Religion needs immediate extermination

[yiennahs]

---

im sure sir it wasnt from religion as all religions differ from one another. .the knowledge of distingushing whats right from wrong is innate us.you dont have to have a religion to know whats right from wrong.

anyways here's the best answer i think to your question.

I think our knowledge of right and wrong is innate in us. Religion gets its morality from humans. We know that we can't get along if we permit perjury, theft, murder, rape, all societies at all times, well before the advent of monarchies and certainly, have forbidden it... Socrates called his daemon, it was an inner voice that stopped him when he was trying to take advantage of someone... Why don't we just assume that we do have some internal compass?[5]- christopher hitchens

according to thomas dixon "Religions certainly do provide a framework within which people can learn the difference between right and wrong."[

if your a theist im sure you will argue and say that without god how will i know the difference between what evil and good? and how am i going to justify moral behaviour?

being an atheist sir, i dont wanna argue as i respect all religions, i only care about believing in morality, a meaning of life, or the human goodness and morality is possible without GOD.

I think our knowledge of right and wrong is innate in us.

i find this odd...
you always told me that common sense is not innate but distinguishing right from wrong is innate?
Actually, morality is acquired on the pre-moral to moral stage of life.

Religion gets its morality from humans.

i find this more odd. This is one of the main reason why religion exist. It was the one who believe to have contributed Morality. The people believe that if they do bad things, God will punish them. Imo paman ganeh nang gisulti "Religions certainly do provide a framework within which people can learn the difference between right and wrong."

and also, i was basing morality through science mainly by Kohlberg's Moral Developmental Stages. Atheist base his principle on facts and science right? So how did you get morality being inborn? What kind of proof do you have?

[nitwit]

i find this odd...
you always told me that common sense is not innate but distinguishing right from wrong is innate?
Actually, morality is acquired on the pre-moral to moral stage of life.



i find this more odd. This is one of the main reason why religion exist. It was the one who believe to have contributed Morality. The people believe that if they do bad things, God will punish them. Imo paman ganeh nang gisulti "Religions certainly do provide a framework within which people can learn the difference between right and wrong."

and also, i was basing morality through science mainly by Kohlberg's Moral Developmental Stages. Atheist base his principle on facts and science right? So how did you get morality being inborn? What kind of proof do you have?

. where did you read that i said that i base my belief and morals in science maam? . even science cant figure out the origin of the universe.its UNKNOWN. but there are so many guesses and ideas and alot of people believe its created by a god. (this i dont wanna argue since theres no proof for this one yet is there?).

if you have a bible and christ to believe in everyday in your life, christ teaching keeps you on track in this life,i believe in what my parents taught me. if christ teaching is considered morals to you, then the same thing. the only difference is i dont have a bible like you people that tells me of whats right from wrong.


bottomline is, it doesnt matter if you have religion or not, unless if having no religion makes you less of a human being or a person.does it? if your being treated less in the society because of not having a religion?if the answer is NO THEN I DONT THINK I HAVE SO MUCH TO WORRY ABOUT .

i let people believe in what they wanna believe in, i respect peoples beliefs and their thoughts about religion and for me thats all that matters. RESPECT ONE ANOTHER.

[Sand Man]

^^ sayon rana kantahon.......

That's coz he don't have a damn clue.

...the TS' choice of words are deliberate and contrived, in order to attract attention.

I'll make it a lot easier for you. There ^^. Because a troll is a troll is a troll and will always crave for attention which he lacked growing up.

Although that in itself demands our compassion, but if it's coupled with a foul mouth it becomes despicable.

I see religion as a coping mechanism for most people. If you were to take this away from society, you're left with a void that may just be filled with something even worse. You're left with the question: What do you have in place of religion? I do not have a satisfactory answer to that, although I'd love to hear one.

I think you are correct that it would be replaced but I don't think it would be something 'even worse'. I am working under the premise that man is inherently good at birth. Religion satisfies the needs of our souls (If you believe we have one). Deny a person religion and he will not believe in Jesus Christ or Buddha or Allah, but he will still have a notion of a higher Being that he can connect to spiritually.

Look at prayer. Some people say it's when you are talking to God (whoever it is you conceive Him to be). Prayer if performed in it's true sense is actually a form meditation. Perform meditation properly and you achieve a certain level of spiritual clarity. What both is trying to achieve is a higher level of focus or consciousness. Your mind is only thinking of one thing (whether naa kay gipangayo ni Lord or just plainly meditating), and this channels your energy (some would call it chi) to that specific thought.

So, in essence, I do believe even atheists will say a prayer to the The Man Up There. Only that he doesn't do the sign of the cross, or refer to a Bible or a Koran.

[tokidoki]

Before continuing, I would like to point out first if we are not like this to begin with:

Brain in a vat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lalis2x ta diri nya mao ra diay na atong pagkabutang.

[jinkazama92]

You do your research first before you blab ignorantly! Don't feed the troll on this thread you've shown to them how rightful they are in saying religion needs extermination. Muslims were the aggressors? Can you tell me just when the Muslims invade sovereign states and force her inhabitants to embrace Islam?

I did my research.
The way you defend seems like you are a muslim.

Here's an answer to your question.
"Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity—and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion—has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years."

[nitwit]

one thing is certain,mag gubot gyud ug ipa exterminate ning religion because those religious people will have nothing to believe in and hold on to. its like you are taking part of their life away from them. religion for them is who and what they are.it molded them to be what they are right now. so i dont really agree on this bisan pa atheist ko.

[hitch22]

So, in essence, I do believe even atheists will say a prayer to the The Man Up There. Only that he doesn't do the sign of the cross, or refer to a Bible or a Koran.

Atheists who say prayers to the Man Up There? I'll plead ignorance here, since this is the first time I've heard of atheists praying to God. Perhaps you mean Deists, people who believe in a First Cause who got everything going and then left it alone. That's what distinguishes a Deist from a Theist: the latter believes in a personal and intervening God. Famous examples of Deists are Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, and Benjamin Franklin. However, in the scheme of things, people used to brand those who don't belong to their mainstream religion as "atheists". Deists were stigmatized as "atheists" by Christians in the 17th and 18th century. Even the early Christians were labeled "atheists" by the Romans. I don't know which group was persecuted more in the history of religious fanaticism: atheists or infidels? I would think the infidels, since only a few (if at all) professed themselves to be atheists in those dangerous times.

Nowadays, there are those who don't believe in a God but believe in some new age spiritualism. Technically, they are atheists too. So, in a sense, you are right. But then again, as one atheist once lamented, "Gathering atheists into a group is like herding cats."

[florida.blanca]

what an intelligent discussion we have here. keep em comin!

[pinoy_09]

Mga erehes! Maypa tan-aw mo ani o.

The Ledge (2011) - IMDb

[tokidoki]

OT: ganahan gyud ko sa mata ni nitwit (ice breaker muna) lolz