Religion = Man Made Virus

I've heard so many religulous people say, i don't care about that cause god knows about that. Ha don't you worry about blank, let me worry about blank

I think you are painting with a pretty broad brush. Lots of religious people are curious and lots of no religious people aren't. Dawkins, once again, is stereotyping which is one of my problems with him.

Mormonism fits this to a T because they teach that the purpose of life is to have faith. Faith is nothing more than hoping that everything all turns out OK, even if you have a hard time accepting it. The idea of faith is pushed by those who don't want you to understand that it all is just a big fat lie.

Once again secular religion rears its own ignorant and ugly head. Your own faith blinds you. Are you saying that faith in God is a disease that needs to be cured? Are you suggesting that to be a person of faith one must somehow lose the innate curiosity and search for understanding that is a hallmark of humanity?

Let me give you a brief history lesson. Are you aware of the role of monasteries in keeping alive much that the world holds dear and which secularists now rely on? Are you aware that some of the first universities were set up by those who believed in God (and even today many great centres of learning owe their continued existence to people of faith?

Perhaps you're not aware that some of the greatest advancements in history were brought about by men and women of faith asking themselves: why is this so? People inspired by faith seeking for a better world in the here and now as well as the hereafter made possible tremendous advancements and discoveries. Nor are you aware that some of the most progressive social movements of our day were fostered and championed by people of faith.

Perhaps the disease you really need to eradicate is not faith but the world's desire to believe and be satisfied with nothing and to accept anything that is easy and expedient. Perhaps what would really help this world is not to take away the people of faith who build schools (and universities), orphanages and set up hospitals for those suffering leprosy, or the ones who give of their time to help the poor, visit the sick, run soup kitchens and homeless shelters. The disease that really needs to be attended to is humanities arrogance and self deception, you see the virtue of faith is not that it makes people satisfied with not understanding but rather that it makes people humble enough to realize their own limitations and to know that this world is not all there is.

Once again Dawkins falls into the error that afflicts so many, he becomes inebriated and mesmerized by his own intelligence - the ant that looks out from its pile of dirt and thinks that that's all there is to life and the world.

Yeah.

I guess those faithful folks were advancing society when they sentenced Galileo to house arrest for years - the remainder of his life - for demonstrating that the sun, not the earth, is the center of the solar system & the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around.

Not to mention the fact that millions of Jews were burned alive during the black plague in an effort to appease what christians believed to be an angry god.

Or how about all the chaos and wars perpetuated in the Middle East by people of conflicting faiths?

I think your ant needs to stick its head back in the sand.

Dear Nancy,

Your hatred (is that too strong a word) blinds you. You are like the person who goes on a holiday and chooses to visit the Sistine Chapel, unfortunately before they get there someone manages to enter and cause much damage so that when the traveller arrives they behold a scene of chaos and devastation and pronounce the chapel unworthy of their attention and its creator a disgrace.

You and people like you enjoy bringing up the failures of humanity as if they are the failures of God and you blame it on faith. Yes we are all aware of Galileo and we are all aware of the many failures of the Christian faith (although I don't know what you're referring to with millions of Jews burned alive during the Black Plague), they are a matter of record. No one denies it, many have apologised for past behaviour, yet you still trot it out. Go ahead and do so. I am not defending what is bad but rather trying to get you to see what good there is.

If you can't see the good then perhaps you are, in your world view, not far off from those who stoke and perpetuate conflicts based on bigotry and prejudice. perhaps you really need to develop some humility and open your mind.

I added balance to your remarks.

You didn't acknowledge ANY failures of the faithful, nor did you mention even just one of the many atrocities that have been committed on humanity in the name of god or religion.

IMO, Your description of history as it relates to the faithful was grossly incomplete.

Truth is, there is good and bad on all sides. That's what my humble, open mind tells me.

So was Dawkins and I didn't see you arguing against that.

Wow.

I can't tell you the number of times I have heard and continue to here from TBMs that we just have to have faith when it comes to things we don't understand. People who "think" this way are praised right and left for being content with the idea that "we'll just find out when Heavenly Father wants us to..."

They are satisfied with not knowing. And take pride in it!

I can't believe you didn't observe this mindset in TSCC.

I don't know the full context of his quote, but I wouldn't be surprised if he got the idea from observing mormons.

I agree some people do that, but the other poster had a point too. Religion has done a lot of good and made many advancements. Dawkins tends to only see the bad and his view of history is skewed.

+1. Some posters need a basic history course.Religion has done some bad things, but it has also done plenty of good. Talk about stereotypes and ignorance



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2012 08:39PM by bona dea.

Not understanding what? I think I would need some more context to know what Dawkins is talking about.

I agree with Dawkins' criticisms of religion generally from what I've read of his book "The God Delusion." I haven't read all of it though.

At times he is right. Jesus is coming so let's ignore the environment is an example. What I object to is the iplication that alll religion does this. uh uh

Yeah, well, I would also disagree with that, but I'd want to see the quote in context.

Martin Luther King Jr. is an example of a man of faith who was not satisfied with what was and who, inspired by his faith, did something about it, and many other people of faith joined him in his freedom marches and suffered for their desire to see a better world, where the colour of skin would not be an obstacle to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.

To be fair and honest, he was opposed and persecuted by others of faith who wrested the scriptures to their own end. There you have it, where does the fault rest? Now I think I can guess where you will be heading next, you turn to the scriptures to prove God wrong just as those bigots and racists who resisted Dr. King raced to theirs to prove their world view right. What do you choose to focus on? The people of faith who changed the world or the people who used the cover of faith as a way of maintaining the status quo?

Just think, without this "virus" as its been called Martin Luther King Jr. may not have done what he did, nor Mahatma Ghandi, nor Mother Teresa, nor Albert Schweizer the list goes on and on.

Do you see the picture? Can you bring yourself to swallow your pride just a little and have the humility to admit that the "virus" that needs to be eradicated is not one brought on by faith but by humanity's own arrogance, pride and prejudices.

Thanks Mordecai for the history lesson. Most would applaud you for the tone and tenor of your language - none would dare say you came off condescending.

Pray tell, what was the world like when Religion had unfettered power over the minds of humanity?...we call it the Dark Ages. Please tell us all the enlightenment we experienced as a species when Faith ruled the day.

Here is a nice quote that makes my point and certainly dovetails into your history lesson:

"As the Roman Empire progressed, scientific knowledge and academia flourished as best as was possible in the ancient world. Europe was largely the beneficiary of this knowledge "but during the Dark Ages in Western Europe the ability to read and write had become largely confined to the clergy, as too had a knowledge of the Latin tongue"13. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, the only major European power that remained was that of the Catholic Church, which had largely become synonymous with all forms of rulership. Under its influence, science was all but destroyed as Church dogma and doctrine was violently enforced. Philosophical works were burned and lost, medicine and psychology set back hundreds of years. Neurologists Davison & Neale note during the "Dark Ages for all medicine [...] Christian monasteries, through their missionary and educational work, replaced physicians as healers and authorities on mental disorder. [...] When monks cared for the mentally disordered, they prayed over them and touched them with relics or they concocted fantastic potions for them to drink in the waning phase of the moon"14. The Age of Faith was an era of Christian fundamentalism and superstition, of theocracy (rule by religion). During this time, the Arab world carried the torch of knowledge and surpassed Europe in its understanding of philosophy, mathematics, and the sciences in general.

But then the Arab world itself fell under increasingly conservative Islam. Some Universities in Europe (three existed by 1200CE), independent from most constraints, had survived. They obtained Greek knowledge about the world via Arab translations15. The spark of the Enlightenment set fires under the authority of the Church in the West, and the West emerged from its dark ages as the Arab world plunged into its own, from which it has not yet emerged. [...]

The Arab world is not synonymous with the Muslim world, but, in the overlap between the two we see a lack of knowledge of science that is unimaginable to those brought up in developed Western countries. Those who do at least know of scientific theories are very likely to reject them as untrue. The Arab world is still in the depths of a Muslim Dark Ages, and although authors from time to time hail signs of an Islamic enlightenment, one has not yet come to pass, and for every step forward in one area of public engagement with science, there seems to be equal steps backwards elsewhere.”

"Science: Its Character and History: 6.2. A Dark Ages of the Past: Science and Knowledge in Christian Europe" by Vexen Crabtree (2006)

The Dark Ages were caused by the fall of Rome, not religion. During that period monks spent time copying ancient manuscripts thus preserving them and the little education there was was from the church.In fact the church founded uniersities during this time. It isn't black and white.When civilization falls, education goes downhill. The church stepped int the void. The Dark Ages would have been a lot worse without them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2012 09:39PM by bona dea.

Beg to differ...something to think about:

The Church all but wiped out education, technology, science, medicine, history, art and commerce. The Church amassed enormous wealth as the rest of society languished in the dark ages. When dramatic social changes after the turn of the millennium brought an end to the isolation of the era, the Church fought to maintain its supremacy and control. It rallied an increasingly dissident society against perceived enemies, instigating attacks upon Muslims, Eastern Orthodox Christians, and Jews. When these crusades failed to subdue dissent, the Church turned its force against European society itself, launching a brutal assault upon southern France and instituting the Inquisition.” - Ellerbe

Sorry, but you are wrong. The church didn't wipe out education, the fall of Rome did.BTW, the literacy rate in Rome was pretty low too. Only the elite were literate. BTW, I have a degree in history and have taught the Dark Ages. No, the church wasn't perfect and yes, they did some bad things but they were not responsible for the lack of education or the Dark Ages themselves.

We have also all heard of the Slave trade - Religion justified it nicely:

"The slave trade was the first black mark against the history of globalisation, resulting in imprisonment and forced movements of labour and destroying many lives. Arguments for slavery largely came from religious thinkers, like bishops and monks. Christian institutions put large sums of money into the slave trade, and became the biggest slave-owners, boosting a trade that would have otherwise collapsed. Behind this stood biblical arguments for slavery. But the Qur'an was even clearer in its institutionalization of slavery, and the conservative Muslim world debated bitterly for the keeping of slaves. Sometimes the motives were purely financial - in Africa itself black-owned companies made money by selling captives to foreigners.

The first abolitionists were the slaves themselves. Their protests and rebellions caused the industry to become too expensive to continue. The most successful religious campaigns against slavery were those under the rule of Voodoo practitioners and priests. Such leaders showed the world that anti-slavery was valid, inspiring hope and valiant anti-slavery efforts, all relying upon the slaves' own will to free themselves. Adding to this physical effort were the arguments of an increasing number of moralists and freethinkers in Europe, who had to battle their own religious authorities in order to help slaves. The Quakers were an influential non-mainstream Christian sect in America who were effective in pushing for abolition in America. In the end it was economic interests that turned the world against slavery, especially in the case of Britain who then went on to run the most potent large scale campaigns against the Slave Trade in order to further its own worldwide economic strength. To the end, conservative Christian and Muslim institutions opposed any attempts to end the slave trade, even when the materialists and moralists had won their arguments for abolition." - Crabtree

And some religious group;s fought against slavery which existed long beofre the Christian religion. It is not black and white. Most of the abolitionists were religious people.

Dear Polyandry Hotel,

You ask me what the world was like during the Dark Ages when, supposedly, "the religion had unfettered power over the minds of humanity...we call it the Dark Ages" I don't want to turn this thread into a history lesson, please review your material and sources and may I suggest that you seek other, more reliable sources for your information than Vexen Crabtree, atheist and self styled master of all things to do with the subject of Satanism. I believe he has a website "Bane of Monotheism." Perhaps that would tell you how trustworthy and unbiased his writing may be.

I believe he currently has a certificate in sociology from an open university and is working towards a degree in the same (due for completion in 2013).

The Dark Ages were, well, dark and not a good time to live in. They were caused not by the Church but by the collapse of the Roman empire. The Church became a bulwark of civilization, although those who really want to put faith down will tell you that the Pope ate children for his dinner. Were there failures in governance by the only authority left to hold things together (the Church) sure there were; and were wrongs and injustices committed by the Church in that time? You bet. Was there any good performed by the Church, yes that too. So Polyandry Hotel you choose where you want to focus and if you have never made a mistake or committed an injustice in your own life then go ahead and blame every person of faith you can. Condemn them for their humanity and by all means condemn the organization that over two millennia has, through its own humanity failed to live up to the teachings of Christ. The teachings themselves are not bad, although that troublesome claim Jesus made about being the Son of God, presents a stumbling block for some.

My favorite quote of all: ‘When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.’ - Dawkins

The world would be better without Religion my friend. By and large, history bears this out.

John Lennon figured this out. So can we.

Cheers,

PH

John Lennone was a great singer, songwriter and rock star. He was not an expert on religion or history. According to his wife, he was also not an atheist although he didn't care for organized religion.I love Lennon, but quoting him as an expert on religion is ludicrous.

You just can't let it go...I was referring to "Imagine" - Look it up on iTunes and listen carefully...

Dawkins himself is go obviously and ironically satisfied with not understanding religion that I think this sentence goes in what Ms. magazine called the "No Comment" section. It speaks to its own shortcomings. No one need point them out.

The idea that religion is a "man-made virus” is -- very kindest phrase -- an untested hypothesis for which no evidence has ever been offered. There are plenty of other phrases that spring to my mind -- including insufferably stupid. Frankly -- Dawkins is often to the discussion of religion what Akins is to the discussion or rape victims rights.

So -- all you "critical thinkers" out there -- where is the evidence that religion "teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding" Not that -- you know -- EVIDENCE has anything to do with your opinions.

Let's look for just a minute at some of the evidence Dawkins might be wrong.

The accomplishments of believing societies: Funny, you know, how Dawkins doesn't know how to construct a pyramid when those incurious believers did. Nor do I think he has mastered sailing the Mediterranean quite as well the Greeks and Phoenicians, just to name two cultures of the many believing societies who were rather provably more accomplish than he. Then there is the Sistine Chapel -- not that the "curious" Dawkins couldn't out paint and out imagine Michelangelo. Or -- let's skip around the globe a bit. Over in this world you have Chaco Canyon, which proved to poor deaf, blind, and dumb as soup Dawkins that society, too, was incurious about the heavens, which he, you know, has like -- mastered -- man. Well -- maybe he can find the Big Dipper on a clear night….

In fact all of human culture and accomplishments, including his beloved science, is built on the achievements of believing societies.

Then there are the accomplishments of believers themselves, such as Francis Collin, who, with all due respect, is much better scientist than poor sidetracked Richard Dawkins will ever be.

No one, and I mean no one, understands how this nummy got through his liberal ed requirement to get his undergraduate degree. He must have been paying a woman to write his papers. It is as big a mystery as -- well -- how in the hell they built those pyramids.

The best evidence is in the mormon church.

Not only are they satisfied with not understanding, they wear their ignorance as a badge of honor!

"We just have to have faith heavenly father will explain it all later..."

The ones who encourage critical thinking, questions, ideas, etc, are labeled as evil intellectuals who are under the influence of the devil.