Why do you guys hate religion so much?

[overlord]

Why do you guys HATE religion so much? Actually I hate it too, but most rightwing/libertarians don't give a damn what someone else beleives.

I can only conlude that communism is something of a cult, and false gods must therefore be stamped out. Otherwise why the bother? In North Korea they literally imprson and work to death those who refuse to say religion is an idiotic fantasy. I want to know why. Unless you're a nazi, right-wing/libertarianism isn't a religion and so worship of any gods are compatible.

Please, feel free to go on kicking religion though. I want this crap stamped out by force if necessary, (hopefully it will be necessary :) )...

[Eleutherios]

Why bother, you ask? Why bother revealing that the germ theory of disease is superior to the demon theory? Why bother telling people that the stars move because of the Earth's rotation, not because God is spinning a giant celestial sphere? Why bother demonstrating that two hands at work can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer? If we know someone else is wrong, what's so bad about telling them so? If someone's beliefs harm themself or other people, why should we respect their beliefs instead of correcting them or deriding them for their ignorance or stupidity?

Religion is false and destructive to mankind. That's why we want to get rid of it. If you want to believe in kooky religious stuff, I don't think anybody here is going to forcefully stop you, but we'll definitely show you where your logic breaks down and we'll stop you if you try to force your beliefs on other people. That's how most religion spreads, mind you: parents forcing their beliefs on their children from birth, and everybody else just letting it happen because for some reason it's taboo to confront religious falsehoods.

[Connolly]

Religion and the supernatural are not compatible with the philosophy of materialsm. Thats the reason.

Communism calls for the radical transformation of all sectors of society, and religious "doctrine" tends to get in the way of this transfomation due to the rigidness of "Gods" law.

Religion, its followers and its organised form have always got in the way of popular revolution and progress.

It can be sexist, homophobic and hierarchal - something communists oppose.

Its illogical and irrational with different versions of history.

[anti-authoritarian]

When you look back in the past religion has been used for centuries for rulers or the elite's own need.

For instance if we look at the power of the pope in the mid-medaevil age. The pope had the power to excomunicate any faction they wished.

Even in modern-day terms, America pins the blame of 9/11 and since terrorist attacks on muslim fundamentalists and not US foreign policy.

When you compare this with Communist belief - they are not compatable.

However, I don't think its a question of 'hate'. Facists are worse!

[Fistful of Steel]

I've given up trying to debate religion on here. Atheism is the new religion, with people citing facts from their prophets in white lab coats to support their claims, and acting bigotted towards any who don't agree.

[Hegemonicretribution]

S'pose it depends what you mean by religion...

For the most part I dislike it because it is a powerful "justification" and as all society thus far has existed on class-conflict, what it justifies is generally reactionary.

In some cases it asserts itself over and above this world, which is not good when it is forced onto others.

Hypothetically I could see possible "religions" being acceptable, but I suppose to get along with most members on the board I just include "reactionary" in my understanding of what it is to be religious here.

It is amusing though that ontological questions, whether answered scientifically or religiously have not produced definite answers, and as Fistful of Steel mentioned, there are dogmatic atheists. I see this as only one of many approaches towards tackling theism, and whilst appealing and romantic, perhaps more against the ideals it professes than other approaches.

[Eleutherios]

Originally posted by Fistful of [email protected] 3 2006, 05:29 PM
I've given up trying to debate religion on here. Atheism is the new religion, with people citing facts from their prophets in white lab coats to support their claims, and acting bigotted towards any who don't agree.
We don't trust science because our "religion" tells us to. We trust science because science works. It helps us to reveal demonstrable truths about the universe. And unlike religious leaders, no good scientist proclaims to know the absolute truth about anything. All truths in science are provisional. The best we can do is come up with theories which best fit the available evidence at the time, keeping in mind at all times that they may be proven wrong by future evidence. In science we take care to construct theories which could be demonstrated wrong if they are indeed wrong. We don't just say "this is so, I believe it, I won't ever question it" like religious people do.

Those of you who instead rely on faith cannot provide sufficient evidence for your beliefs, since that's what faith is -- believing in things without sufficient evidence. You have to take somebody else's word for it, since no sane individual would arrive at such crazy ideas on their own. If you could prove it, it would be science. If you're going to believe in things for which there is no evidence, what's wrong with me making fun of you for that? Especially if those beliefs promote very anti-revolutionary ideals, as all the holy texts do. I haven't seen one holy text which isn't blatantly sexist or doesn't fail to condemn slavery.

[TC]

i don't think theres any reason to "hate" religion in general, there are lots of harmless but silly religions like Unitarian Universialism, the Society of Friends, certain progressive protestant churchs, most anglicans, progressive Sufi Islam, Reconstructionist Judaism, Reform Judaism, and Scientology are all pretty much harmless but dumb. Theres no reason to hate them anymore than you should hate Santa Clause/Father Christmas, the Easter Bunny, or Tooth Fairy...sure you might think that people who believe in any of that stuff are, uh, a little dumb, not too bright, and might try to persuade them to give it up, but no reason to hate it.

Whats objectionable is religions and religous organizations that people draw authority from to justify their hatred and discrimination and unfair treatment, thats what we object to.

[Oh-Dae-Su]

why would they be dumb if they believe in a GOD! what if we are wrong? belief has nothing to do with intelligence. We BELIEVE there is no GOD, they BELIVE there is, thats our difference. Sure religion has brought a lot of bullshit, but it has also set forth a lot of moral and ethic codes that have ruled over our society and shaped it. Religion has changed many "bad" people into "good" citizens, etc... religion is a matter of belief and it's an important component of culture, i find it ridiculous for anyone who thinks religion should be abolished or something, if you want to believe it than go ahead believe whatever the hell you want to believe, but of course i do think that it should have it's limits, government should defenitally be separated from religion. But eitherway, trust me guys, it will be impossible to change people, just like it's impossible to make any of you believe that communism is a flawed theory, you will not convince any of these people that god is a mere invention of human beings, so...trust me we have 2 religions that are each 1 billion strong....give it up religion will always be there until the end, it's a human invention that will never go away..it started with us, it will end with us

[amanondeathrow]

We BELIEVE there is no GOD, they BELIVE there is, thats our difference.

Atheists do not "believe" in anything the way a Christian does.

Instead they collect and observe the evidence, deciphering the most logical conclusion, and understand that it is so.

Theists, on the other hand, are not concerned with facts. They simply take what is given to them, analyzing little, and take it as fact.

This is the obvious major difference between the two and should be enough to convince any logical person that Atheists are better at applying their intelligence.


Sure religion has brought a lot of bullshit, but it has also set forth a lot of moral and ethic codes that have ruled over our society and shaped it. Religion has changed many "bad" people into "good" citizens, etc...

Religion has been shaped by society, not the other way around.

Throughout history the church has adapted to fit the progression of society and has only served as a weight on that progression.

Few people have actually been "turned good" by religion. Many more have been turned into illogical slaves to scripture than saintly missionaries.


But either way, trust me guys, it will be impossible to change people, just like it's impossible to make any of you believe that communism is a flawed theory, you will not convince any of these people that god is a mere invention of human beings

I agree that abolishing religion will be nothing short of an uphill battle. However once the oppressive conditions that gave birth to "faith" have been abolished, religion will follow.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Fistful of [email protected] 3 2006, 12:29 PM
I've given up trying to debate religion on here. Atheism is the new religion, with people citing facts from their prophets in white lab coats to support their claims, and acting bigoted towards any who don't agree.
Yeah, you pathetic heathen, and after the revolution, we're going to sacrifice your sorry ass to the Science God! :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by redstar2000+May 4 2006, 12:36 PM--> (redstar2000 @ May 4 2006, 12:36 PM)
Fistful of [email protected] 3 2006, 12:29 PM
I've given up trying to debate religion on here. Atheism is the new religion, with people citing facts from their prophets in white lab coats to support their claims, and acting bigoted towards any who don't agree.
Yeah, you pathetic heathen, and after the revolution, we're going to sacrifice your sorry ass to the Science God! :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif [/b]
I would like to understand this as a joke...but I don't know anymore.

I know you are pro-execution Redstar2000, would you advocate the execution of any professed spiritualists?

[bezdomni]

Religion stops rational thought. It turns people into morons and makes them feel good about injustices committed against them. If the capitalist slaps you, you don't turn the other cheek. You punch him in the face and take over his factory! :P

Religions are either interpreted as completely peaceful and value submissiveness, or they are interpreted as being violent and value crusades.

As communists, we are opposed to being brainwashed into not standing up for your rights and violently defending yourself if necessary, as well as we are opposed to terrorism and religious fascism.

Basically, religion brings no good to the world. Religions cause oppression, not liberation; submission, not assertion; and regression, not progression.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Hegemonicretribution
I know you are pro-execution Redstar2000, would you advocate the execution of any professed spiritualists?

Not unless they are convicted of violent crimes against others.

Of course, they are kind of notorious for doing that... :angry:

When "God" commands you to smite the heathen, what seriously religious person can refuse?

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 12:44 PM
I would like to understand this as a joke...but I don't know anymore.
Oh for goodness sake Heg, do you seriously think that such things have the remotest chance of happening?

[overlord]

Anti-Religion and pro-science + equality is the only thing I like about communism.

The problem I have is that religious fanaticism is replaced by communist fanaticism. This fanaticism killed 100 million 'heretics' in the 20th century, something which would make the inquisitition mighty proud. The Tsar or Chinese emperors would never have been able to kill so many.

[LSD]

Anti-Religion and pro-science + equality is the only thing I like about communism.

There are other good things about communism too, but materialism and equality are a good place to start. :)


The problem I have is that religious fanaticism is replaced by communist fanaticism.

Nonsense.

Communism is inherently materialist and libertarian. "Fanaticism" of any kind would not only not be encouraged, but any one displaying it would probably be considered mad by a communisty society.

I understand that you have been misled by the dedicated propaganda campaign of the last fifty years and the truly abominable things done in the name of "communism".

But just like all modern libertarians would reject slave-trading America as being "capitalist", so do we reject the errors of Leninism being considered valid examples of "communist states".

I'm not going to go into the whole there's no such thing as a communist state anyways routine, because I figure that by now you've probably already heard it a few times. But suffice it to say that the things you "like" about communism; the materialism and the equality, they are the fundamental features and they are the defining attributes of a functional communist society.


This fanaticism killed 100 million 'heretics' in the 20th century

Care to cite your sources?

Better yet, care to detail your definition of "communism"? I mean, if you get to count "Red China" as "communist", do we get to count Nazi Germany as "capitalist"?

Statistics are like tennis; both sides get to serve. ;)

[overlord]

This fanaticism killed 100 million 'heretics' in the 20th century



Care to cite your sources?


What like it didn't happen now?


I understand that you have been misled by the dedicated propaganda campaign of the last fifty years and the truly abominable things done in the name of "communism".


I read a book by George Smith, a U.S. Special Op POW in South Vietnam. The NLF sent someone from Hanoi to speak to him and a few others to get them to write anti-US propaganda. The Hanoi guy spoke just like you! :o :o


I'm not going to go into the whole there's no such thing as a communist state anyways routine, because I figure that by now you've probably already heard it a few times. But suffice it to say that the things you "like" about communism; the materialism and the equality, they are the fundamental features and they are the defining attributes of a functional communist society.


In theory of course.... In reality a communist society would not function. Look at Lenin's NEP for christsakes. He recognised communism was a failure and chose to lurch back into capitalism - why the hell did he bother, could have saved a lot of lives. I know you don't like Lenin but these things happen, don't they.


Better yet, care to detail your definition of "communism"? I mean, if you get to count "Red China" as "communist", do we get to count Nazi Germany as "capitalist"?


My definition of communism: It don't matter if you work or not, everyone is equal, therefore no-one does anything and the place tends to 2001 Afghanistan.

Sure, N.S. Germany was capitalist. They recognised the virtue of incentive and hard work for innovation. Even though Hitler was originally elected for his socialist platform, he abandoned all of it and - until he went mad, he pandered to the interests of American big business and recognised the accomplishments of American Free enterprise. As for Red China being communist, if they weren't communist i am Mickey mouse.

[RevMARKSman]

Hello Mickey. China had a government and police etc (Red Guards anyone?) so by definition they were not communist. They also had "red" and "black" classes that were determined by one's heritage. Doesn't sound much like a "stateless, classless society" to me.

[bezdomni]

My definition of communism: It don't matter if you work or not, everyone is equal, therefore no-one does anything and the place tends to 2001 Afghanistan.

Good thing that definition is wrong. Otherwise you'd be spot on in your dislike for communism.


Sure, N.S. Germany was capitalist. They recognised the virtue of incentive and hard work for innovation.
Incentive and hard work to avoid death camps, maybe.


Even though Hitler was originally elected for his socialist platform, he abandoned all of it and - until he went mad, he pandered to the interests of American big business and recognised the accomplishments of American Free enterprise.
The pandering to big business thing is true, but Hitler was not elected on a "socialist platform" as your world history book would like you to believe. National Socialism (Mussolini and Hitler) is diametrically opposed to Socialism/Communism (Marx, Lenin...etc). National Socialism has a glorified state taking control of nearly every aspect of a person's life. People are filled with rabid nationalism and usually some form of racism. Hitler was elected on a National Socialist platform, and it isn't like he woke up one day and decided he didn't like jews so he would relocate and kill all of them. That was the plan all along!

Furthermore, Hitler despised communists as much as he despised jews. In no manner was Hitler even elected on a socialist platform, since anti-semitism and anti-communism were the "strong points" of his campaign.

Just because the word "socialist" is somewhere doesn't mean they actually are socialist. The "people's democratic republic of the congo" is not a people's democratic republic in any stretch of the imagination.

[overlord]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sup. I'm Mickey Mouse now am I? I'd rather you called me Scrooge McDuck or Uncle Scrooge but as I have always been a HUGE Disney fan that's ok. :P

BTW, communism can't survive without a state dictatorship. This is becuase you are in an infinitely high entropic state if everyone is equal. Therefore your 'communism' is transient capitalism with a Gibbs phenomena spike running through the middle. Hadn't you noticed this thing can't run?, i mean its only been 6000 years of civilisation:lol:

[amanondeathrow]

BTW, communism can't survive without a state dictatorship

No, socialism cannot survive with out a state dictatorship. Communism is the eventual result of this dictatorship.

The former so called "communist" states failed to implement this prolatarrian dictatorship properlly, as it has been proved in previous posts.



Therefore your 'communism' is transient capitalism with a Gibbs phenomena spike running through the middle.

This has some truth to it. Like Capitalism was the evallution of feudalism, communism is the evolution of capitalim.

However, Communism only retains the ethical and useful aspects of capitalism.


i mean its only been 6000 years of civilisation:lol:

Communism is as much a civilization as capitalism is.

Just a more advanced one.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

No, socialism cannot survive with out a state dictatorship. Communism is the eventual result of this dictatorship.

The former so called "communist" states failed to implement this prolatarrian dictatorship properlly, as it has been proved in previous posts.

And some communists, like me, think that such dictatorships are entirely unnecessary.

[LSD]

What like it didn't happen now?

What "didn't happen"?

I am not denying that self-declared "communist" regimes have been guilty of all number of crimes, I am, however, challenging your "100 million" figure.

So, again, care to cite your sources?


In theory of course.... In reality a communist society would not function.

And why is that, then? Because of the "iron laws" of the "market" perhaps? :rolleyes:

Sorry if we don't all drop to our knees before the glorious icons of bourgeois "economics", but as communistst and materialist we have absolutely no patience for their long-discredited idealist fantasies.

The reality is that while communism is at least "good in theory", capitalism can't even say that much! :lol:

I mean, really, even it's theory is dispicable, not to mention its practice.

Yeah, it's a step up from feudalism, but to imagine that the "free market" is the "end of the road" of human development is pure folly.


Look at Lenin's NEP for christsakes.

Sorry, but I prefer to spend as little time "looking" at Lenin's policies as possible.

It significantly reduces the chance of spontaneously breaking things. :angry:


BTW, communism can't survive without a state dictatorship.

Well, since, by definition, communism means a stateless society, what you just said is logically impossible.

It's like saying that capitalism can't survive without fedalism; it just doesn't make sense.

Again, due to its influence and significance, the ideas of Marx and his successors become a rallying cry for many revolutionary "leaders" throughout the past century. But their actions had very little to do with actual communism.

Remember, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea not only claims to be communist (sort of), but it also claims to be democratic.

And unless you want to buy into the "democratic republic" part of its name, it's illogical, not to mention hypocrtical, to buy into the "peoples'" part.

[cenv]

I hate religion because of all the other negative effects it has. Suddenly, people start discriminating and acting in completely illogical manners because of their religion. They become more and more interested in doing what their religion dictates they should do, and pretty soon are unable to think and behave logically in many situations. Things just detereorate from there.

In my opinion, religion is what happens when a fairy tale goes on steroids. The belief somehow gets out of control, even though any intelligent human being should be able to examine the phenomenon of religion and say "hey, something's not right here". Yet society perpetuates religious views, and religion becomes a virus of sorts, carrying along with it all the problems it causes. The popularity of religion and its surprising ability to last over generations upon generations is both fascinating and stunning, but it's also depressing and, in all truthfulness, terrifying.

Religion would be fine if it didn't have all of its nasty side effects, but the problem is that those side effects are inherent to religion. Religion needs to go, but its death will be a drawn-out, gradual, slow process.

[overlord]

QUOTE
In theory of course.... In reality a communist society would not function.



And why is that, then? Because of the "iron laws" of the "market" perhaps?

A communist society would not function because as soon as it did it would cease to be communist. People need incentive to get up in the morning.



Sorry if we don't all drop to our knees before the glorious icons of bourgeois "economics", but as communistst and materialist we have absolutely no patience for their long-discredited idealist fantasies.



The world is becomming aristocratic. You will have no choice but to fall to your knees and start polishing our shoes with your tongue if you want a job from one of us... peasant.



The reality is that while communism is at least "good in theory", capitalism can't even say that much!


You don't need theory. You need reality.



Yeah, it's a step up from feudalism, but to imagine that the "free market" is the "end of the road" of human development is pure folly.

Humans are members of the animal kingdom and as such capitalism is complete. If you want celestial paradise....commit suicide you religious fruitcake

[cenv]

It's kind of sad how all threads in the OI forum and its subforums eventually degenerate into the same debate, with the cappies using the same old, flawed arguments. Good thing the cappies are restricted to this forum.


A communist society would not function because as soon as it did it would cease to be communist. People need incentive to get up in the morning.
Are you saying that everyone will just lay in bed while the human race gradually decays? Or are you a simply stating that as soon as someone got out of bed, it would cease to be classless and stateless? :lol:


You don't need theory. You need reality.
So you admit that capitalism is not good in theory? The thing is, you can't have something that's good in reality if it's not good in theory. I think it's safe to say, then, that if communism is superior to capitalism in theory, it will probably be superior to it in reality too.



Yeah, it's a step up from feudalism, but to imagine that the "free market" is the "end of the road" of human development is pure folly.
Humans are members of the animal kingdom and as such capitalism is complete. If you want celestial paradise....commit suicide you religious fruitcake
The only thing that is 'complete' is the stupidity of what you just said: that is, the above point is completely stupid. It's ignorant, illogical, and closed-minded to think that society will suddenly cease to develop.