, like other is based on morality.

And I saw your post the first time, thank you.

Quote:

---

Prostitution, if legal would be far safer, as they could check and work with the prostitutes to prevent diseases.

---

Hypothetically. What about my family, societal structure argument?

Quote:

---

Is my view of this based on my Christian upbriging? Probably. It doesn't mean that the law isn't neccasary, or that the law, like other is based on morality.

---

The reason the law is there is because of those insane PETA animal rights lobbyists not for any other reason. Again that goes back to human rights, except PETA people think animals are equal to man and therefore we have this stupid law.

Prostitution is not illegal everywhere...

The reason it is illegal almost everywhere may originally be because of religious morals, but it also spreads disease and promotes the subjagation of (mostly) women.

just as using drugs............ HOLLAND

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

Perhaps. But anyone that sacrifices animals in this day and age is a monster, just as anyone that tortures animals for fun. Is my view of this based on my Christian upbriging? Probably. It doesn't mean that the law isn't neccasary, or that the law, like other is based on morality.

And I saw your post the first time, thank you.

---

what are meaning when you say sacrifise. OK when you torture a animal for fun you should really question yourself who's the beast. but (if you're not a vegetarian) you also eat meat. ok some things they do are wrong. but why are you a monster when you provide food for millions. if you were starving you wouldn't care where the meat came from. it just have to come.

there is no big diffrence between slaughtering a cow with millions at a time or just one. People say it's terrible what they do to these animals. but in the meen (sp?) they just sit in their villas and eat kaviar. while people on the other side of the globe (or just downtown) are starving. and what are those christians doing for those. yeah anual fundraising. but nobody has the guts to go there and see for theirself.