22 Jul 08
Originally posted by JigtieI like that. I’ll expand a bit—
Religion is only dangerous when taken too seriously. Matter of fact for most
things in life.
Religion is only dangerous when it’s taken—religiously.
Which might illustrate, obliquely, how differently people here are implicitly using that word: religion.
22 Jul 08
Originally posted by scherzonice, but i am sure you can use even more sarcasm than that. try again.
I believe that the Virgin Mary conceived of Jesus because Zeus commanded Yahweh commanded God to tell Allah to get the flying monkeys to impregnate her, and then the monkeys were all turned into pwink fwuffy bunnies that laid eggs under pine trees twice a year. Christ was born 4-6 years before Christ was born, then the turkey conceived of Pontias Pilate, who ...[text shortened]... eath of Christ. Then some guys wrote a book about it and it became the Greatest Story Ever Told.
22 Jul 08
Originally posted by vistesdreligion is only dangerous when you decide to follow the interpretation of one person of it. when you decide that one man's opinion is better than your own and it is sinful to think otherwise is when you give up your god given right of free will and start sending money to fallwell.
I like that. I’ll expand a bit—
Religion is only dangerous when it’s taken—religiously.
Which might illustrate, obliquely, how differently people here are implicitly using that word: religion.
"what would jesus do?" bracelets are a nice idea. the world would be a better place if christians, jews, muslims, atheists would use them. you don;t have to believe he was the son of god, just believe in the concept of a person that has nothing but love for the others. the problem is when you ask yourself "what would pastor X or priest Y say jesus would do?". that is when you stop talking to your gay daughter or let your son who needs a transfusion die.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
22 Jul 08
The problem is that pretty much the whole point of religion (certainly organised religion) is that it's about subverting your judgment and handing it over to others. And religions tend to be disliked, (have a higher controvosy rating if you will) In proportion to the amount this happens.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
22 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by JigtieNo, Irrationality is good, in it's place. Without it we wouldn't be here, and if we were we'd be really bored. Whats dangerouse is useing irrationality when you should be being rational, or not being able to tell the difference between the two, which is probably the bigger issue.
Alice in wonderland is a dangerous book whether you take it seriously or
not, for it is most irrational.
Edit: Plus Alice rocks, disbute at your perril :-p
22 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgeI still say that the only danger with religion (and irrationality) is if you take
No, Irrationality is good, in it's place. Without it we wouldn't be here, and if we were we'd be really bored. Whats dangerouse is useing irrationality when you should be being rational, or not being able to tell the difference between the two, which is probably the bigger issue.
Edit: Plus Alice rocks, disbute at your perril :-p
it too seriously. There's nothing inherently dangerous about a religion.
People are dangerous.
Let me rephrase that: People can be dangerous. Religion cannot.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
22 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by JigtieReligion can alter peoples behaviour. Given that, it can be dangerous if it alters behaviour in dangerous ways.
I still say that the only danger with religion (and irrationality) is if you take
it too seriously. There's nothing inherently dangerous about a religion.
People are dangerous.
Let me rephrase that: People can be dangerous. Religion cannot.
Religion is of course an entirely artificial construct created by people, but so is a kingdom or a dictatorship.
Dictatorships are dangerous because they put to much power with too little accountability into one person (or small clique of people) and is thus open to abuse, (plus the adage about power corrupting and absolute power... well you know the rest)
It is always about people, but institutions can foster dangerous individuals, or protect against them. Religions foster dangerous/irrational people, and as such are dangerous. (in general)
22 Jul 08
Originally posted by googlefudgeSo can Alice in wonderland. After having read Alice in wonderland I saw
Religion can alter peoples behaviour. Given that, it can be dangerous if it alters behaviour in dangerous ways.
white rabbits and mock turtles everywhere. I could have sworn they were
trying to give me a message. At first it confused me, but after a while I
realised what that book was really all about. Alice's dream was a
message from God to mankind that we should all avoid rabbit holes and
preferably shoot all rabbits, for even though their cute and inherently
innocent, they can lure us into very troublesome situations.
And don't you dare laugh at me, heathen!!!
It's my duty to teach people how to live their lives therefore, and those
who don't agree with me will experience a much worse judgement at the
end than Alice, for the Queen of hearts will turn into a giant farting
machine rather than a leaf, and we'll see who laughs then!
I hear your argument, but I disagree. No book, movie, philosophy or
whatever is inherently dangerous. They're all thought works that
dangerous people can use, but it's still people being dangerous, not the
thought work itself.
Take something too serious and you become dangerous, sometimes
without even realising it.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
22 Jul 08
I would say that it didn't need tainting, it was inherent from the beginning. In the same way that a dictatorship involving humans is destined to head towards corruption and tyranny, religion has the seeds of (danger/irrationality, whatever it is we are talking about right now :-) ) built right in. because it has to do with how humans behave and not some theoretical perfect meta people, any system of morals/laws/governance/way of thought needs to take the foibles and shortcomings of human kind into account.
22 Jul 08
Originally posted by googlefudgewe all are influenced by outside factors in some way. but ultimately we make a decision, not the outside factors. in the end it is us who made the good or wrong decision and it doesn't matter what the outside factors were, we were or not able to make the correct decision.
My point is you can't separate the idea from its consequence, even if the idea is only played out via people.
someone who gave money to fallwell has nobody to blame but himself. not even fallwell is to blame. he didn't rob the person of his/her money, the person willingly gave them away. if religion didn't existed, that someone would have been tricked out of his money by someone else instead of fallwell.
you can separate the idea from the consequence and you should. until you do that, you assign blame for your bad decisions on anyone but the person who is really responsible, yourself. does it comfort you in any way if when you bump your head really hard on a ladder, you blame the worker that put the ladder there?does your head hurt any less?
22 Jul 08
Originally posted by JigtieYou are missing the whole argument. The issue is not whether or not the Bible or the Quran is dangerous.
I hear your argument, but I disagree. No book, movie, philosophy or
whatever is inherently dangerous. They're all thought works that
dangerous people can use, but it's still people being dangerous, not the
thought work itself.
Your example of Alice in wonderland showed quite clearly that if you start a religion based on it, then the religion will be dangerous.
So yes, it is not the work itself that is dangerous but the actions people take based on the works, and that is exactly what religion is. It is taking something too seriously.
So when you say:
Take something too serious and you become dangerous, sometimes
without even realising it.
you are in fact saying:
"Take up/create/join a religion and you become dangerous."