<p>
</p>
<p>Intolerant religious bigotry? What the ****? My point had nothing to do with religion.</p>
<p>@applicannot:
you said: “I don’t commit crimes because I’m morally opposed to doing so”. where do your morals come from? your parents? before them? before them? and you will eventually come to adam/eve(if they existed). so then god must have given our morality. </p>
<p>“RELIGION promotes slavery”: second great awakening? slavery in america ended in large part due to christian ideals that slavery is sin. </p>
<p>“RELIGIOUS PEOPLE promote hatred for certain groups”: is it really hate? is it really why they fight? i dont believe so. i think its because each religion truly believes that their religion is the right religion. and they are frustrated at each other. as time went on, the cause became corrupted.</p>
<p>and yeah we actually do believe in the same ideology about god/universe.</p>
<p>“I’m anti-religious because religion is more negative than positive”. Religion as in church? I too agree that the church’s religion is more negative than positive. i believe the only way to experience god is by yourself. like you said, “I don’t believe in marriage or waiting for marriage to have sex. I also don’t agree with a host of other Christian practice, or Islamic practices.” i also dont believe in communion, baptism, and to a certain extent, the bible. if god is really all good and all loving, then i believe he would want a personal relationship. religion is an individual search for god. the church is the one who corrupts god. </p>
<p>and you said our society is too patriarchal. maybe you believe this because society brainwashed you, manipulated you into thinking this. if you lived in a society where men/women were perfectly equal and society was trying to impose on you beliefs that men are better than women. than without a doubt you will believe that men should be above women. the point is, your beliefs are not your own and what you thing is wrong, may not actually be wrong. only god can judge right/wrong. </p>
<p>“I don’t believe in the supernatural”: have you ever seen someone demon possessed? </p>
<p>And please don’t compare Santa Claus to God. You know full well, that Santa Claus is pure myth. God may not. </p>
<p>Also, I don’t believe in the theistic God, in the sense that he is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.
Do you guys think that God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, science can’t prove that Santa Claus doesn’t exist, so it’s really a personal choice whether you want to believe or not.</p>
<p>In my experience, people who believe in Santa tend to be more content than people who don’t.</p>
<p>My claim is, why not believe in Santa? Why not hold an optimistic point of view? I’d rather believe that I’ll be rewarded for my good behavior all year than that my Christmas will be based on how much money my parents have.</p>
<p>If the whole world believed in Santa, do you believe that there would be less crime and torment as opposed to if the whole world didn’t? From my perspective, if the whole world was didn’t believe, less people would care about the outcome of crime, and would in turn commit more of it. After all, who cares? It’s not like they will get coal in their stockings or face consequences on Christmas. I’d like to believe that those who have conducted good lives would be benefited more so than those who have led lives full of murder and hatred.</p>
<p>^First of all, if you are going to use my words(or my sentences as you plug in a word), please quote me, thanks:)</p>
<p>I think it’s a poor example to replace religion with Santa Claus. Santa Claus doesn’t have guidelines to live one’s life, there is no book to which he is followed. It’s origin is derived from an alternative country. Are you trying to claim that believing in Santa Claus is a religion? I would like to hear your interpretation on this(not your random words thrown into one of my statements) if that’s so. In no bible or guidelines is Santa Claus listed. It was only recent that he became popular in western areas(19th or so century). Also, his image and popularity were derived from a cartoonist. Personally, I don’t believe Santa Claus serves purpose in that he takes away the true value of Christmas(not just receiving presents) and the origins of Christianity. I don’t see how the idea of solely acquiring presents can be considered a religion.</p>
<p>Of course Santa existed :rolleyes: The ignorance here is stunning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He’s just long dead - that’s all.</p>
<p>^Very nice haha:) Thanks for the quote, and sorry we aren’t all familiar with the history of it, but that doesn’t make us ignorant:) Thanks for the information though!</p>
<p>Actually, science can’t prove that Evolution doesn’t exist, so it’s really a personal choice whether you want to believe or not.</p>
<p>In my experience, people who believe in Evolution tend to be more content than people who don’t.</p>
<p>My claim is, why not believe in Evolution? Why not hold an optimistic point of view? I’d rather believe that I’ll be rewarded for my good genes than that inheritance is determined by acquired traits.</p>
<p>If the whole world believed in Evolution, do you believe that there would be less crime and torment as opposed to if the whole world didn’t? From my perspective, if the whole world was didn’t believe, less people would care about the outcome of crime, and would in turn commit more of it. After all, who cares? It’s not like they will get to see their descendants or face consequences in later generations. I’d like to believe that those who have conducted good lives would be benefited more so than those who have led lives full of murder and hatred.</p>
<p>Actually, science can’t prove that chicken doesn’t exist, so it’s really a personal choice whether you want to believe or not.</p>
<p>In my experience, people who believe in chicken tend to be more content than people who don’t.</p>
<p>My claim is, why not believe in chicken? Why not hold an optimistic point of view? I’d rather believe that I’m eating something from some animal than something synthetic.</p>
<p>If the whole world believed in chicken, do you believe that there would be less crime and torment as opposed to if the whole world didn’t? From my perspective, if the whole world was didn’t believe, less people would care about the outcome of crime, and would in turn commit more of it. After all, who cares? It’s not like they will die from under or malnutrition. I’d like to believe that those who have conducted good lives would be benefited more so than those who have led lives full of murder and hatred.</p>
<p>Actually, science can’t prove that the Internet doesn’t exist, so it’s really a personal choice whether you want to believe or not.</p>
<p>In my experience, people who believe in the Internet tend to be more content than people who don’t.</p>
<p>My claim is, why not believe in the Internet? Why not hold an optimistic point of view? I’d rather believe that I’m talking to real people far away rather than just having answers spat back at me by a computer.</p>
<p>If the whole world believed in the Internet, do you believe that there would be less crime and torment as opposed to if the whole world didn’t? From my perspective, if the whole world was didn’t believe, less people would care about the outcome of crime, and would in turn commit more of it. After all, who cares? It’s not like the computer will do anything bad to you if the Internet doesn’t exist. I’d like to believe that those who have conducted good lives would be benefited more so than those who have led lives full of murder and hatred.</p>
<p>Seriously, if you have to repeat what I stated, use quotes. You’re really just taking credit for someone else’s words. How do you believe evolution is optimistic? I’m more interested in what you guys think(you know, using your own brains instead of just pugging in different words to my sentences?). If that’s the best claim that you can come up with, then there is nothing left to talk about that I couldn’t already do so with myself. “I’d rather believe that I’ll be rewarded for my good genes than that inheritance is determined by acquired traits.” How is that an optimistic viewpoint? You think that all people who believe in evolution will be rewarded with good traits, is that what you’re saying?</p>
<p>“Actually, science can’t prove that Santa Claus doesn’t exist, so it’s really a personal choice whether you want to believe or not.”</p>
<p>Actually, science can prove that Santa Claus doesn’t exist you ****** bag</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, no. But morality did come from a long, long time ago. When humans began to develop, it became clear to them that working in groups was better than working alone. It was a mutually beneficial relationship between two or more humans. Killing off other humans for other reasons resulted in the death of the self - something our distant ancestors could surely comprehend. Thus came the first moral: don’t kill your friends. Other morals evolved, like don’t steal or cheat. Other morals are passed to us via current ideas and society, especially from about 1000 B.C.E. forward. Morals don’t prove that God exists at all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Slavery was reconciled with religion long before the Second Great Awakening (after all, there had to be two of them). Slavery is also sanctioned in the Bible. If you’d rather not use the New Living Translation, consult this site before considering other versions: [What</a> the Bible says about slavery](<a href=“http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl3.htm]What”>http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl3.htm)</p>
<p>However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)</p>
<p>If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)</p>
<p>When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NLT)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What about some Christians and homosexuality? Let alone the conflicts between religion. This is a good website on hatred: [HowStuffWorks</a> “How do you define hate?”](<a href=“http://health.howstuffworks.com/human-nature/emotions/other/define-hate.htm]HowStuffWorks”>http://health.howstuffworks.com/human-nature/emotions/other/define-hate.htm)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with you here. I don’t believe in God, but if you do, by all means do so. Like I said, I’m anti-religious, not anti-higher power.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Disagree entirely. I can’t sanction ANY community that degrades, physically injures, shuns, and serves injustice to any group, including women. Society has not manipulated me into thinking that all people should be treated equally under the law. That is a natural right. I do not think that the U.S., right now, is too patriarchal. Is it more patriarchal than I’d like to see? Yes, absolutely. Is it too patriarchal? Compared to what? Compared to a thousand years ago, yes, I’d much rather live here and now. Compared to Islam? Definitely not too patriarchal. Maybe you believe in God because society brainwashed you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…you actually believe that is real? Do you also believe the WWE is real wrestling? I’ve met some good actors. I’ve seen some people who clearly believed they were speaking in tongues or being possessed by demons (and I’ve met plenty of people who believe the world was created by some invisible, supreme being). I was trying to be civil, but okay, if you’re going to try to convince me that demon possession is real - which thankfully, you haven’t done yet - puh-lease. You can try to convince me that patriarchy isn’t bad or that there is a higher power, at least those are slightly viable.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have no reason to believe that God is not pure myth. You BELIEVE in God because you have faith. You have nothing else. I have remarkably little else to prove he IS pure myth… but the same is said of Santa Claus, isn’t it? Like the ensuing debate, we can’t technically prove Santa Claus isn’t real.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re right that there’s no book, but it wouldn’t be the only religion with no book. And Santa Clause does have guidelines on how to live one’s life: be good. It’s no more or less open than, say, Buddhism.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, Christianity also developed in “an alternative country.” But, as for religion:</p>
<p>Definitions of religion:
having or showing belief in and reverence for a deity Santa Claus
A religion is a system of human thought which usually includes a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices that give meaning to the practitioner’s experiences of life through reference to a higher power, deity or deities, or ultimate truth. Christmas and the associated, consumerized festivities certainly qualify.
A collection of practices, based on beliefs and teachings that are highly valued or sacred. Qualifies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While this is funny, you have a problem. Science CAN prove that evolution exists. In fact, it already has. Natural Selection has been adopted as a scientific theory. So undoubtably we’ll get into the debate about what makes a scientific theory credible, which leads to education on what a scientific theory is. I’ll just cut to the chase and name some OTHER notable theories. No one is contesting these.</p>
<p>Germ Theory
Atomic Theory
Thermodynamics
Cell Theory</p>
<p>“I like to think of it from a different perspective. If the whole world was religious, let’s say Christian, do you believe that there would be less crime and torment as opposed to if the whole world was atheist?”</p>
<p>This has pretty much happened already.</p>
<p><a href=“http://eatliver.com/i.php?n=3859[/url]”>http://eatliver.com/i.php?n=3859</a></p>
<p>If there is a difference in people’s morals, it’s probably negligible.</p>
<p>"Do you guys think that God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent? "</p>
<p>it’s logically impossible (using everyday informal logic) if you assume free will.</p>
<p>"Actually, science can prove that Santa Claus doesn’t exist you ****** bag "</p>
<p>do it</p>
<p>"Actually, science can’t prove that Evolution doesn’t exist, so it’s really a personal choice whether you want to believe or not. "</p>
<p>this person is just saying that you can’t prove (100%) a negative (outside of formal systems).</p>
<p>[Existence</a> of God - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God]Existence”>Existence of God - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Russell’s</a> teapot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel’s_teapot]Russell’s”>Russell's teapot - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>from the above, it is clear that the burden is on the religious to provide evidence of the existence of god. Keep the anthropic principle in mind</p>
<p>[Anthropic</a> principle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle]Anthropic”>Anthropic principle - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Wartsandall, let me explain how sarcasm works:
I am NOT trying to prove that Santa Claus exists, and I’m NOT suggesting we replace religion with belief in Santa Claus. First, let us agree that Santa Claus (as in, the jolly fat man who slides down chimneys) does not exist. By using your arguments to show that he does, I’m demonstrating that your arguments are invalid, since you can’t use valid arguments to prove something false.
Got it?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did I say that? Try reading next time. Thank you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The fact that nobody has ever legitimately believed in the existence of Santa is a good start. And no, kids do not count, since they have been deliberately, traceably, and temporarily misled by people that do not believe. If nobody argues something exists and there is no evidence in favor of its existence, then it’s safe to conclude that it does not in fact exist.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So slavery was introduced by the bible? Or is religion responsible for slavery even though it’s an unrelated phenomenon?</p>
<p>that is evidence, but not proof. But it is reasonable to think that whether something is true or not, or whether something exists or not, is independent of how many people think that something is true/exists.</p>
<p>Or, you could say, there exists a scenario given what we know now where santa claus exists.</p>
<p>^^I’m pretty sure there was a time when no one legitimately believed that the earth went around the sun.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure it wasn’t Santa Clause putting presents under my Christmas Tree. But then again, who knows. Why are we arguing belief and religion anyway? Believe what you want, who cares.</p>
<p>^I’m beginning to believe the same thing. We each have our own beliefs regarding what we believe to be an outcome. Ultimately, we will all find out in time.</p>