What people see in religion

Post by **AdmiralKanos** » 2002-07-29 01:07am

John wrote:I never said it sprang from morality, only self interest.

Of course not, since you claim there is no morality apart from self-interest. Whoops; you contradicted yourself.

Darth Wong wrote:No. You are wasting time with strawman distortions. It is possible to be rude without being immoral. It is possible to be unhygienic without being immoral. It is possible to break the law without being immoral.
As your wife's grandparent's did when they rejected you arbitraily?

My wife's grandparents are immoral for being racists. Racism is immoral because it engenders discrimination and hatred and in some cases, violence. It impedes the healthy functioning of human society by creating pointless conflict. This has nothing to do with being rude, unhygienic, or illegal.

Darth Wong wrote:You do know that this is a fallacy, right?
I don't. Please explain.

I already have. If you can't understand the black/white fallacy even after having its shortcomings pointed out, look it up.

As far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter how right you are...if I win, you were wrong.

This is the most fucked-up, illogical thing I've ever heard. I can be right but I'm still wrong because you declare yourself the winner? What the fuck ...?

John · Post by **John** » 2002-07-29 09:06am

Of course not, since you claim there is no morality apart from self-interest. Whoops; you contradicted yourself.

All morality derives, ultimately, from self interest. Why do you deny that?

My wife's grandparents are immoral for being racists. Racism is immoral because it engenders discrimination and hatred and in some cases, violence.

So does being a soccer fan. Does that mean being a soccer fan is immoral? Why do you even care that they didn't approve? They couldn't stop you from marrying so why does it even matter to you what they think of you, or why they think it?

I already have. If you can't understand the black/white fallacy even after having its shortcomings pointed out, look it up.

I will.

This is the most fucked-up, illogical thing I've ever heard. I can be right but I'm still wrong because you declare yourself the winner? What the fuck ...?

Did the Nazis lose the Second World War because they were evil? Or because they were weak? They thought they were right. They were sure of it. But they lost, so they were 'wrong'. If they had won, they would have been 'right', because the winner gets to right the history books. In the US civil war, the Union said states did not have the right to seccede, the Conferacy said they did. The Union won, so they were 'right'. In Vietnam, we said the communists were wrong to try and rule the whole country. They disagreed. We lost. They were right, and we were wrong.
I don't go in for that 'declaring victory' crap. Saddam Hussein is proof that you can get the crap kicked out of you, 'declare victory' and not only believe it yourself, but have others believe you as well. Sheer self delusion. You and I will (likely) never come to blows over this, so we will never know for sure which of us is 'right'.

Out of curiousity, why do you have two identities on the boards?.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-29 09:30am

John wrote:
Of course not, since you claim there is no morality apart from self-interest. Whoops; you contradicted yourself.
All morality derives, ultimately, from self interest. Why do you deny that?

My wife's grandparents are immoral for being racists. Racism is immoral because it engenders discrimination and hatred and in some cases, violence.
So does being a soccer fan. Does that mean being a soccer fan is immoral? Why do you even care that they didn't approve? They couldn't stop you from marrying so why does it even matter to you what they think of you, or why they think it?

I already have. If you can't understand the black/white fallacy even after having its shortcomings pointed out, look it up.
I will.
This is the most fucked-up, illogical thing I've ever heard. I can be right but I'm still wrong because you declare yourself the winner? What the fuck ...?
Did the Nazis lose the Second World War because they were evil? Or because they were weak? They thought they were right. They were sure of it. But they lost, so they were 'wrong'. If they had won, they would have been 'right', because the winner gets to right the history books. In the US civil war, the Union said states did not have the right to seccede, the Conferacy said they did. The Union won, so they were 'right'. In Vietnam, we said the communists were wrong to try and rule the whole country. They disagreed. We lost. They were right, and we were wrong.
I don't go in for that 'declaring victory' crap. Saddam Hussein is proof that you can get the crap kicked out of you, 'declare victory' and not only believe it yourself, but have others believe you as well. Sheer self delusion. You and I will (likely) never come to blows over this, so we will never know for sure which of us is 'right'.

Out of curiousity, why do you have two identities on the boards?.

Ah yes, the old saying: The winner defines what is right and what is wrong.

Well, regardless of wether nazi germany had won or not, it's ideologies were still wrong if you regard them with a certain set of moral standards in mind, from a certain point of view (humanism, for example).

The victorious often goes and changes the moral set to justify his actions and make them seem right.
But if regarded from the other moral mindset they're still wrong.

As for the soccer issue:

This example is an completely unsuited comparison for racism.
As a side note, normal soccer fans don't hate each other. It's the hooligans, not normal soccer fans, who beat each others up, and that in fact is immoral.

But the main point is: soccer is about two rivaling groups. group 1 fights group 2 in a game, but it's still a fight. The competition is where hostilites between the two fan groups originate.
Now there is no such thing as a fight of some sort between the human races where those hostile sentiments could originate from (such as a soccer game between black and white people, for example).

Tosho · Post by **Tosho** » 2002-07-29 09:54am

Nice link. my top 3 results are Sikhism 100% Jainism 95% and hinduism 94%. personally I identify with Mahayana Buddhism.One more thing, That "Questionaire" is Almost a carbon copy of beleifnet's Belief-O-matic.

http://about.beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

Nick · Post by **Nick** » 2002-07-29 10:53am

Tosho wrote:Nice link. my top 3 results are Sikhism 100% Jainism 95% and hinduism 94%. personally I identify with Mahayana Buddhism.One more thing, That "Questionaire" is Almost a carbon copy of beleifnet's Belief-O-matic.

http://about.beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

*shrug* No idea - someone's probably stealing from someone though, given neither of them acknowledge the existence of the other, or of some common source :> (That such a thing would ever happen on the Web, tsk, tsk, tsk. . . *g*)

Actually, the link you provide seems to display a little better in Mozilla - the ads on the original link seemed to be messing up the page display.

If anyone had failed to guess, I register as 100% secular humanist (and 0% Jehovah's Witness -yay!)

Meghel · Post by **Meghel** » 2002-07-29 11:06am

100% Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants.

99% Islam
99% Orthodox Judaism
97% Reform Judaism

Nothing unexpected here.

Meghel

Dralan · Post by **Dralan** » 2002-07-29 04:41pm

1. Nontheist (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (100%)

hmm... interesting test.

lgot · Post by **lgot** » 2002-07-30 12:34am

So does being a soccer fan. Does that mean being a soccer fan is immoral? Why do you even care that they didn't approve? They couldn't stop you from marrying so why does it even matter to you what they think of you, or why they think it?

This is very silly.
What makes racism be immoral in our society is pure and simple racism.
Now, being a soccer fan ? A hooligan or those others who transform a sport in a battle for life are not "soccer fans", but a particular minority. And yes they are immoral. See the difference ?
The thing is moral is as much arbritary as language. You do not choose, you are born in a society with such vallues and you have to grow up with them. But there it ends. You are free to leave it - because there is another groups that you may fit in better - to break it - often the group will punish you for it but breaking a moral code may bring up changes on this moral code as the society changes. Moral codes are a development of different societies and groups, not the work of a lonely individual. And almost everything in human society have a moral code.

Did the Nazis lose the Second World War because they were evil? Or because they were weak? They thought they were right. They were sure of it. But they lost, so they were 'wrong'. If they had won, they would have been 'right', because the winner gets to right the history books.

Only bad history books.
Cortez won his invasion for all Central America. Which books we see tell about him being right ?
Brasil, Argentina and Uruguay destroyed Paraguay in the end of last century. Where does it say they are right ?
People said americans are wrong in the Vietna, Before the War was over and lost. People still argument if the H-Bombs are correct, World War Victory or not.
The victory in a war does not make the loser changes it moral code because the other was "better". Look up the China-Nepal stuff. Does they changed their moral costumes because they are crushed ? Look the early christians - they are not winners, but they moral code was the one who survived.
A moral code is accepted by a society as long new conflicts bring new arguments, solutions and slowly changing the moral, not by war.

XPViking · Post by **XPViking** » 2002-07-30 03:14am

What I fail to understand is that many of you take extreme examples (Stalin, Hitler, Andrea Yates, etc...) and somehow believe that such a person is representative of all atheists or all Christians if you will. - XPViking

Will you ever get tired of this goddamned strawman? They are used as examples of how and why a specific belief can be used to justify atrocities. They are not used as generalizations about all Christians. - Darth Wong

My apologies for not stating earlier that I misunderstood the context of those quotes in that particular situation.

XPViking

C.S.Strowbridge · Post by **C.S.Strowbridge** » 2002-07-30 04:41pm

Darth Wong wrote:I got 100% secular humanism. No big surprise there.

Same here. I also got 0% Jehovah's Witness, which should convince them not to come here any more, but I know it won't.

I'm also 42% Reform Judaism, so maybe I should convert to Extremely Reformed Jew. Which is an Atheist who says 'Oi, Vai!' a lot.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2002-07-31 07:03pm

100% secular humanist.

It is possible to break the law without being immoral.

True. As an example I will use the state of Idaho(a place I will never go)

In Idaho sodomy(In all forms) is Illegal with a max penalty of life in prison(funny how in practicing my sexual orientation in Idaho Iam more of a menace to society than a serial rapist) I however am not an imoral person.

I dont lie(unless it is absolutly necessary) I dont steal(unless i must too survive, which has never come up) and i dont kill people or commitrape or other such crimes.

yet in Idaho I would be locked behind bars for the rest of my life for being born gay.

Yes that was a bit of a rant.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-31 07:17pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote: True. As an example I will use the state of Idaho(a place I will never go). In Idaho sodomy(In all forms) is Illegal with a max penalty of life in prison(funny how in practicing my sexual orientation in Idaho Iam more of a menace to society than a serial rapist) I however am not an imoral person.

Not to me, and as far as I can tell, not to the majority of the people on this board. However, there are obviously a lot of people in Idaho who think that you are. The fact that their intolerance of "victimless crimes" such as sodomy makes them immoral is an irony that is naturally lost on them.

I find the use of anti-sodomy laws to discourage homosexuality quite laughable. As a gay person you may not be aware of this, but I can tell you that 90% of heterosexual porn involves anal sex nowadays. Guys love to watch videos of girls taking it up the backdoor. Even in so-called "couples porn", anal sex is quite common. And who hasn't heard Howard Stern wax poetic over the joys of anal sex?

Frankly, whenever I hear a guy saying that he has no curiosity about what it would feel like to greek his wife or girlfriend, I always suspect that he's lying.

I dont lie(unless it is absolutly necessary) I dont steal(unless i must too survive, which has never come up) and i dont kill people or commit rape or other such crimes.

yet in Idaho I would be locked behind bars for the rest of my life for being born gay.

Yes that was a bit of a rant.

Quite understandable. On that same theme, did you know that in Georgia and a couple of other states, possession of a vibrator is a criminal act, and can be punished with a hefty fine and imprisonment? I guess the men down there don't like competition

lgot · Post by **lgot** » 2002-08-01 12:35am

There is plenty of more examples
If you find a baby and take it home and take care of him like if was your own son but never tell a authority you are being illegal and not immoral.
If you find a wallet in the street with money and do not try to give the money back, you may be immoral but not illegal...
In Brazil, it was illegal until 1988 the pratice of Umbanda, Candoble and such religions. But people did that in plain sight (therefore illegal but moral) and because sociologists started those that as a positive example of brazilian's african culture it turned to be legal.
and there goes...

John · Post by **John** » 2002-08-03 12:17am

Once again, as regards sexual morality ( or any other kind of morality for that matter) see my quote below.

Priesto · Post by **Priesto** » 2002-08-14 03:36am

Well this is my first post.I'm a christian and I attend church on a regular basis.Being a child of God, I seek Jesus and obey him.It is not about religion, for that was created by man.Anyways I think I'll have fun hear.

Darik Sdair · Post by **Darik Sdair** » 2002-08-14 03:59am

how absolutely intriguing. Despite the fact that I'm an Atheist, I only show up as 79% nontheist. In fact, I'm 100% Unitarian Universalist.

Now here's the creepy part: during my childhood, I attended a UU church. I'll confess, I spent most of my time playing Dungeons & Dragons with the youth group, but aparently the overall "feel" of UU rubbed off on me.

heh.

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (98%)
3. Liberal Quakers (86%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (85%)
5. Nontheist (79%)

starfury · Post by **starfury** » 2002-08-14 10:42am

1. Secular Humanism (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (91%)
3. Nontheist (78%)
4. Liberal Quakers (78%)
5. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (69%)
6. Theravada Buddhism (67%)
7. Neo-Pagan (64%)
8. Reform Judaism (58%)
9. New Age (54%)
10. Taoism (50%)
11. Orthodox Quaker (48%)
12. Mahayana Buddhism (45%)
13. Scientology (44%)
14. New Thought (41%)
15. Sikhism (40%) C
16. Bahá'í Faith (37%)
17. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (37%)
18. Jainism (35%)
19. Islam (34%)
20. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (34%)
21. Orthodox Judaism (34%)
22. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (32%)
23. Seventh Day Adventist (28%)
24. Hinduism (23%)
25. Eastern Orthodox (23%)
26. Roman Catholic (23%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (16%)

what does everybody thought of my list, nothing surprising to me.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2002-08-14 02:26pm

To be more specific

1. Secular Humanism (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (92%)
3. Nontheist (81%)
4. Liberal Quakers (75%)
5. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (66%)
6. Theravada Buddhism (65%)
7. Neo-Pagan (64%)
8. Taoism (54%)
9. Reform Judaism (51%)
10. New Age (50%)
11. Bahá'í Faith (36%)
12. Orthodox Quaker (36%)
13. Sikhism (36%)
14. Mahayana Buddhism (35%)
15. Scientology (35%)
16. New Thought (33%)
17. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (29%)
18. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (25%)
19. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (23%)
20. Eastern Orthodox (19%)
21. Islam (19%) Click here for info
22. Jainism (19%) Click here for info
23. Orthodox Judaism (19%) Click here for info
24. Roman Catholic (19%) Click here for info
25. Seventh Day Adventist (14%) Click here for info
26. Hinduism (7%) Click here for info
27. Jehovah's Witness (0%) Click here for info

And Starfury, what do you have in common with JWs

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What people see in religion

Morality