This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Oh this should be good
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Orranis
Yes. I do not truly believe in Justification, or right or wrong for that matter. Things simply are. Just as we use monkeys or apes for experiments before we use humans, humans could get to the point where they split up and become so different that human rights do not apply to the other side for one. However, I do not believe this will happen because essentially we've exceeded natural selection. It's become impossible to see what will happen. Now almost all mutations that are not immediately fail will not affect the persons survival, and thus both the good and the bad will go on.
I'm not even sure i have a response to this. I'm at a loss for words. So if someone killed your parents, its neither right or wrong, it just is?
Do you think there are humans now that are lesser, or that through evolution its possible that this might be the case?
I
would think it's wrong, and that's just the point. The Universe will go on. I don't think any great force would come down and brand "Bad" on his forehead. The idea is that any Human would think it wrong, because it's counter to furthering the human race.
Hmm... I see your point. Even so, Religion has caused far more of this, simply because Science is not as interpretable. Also, it does not teach what is moral and why. It is far easier to justify something based on a higher power giving it the O.K. then to do it scientifically. Hitler's hatred was directed towards a religion, not a race. He used Science to note the differences, not to determine if it was okay or not to do it. It would be a lot more convincing to say "God wants these people dead, this is the right thing to do." Than say "These people have evolved differently, this is the right thing to do." Religion is used as a tool for war because usually it says that Morals come from a higher power, so that if a higher power "Says yes" then it's okay. Science does not teach it.
Actually Hilters actions were against anyone deemed inferior to the "aryan race", or people that evolved differently. Gypsies, poets, and many others besides Jews were killed. He felt that anyone inferior according to his standards, needed to be cleansed out of society.
It was a fear of difference. Again, he did not judge them being better or worse scientifically, because science doesn't really have a "Better" or "Worse". There's more or less likely to survive, but that means they'd be wiped out on their own, without genocide.
I would agree that Religion has been used for some very aweful things around the world and throughout history, but some of the biggest "evils" were done by atheist, Hilter, Stalin, Mao:
"
The problem with this critique is that it exaggerates the crimes attributed to religion, while ignoring the greater crimes of secular fanaticism. The best example of religious persecution in America is the Salem witch trials. How many people were killed in those trials? Thousands? Hundreds? Actually, fewer than 25. Yet the event still haunts the liberal imagination.
It is strange to witness the passion with which some secular figures rail against the misdeeds of the Crusaders and Inquisitors more than 500 years ago. The number sentenced to death by the Spanish Inquisition appears to be about 10,000. Some historians contend that an additional 100,000 died in jail due to malnutrition or illness.
These figures are tragic, and of course population levels were much lower at the time. But even so, they are minuscule compared with the death tolls produced by the atheist despotisms of the 20th century. In the name of creating their version of a religion-free utopia,
Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong produced the kind of mass slaughter that no Inquisitor could possibly match. Collectively these atheist tyrants murdered more than 100 million people.
Moreover, many of the conflicts that are counted as "religious wars" were not fought over religion. They were mainly fought over rival claims to territory and power. Can the wars between England and France be called religious wars because the English were Protestants and the French were Catholics? Hardly.
The same is true today. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not, at its core, a religious one. It arises out of a dispute over self-determination and land. Hamas and the extreme orthodox parties in Israel may advance theological claims – "God gave us this land" and so forth – but the conflict would remain essentially the same even without these religious motives. Ethnic rivalry, not religion, is the source of the tension in Northern Ireland and the Balkans.
"
The main point of this is some of the worst attracities, can be linked to known atheist. I'm not sure if I agree with the assumption of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but it's interesting to think, that if religion wasn't involved, would there still be a conflict? I would say that maybe yes.
I guess. I just see it incredibly hard to note someone or someone else as lesser from my point of view of science.
Which is exactly why I'm agnostic. Because no real proof exists for either side. I just feel that Athiesm is the less hole-ridden of the two. In fact, if a higher power did exist, I doubt it would be anything like what is mentioned in Judaic or Christian texts (I only say these to because they are the ones I am most familiar with, and have to see the others before I talk about their flaws)..
I guess it depends on what you deem as "real" proof. Everyone probably has a differnt idea of what this is. Hopefully, you figure out what you're looking for!
I see constant talk of how I need to look at it from both sides..
Whenever I made a comment like this, I was referring to people in general. Some might say, i'm not looking at it from both sides (I try!).
Anyways, again, thanks for your thoughts. I'm not sure about the first quote of yours, but maybe you can give some more insight.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
150529
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
Where did you pull this .02% statistic? You can't just pull something out of a hat and then go "This proves my point". Also, how do you measure how "different" two societies are? I'd say that a society where ritual sacrifice is acceptable goes against the idea that all societies have the same moral code. And regardless of what people call it, "minor marriage" is basically pedophilia. In afghanistan, they don't consider having sex with other men constantly and preferred to women as homosexuality, so what people consider a word to mean is entirely irrelevant to whether they find a specific act acceptable.
Post by
313135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
So if you say something that another society does is immoral, but morality is a "social constructed" idea, then you can't really say that they are being immoral, b/c that society "says" it is.
I can say they're "immoral" on my society's moral scale. And if there was a perfect example, then we wouldn't argue about what is or isn't moral, there would be no ethical dilemmas and no need for ethics boards.
Edit: Messing with these numbers actually gave me an interesting idea for running a statistical test. I'll see if I can pull up some other numbers of Japanese deaths to see the differences in how Japanese people die compared to Americans, then I'll head back here.
Post by
516631
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
What the flippen heck has suicide rates in Japan got to do with WoW or the opinions of WoW by religious fanatics? The reasons for suicide world-wide are all the same no matter the culture: depression, mental illness, social isolation, and excessive long-term stress are the most common. Humans are human no matter where they are from.
Right, but the amount of influence certain factors have on certain cultures may be different. To say that all cultures view suicide the same is very likely untrue.
Post by
Squishalot
Fact: The two games of all that exist in the world that have attributed to the most number of murders and suicides, and have destroyed the most familes and ruined lives world-wide are on a very close running for which is actually in first place. They are....
Poker and Monopoly.
Evidence or it didn't happen. Despite all the research I've done, I haven't ever had a falling out over Monopoly, and can't imagine that it would ruin more families and lives than, say, lotteries or poker machines (which is unrelated to Poker, as a game in itself).
Post by
516631
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Orranis
God created Evolution. Evolution created Man. Man created WoW. Thus, God created WoW.
What the flippen heck has suicide rates in Japan got to do with WoW or the opinions of WoW by religious fanatics? The reasons for suicide world-wide are all the same no matter the culture: depression, mental illness, social isolation, and excessive long-term stress are the most common. Humans are human no matter where they are from.
Back onto the topic...
The majority of people prefer to remain ignorant of a lot of things they can't comprehend or understand, and it's always easier to blame something - anything - else besides ourselves for our own downfalls.
In general, people are as thick as bricks. If given a choice between believing in a greater power and being told to just have faith in their existance and the idea that everything has a purpose even if we don't understand it... that is much easier than facing the harsh, dirty, nasty, cruel and often senseless realities of life and death and the fact that humans, all humans, have it in them to be cold-blooded murderous and torturous evil SoB's under the right circumstances.
People don't like that idea, so their laziness, depression, dark evil thoughts, naughtiness, etc - it can't be our fault, and we're not allowed to blame God, so we have to blame Satan, demons, evil spirits, other religions, WoW, Heavy Metal, the Beatles, Doom, Dungeons & Dragons, the internet...
May as well say your neighbours dog made you do it for all the reality of that bull^&*!. If you're sitting on your arse playing WoW while your baby is drowning in the bath, that is your fault because you, and only you, chose to do that instead of supervising the baby.
Fact: The two games of all that exist in the world that have attributed to the most number of murders and suicides, and have destroyed the most familes and ruined lives world-wide are on a very close running for which is actually in first place. They are....
Poker and Monopoly.
Meh, this is a very attacking way to look at it. I'm sure it's one of the reasons some people do it, but it's not the only one. Also, many religions do not have this said Devil.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.