Is religion evil?

[SkinWalker]

I personally think that you're the one who's misguided in this respect. If you really believe that rituals, gold statue idolatry, incense burning and prayer to deified semi-mythical figures have ANYTHING to do with the teachings of Buddha, then you should re-evaluate.

 

Mahayana Buddhists follow the Eight Fold Path and accept the Four Noble Truths. These are teachings of Buddha. The follow the core teachings of Buddha. Therefore they are "Buddhists."

 

I challenge you to provide any scholarly source in the fields of anthropology or sociology concerned with religion that assert otherwise.

 

I say again: calling a sphere a cube presents no corners.

 

Very emotive term, by the way: Bigoted. Spare me. There's nothing bigoted about my dislike of organised religions, or more accurately, religious organisations.

 

Perhaps poorly chosen. But you'll notice I said "reminded" and did not mean to imply that you were bigoted. I was recently engaged in another discussion elsewhere in which the very topic arose. I found the similarities striking.

 

Still, for purposes of defining the world around me in an anthropological way, I'll not be arsed to judge whether any one particular religionist is truly devoted; truly adherent; true believer; true [insert noun]. My inquiry is answered when I discover the doctrine said religionist follows or believes he/she follows. In the end, one's religion is about what that person believes and professes to believe; not my opinions of that person's professed faith and what it should mean to be a true adherent.

 

Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy? Its certainly the latter. It can be debated (and is!) on the former. It certainly doesn't fall into the parsimonious definition of a practice that has the purpose of influencing or gaining favor from a supernatural deity. Theravadism is clearly a philosophical position, while Mahayanism has more religious content. While it may have no clear deity (though for some, Buddha *is* deified), there are definitely supernatural overtones and mysticism involved.

 

And I've yet to see a course on comparative religion, world religion, or anthropology of religion that did not spend significant time reviewing Buddhism.

 

But to bring this back into the fold of the topic, I would have to conclude that by and large, Buddhists are not guilty of "evil" acts that can be attributed to other world religions that have one or more deities. Indeed the core Buddhist beliefs include Arhat, which involves destroying hate, greed, and the like. It is, perhaps, impossible for the Buddhist to reconcile violence in the way other religions do simply because there are no deities like god or satan to blame for behaviors. There is only the individual: each responsible for his own actions on the path to enlightenment.

 

Call it a religion or call it a philosophy. Its hard to find fault with Theravadism.

[kipperthefrog]

Richard Dawins as alful brave.

 

He went around confronting all those religous poeple..

 

I would be afraid to say stuff like that to fundimentalist beleivers. wasn't he afraid people will smack him? how did he do this without worry that the people he interviewed would take away his film?

[toms]

Maybe because in the UK we aren't all afraid of annoying the religious right?

 

It wouldn't really occur to most people in the UK to worry about what the religious nuts might think.. unlike the US where it appears that every election is a case of "i'm more christian than you!"

[Kurgan]

Richard Dawins as alful brave.

 

He went around confronting all those religous poeple..

 

I would be afraid to say stuff like that to fundimentalist beleivers. wasn't he afraid people will smack him? how did he do this without worry that the people he interviewed would take away his film?

 

Because people are less likely to do that when they know a camera is on them (besides, fame is a powerful lure, even if it's 15 seconds of somebody trying to make you look stupid). Anyone who's face appears on public TV has signed a release allowing them to be shown (otherwise they can sue). Then again I'm not sure if that's how it is in the UK...

 

Atheists and Christian-bashers have powerful friends, they're not some persecuted minority in Europe or North America that can't have their say.

[kipperthefrog]

Thanks gang! I really like that documentary! I would show it to my Parents, but they are too religuis.

[TK-8252]

Atheists and Christian-bashers have powerful friends, they're not some persecuted minority in Europe or North America that can't have their say.

 

In the U.S. atheists certainly are not a very "welcome" minority.

 

George H. W. Bush said that he doesn't think that atheists should be U.S. citizens, because this is a country "under god."

 

If by atheists having powerful friends you mean the ACLU, because that's really all there is, then it's the ACLU versus... well, 90% of America.

 

The American people have said that they would rather elect a gay person than an atheist to be President. Isn't it odd how the person who gets elected into office is always the one who claims to be more Christian than the other guy? It's ironic, since so many of the Founding Fathers weren't Christians at all. They even rejected Christianity in some instances.

[toms]

Odds are quite high that john kerry would have won if he'd been the right kind of christian... *shrugs*

[Lomall]

Is religion evil? What an absurdly stupid concept.

 

Most ideas and beliefs are inherently neutral. The concepts of good and evil only apply when people use these ideas to further their own agendas and goals.

 

Religion does two things. It offers people guild lines on living and relating to people around them. It also offers a hope that when death comes there is something better awaiting them. It offers a hope that all of the trials and tribulations that we have endured in this life amount to something and are not erased the second life ends.

 

Judging an entire group based on the loudest is very easy to do and will usually get you the wrong impressions. Ignore the fundamentalists who whine about creationism vs. evolution. If you want to see what a real Christian looks like look at the people who work the missionary homes in the third world countries doing the work that the nations of the world can’t be bothered to do. Its that whole help the poor and sick thing.

[Windu Chi]

Is religion evil? What an absurdly stupid concept.

 

Most ideas and beliefs are inherently neutral. The concepts of good and evil only apply when people use these ideas to further their own agendas and goals.

 

Religion does two things. It offers people guild lines on living and relating to people around them. It also offers a hope that when death comes there is something better awaiting them. It offers a hope that all of the trials and tribulations that we have endured in this life amount to something and are not erased the second life ends.

 

Judging an entire group based on the loudest is very easy to do and will usually get you the wrong impressions. Ignore the fundamentalists who whine about creationism vs. evolution. If you want to see what a real Christian looks like look at the people who work the missionary homes in the third world countries doing the work that the nations of the world can’t be bothered to do. Its that whole help the poor and sick thing.

Religion is evil, it will always be a trouble maker for human socity as along it continue to exist as a major concept.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Most ideas and beliefs are inherently neutral. The concepts of good and evil only apply when people use these ideas to further their own agendas and goals.

So it's not wrong for me to think that, say, all Kurds should be killed and write a book about it? It's only when someone acts on the book that my view is no longer neutral?

 

Religion does two things. It offers people guild lines on living and relating to people around them.

So much for its neutrality.

It also offers a hope that when death comes there is something better awaiting them.

And, in many religions' cases, that most of the world's populace is being brutally tortured or otherwise punished after death. Maybe I'm biased as a member of a humanitarian organization, but that philosophy does not appeal to me.

 

Of course I'd like for there to be something else after death, preferably good ole reincarnation. But I don't think going around and believing in such a phenomenon does anything good for you, as it means that you risk failing to live this life to its full potential.

 

It's like buying a cell phone. If I told you that you can have one cell phone in your life and that's it, you'd probably take better care of it than if you got a free one that was ten times better when you wore out or "lost" your first one, right? Of course Christianity and most other mythologies have anti-suicide systems (such as Christianity's condemnation of all suicide victims to Hell), but still, I think such a belief makes this world seem more dull and unenjoyable.

 

It offers a hope that all of the trials and tribulations that we have endured in this life amount to something (...)

If you need that kind of affirmation from a book, you're not doing enough with your life.

 

I'm with the Red Cross visitation service. I'm a past volunteer at a Houstonian animal shelter and at my past school's volunteer organization. I've signed up as a volunteer at an annual camp for burn victims next year.

 

Does that amount to something? For the animals we saved at the shelter, yes. For the person I'm going to help as a visitor, yes.

 

If you feel your life amounts to nothing, then go do something with it.

 

Ignore the fundamentalists who whine about creationism vs. evolution. If you want to see what a real Christian looks like (...)

True Scottsman argument. Timothy McVeigh was as Christian as that random charity guy.

 

look at the people who work the missionary homes in the third world countries doing the work that the nations of the world can’t be bothered to do. Its that whole help the poor and sick thing.

While forcing their religion down their throats.

 

Lots of organizations, ICRC being one, are involved in the third world. It's not like atheists don't care and the friendly Christians have to do all the dirty work.

[Samuel Dravis]

So it's not wrong for me to think that, say, all Kurds should be killed and write a book about it? It's only when someone acts on the book that my view is no longer neutral?

That's not what he said.. just the idea does not affect nor hurt anyone. What they do with the idea is something else entirely. Writing a book constitutes doing something. Just thinking it, however, is not a reason to punish someone. AFAIK, no one wants thought police... and yes, as far as people should be concerned, if someone never does something about their (positive or negative) beliefs, it's the same as if they didn't have them in the first place.

[Jae Onasi]

While forcing their religion down their throats.

 

Lots of organizations, ICRC being one, are involved in the third world. It's not like atheists don't care and the friendly Christians have to do all the dirty work.

 

My aunt and uncle are agnostic, and have done so much volunteer work I'm inspired by their example. I've heard of fine work being done by the Red Crescent in various countries hit with natural disasters and wars. I'm also inspired by Mother Teresa and the charity she set up. We all could go on and on, and that's not a bad thing--with all the bad news we get, especially today, it's great to hear the stories of what people here are doing to volunteer. Volunteerism and caring for one's fellow humans is not confined to one religion/philosophy, obviously. I volunteer in and out of the church--I'm on the 'welcome committee' at church and moderate a Bible study. I'm the first aid director for a re-enactment group, I do work with the visually impaired, and I volunteer at my kids' school. (yes, I do wonder when I sleep sometimes).

 

Our church supports some medical missionaries in at least 2 different countries where they are expressly forbidden by that country's laws to speak about Christianity. They do their work and they follow those countries' laws, and so they don't prosyletize. Not all missionaries are doing their work in order to 'force religion down their throats.'

 

Of course I'd like for there to be something else after death, preferably good ole reincarnation. But I don't think going around and believing in such a phenomenon does anything good for you, as it means that you risk failing to live this life to its full potential.

The belief frees me from the despair that my life is a cosmic joke (even though it does have its amusing points, believe me) and that anything I would do in that case possibly won't make any real difference in the long run.

Regardless of belief in an afterlife, we all only get one go-around in this particular life. All of us fail to live up to our true potentials from time to time. I happen to believe in a heaven, but I also believe we're here for a purpose, and we need to be work at fulfilling that purpose. We can't do that if we're sitting around telling ourselves 'oh, it'll be OK, I'm going to heaven anyway, so I'll skip the hard stuff here on earth.'

One of my favorite movie lines is in Dead Poets Society when Robin Williams' character says to the boys, 'Suck the marrow out of life.'

[Nancy Allen``]

Y'know, atheists really must have all the answers. Any Bible stories or tales of the Prophet Mohammed must really be no more real than Tolkian or Rowling. They really must be so super intelligent that because they cannot grasp the jump of logic that is religion it must not be real. They must also be some of the most misrible unhopeful people in the world as they have nothing to look to, no faith to follow or any source to lift themselves up when times are bad.

[Emperor Devon]

Religion has caused just as much wickedness to the world as it has caused goodness. While many devote Christian monks preserved ancient works through the Dark Ages, it was Christians on a holy Crusade who sacked Constantinople. It's resulted in thousands of people being sacrificed and killed for reasons so stupid you can laugh at them, but churches and monastaries have helped the needy and the sick. At he same time, it's started completely pointless and avoidable wars. I could go on and on about how many good and bad things done in the name of God....

 

Despite being an atheist, I would have to be fair say it's neither good nor evil overall, but has played and essential role in the history of humanity.

[Nancy Allen``]

Religion has caused just as much wickedness to the world as it has caused goodness.

 

No denying that. Those who had gone out to spill blood in the name of religion are wrong. They are wrong to set out to war. Not only are they wrong they're hypocrites, preaching peace only when it suited them. Such people damage their religion, not benefit it.

[Tyrion]

Y'know, atheists really must have all the answers. Any Bible stories or tales of the Prophet Mohammed must really be no more real than Tolkian or Rowling. They really must be so super intelligent that because they cannot grasp the jump of logic that is religion it must not be real. They must also be some of the most misrible unhopeful people in the world as they have nothing to look to, no faith to follow or any source to lift themselves up when times are bad.

 

In a way, atheists at least would tend to the needs of the world more than those who believe this is ultimately fleeting. A contradiction I suppose, but it still holds true.

[toms]

Those who had gone out to spill blood in the name of religion are wrong. .

Why?

 

Thats the problem with religion, it always comes down to an arbitary "our way is right, their way is wrong"..why?.."because it is."

 

They would say exactly the same thing about your views, giving exactly the same reasons, probably quoting exactly the same darn teachings.

 

As an impartial observor i'd say that, using the religion's own standards, there is a lot more evidence to support "those who spill blood in the name of religion are right.".

 

I'm also inspired by Mother Teresa and the charity she set up.

Hmm.. yes. You mean the one that got money to "tend the sick" and then spent it all on churches and missionary activities while letting the sick die with very few pain meds or doctors?

 

The woman who was more interested in baptising hindus and muslims on their death beds than in actually trying to cure them.

 

The charity that didn't distinguish between the curable and the dying?

 

The religious nut job who, at a 1981 press conference in which she was asked: "Do you teach the poor to endure their lot?" replied: "I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people."

 

If she is an example of the GOOD that religion can do then I think i'd be happier without, thanks very much. Or with something that is more concerned with saving people than spreading religious dogma such as the red cross or oxfam.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

They must also be some of the most misrible unhopeful people in the world (...)

Who, me:confused:?

 

I'm feeling better than I have in years:).

(...) as they have nothing to look to (...)

How about a nice future?

(...) no faith to follow (...)

Since when did I need one?

(...) or any source to lift themselves up when times are bad.

Let's see. I've got my therapist, the Red Cross, my fantastic buddies, my parents, some truly great teachers, and my forever-faithful doggie. And, of course, candy and Pepsi.

[TK-8252]

Y'know, atheists really must have all the answers. Any Bible stories or tales of the Prophet Mohammed must really be no more real than Tolkian or Rowling. They really must be so super intelligent that because they cannot grasp the jump of logic that is religion it must not be real. They must also be some of the most misrible unhopeful people in the world as they have nothing to look to, no faith to follow or any source to lift themselves up when times are bad.

 

Atheists/agnostics don't pretend to know everything like religious people do. Religious people are the ones who are absolutely 100% certain that they're going to heaven to see their lord and their family and everyone else is going to hell.

 

I'm an atheist... do I know what happens after death? Nope, no clue. But do I worry about burning in hell? Nope. We don't know everything and we likely never will. Is there life on other planets? No clue. Maybe, maybe not. No proof so we can't say for certain, but it's a possibility. Is the universe infinite? That's disputed as well.

 

The difference is that pretty much every evangelical you talk to will have a definitive answer for any question, other than "where did god come from?"

[toms]

People who aren't worried about god and heaven tend not to worry about what will happen when they die.. they are more concerned with living. But if it makes you feel better to think of all athiests as miserable, lonely people then by all means go ahead.

 

I'm more of the

Preacher man don't tell me heaven is under the earth

I know you don't know what life is really worth

Is not all that glitters in gold and

Half the story has never been told

So now you see the light, aay

Stand up for your right. Come on

 

Get Up, Stand Up, stand up for your right

Get Up, Stand Up, don't give up the fight

 

Most people think great God will come from the sky

Take away ev'rything, and make ev'rybody feel high

But if you know what life is worth

You would look for yours on earth

And now you see the light

You stand up for your right, yeah!

persuasion.. but that s just me..

[Kurgan]

Of course the stereotype of all religions as "pie in the sky, just wait till you die" is not really true. Yes, a lot of people are lazy, yes a lot of people are hopeless, but still.

 

It can swing both ways, so no, religion itself is not "evil"

[Davinq]

Low on time, too lazy and offended to read the rest of the thread, I will say only this:

 

Despite being a fictional story allegedly twisting the facts... Angels and Demons has thoroughly reshaped my views on religion and the meaning of life.

[Kurgan]

Learning about religion from Dan Brown is like learning about physics from Wile E. Coyote.

[Nancy Allen``]

Dagobahn Eagle said about ramming religion down people's throats. I think a better way of looking at it is to say that we shouldn't force beliefs down people's throats. Whether you are religious or not, atheist, whatever, slamming people who don't believe the same things you do and trying to make others believe what you do only serves to margenalise what you believe. Michael Moore and him speaking out against America at the Oscers is a good example, as his act made him the subject of scorn for many and served to cast those opposed to war in Iraq in a negative light.

 

Just on religion, there's the belief that Islam is terrorism. Bull****. Islam is not terrorism; hijacking planes, car bombings, suicide bombings, in short any act that us used to cause terror is terrorism. And why do people such as Al Qaeda commit terrorist acts? One of the reasons they give is to force the world into their version of Islam, which is not really Islam at all but racism, intolerance and hypocracy. Like I said, forcing your beliefs on others damages that belief, not promotes it.

[Emperor Devon]

I can't believe I didn't notice this... Thanks for pointing it out, DB.

 

Y'know, atheists really must have all the answers. {snip}

 

As an atheist, I must say I find your post extremely offensive. I will keep the tirade I could say to myself, though again, I take great offense to your statement.

 

Y'know, atheists really must have all the answers.

 

I wish I did.

 

Any Bible stories or tales of the Prophet Mohammed must really be no more real than Tolkian or Rowling.

 

I believe that some events in the Bible and some tales of Mohammed have occured. Others I am simply too skeptical to believe.

 

They really must be so super intelligent that because they cannot grasp the jump of logic that is religion it must not be real.

 

I can 'grasp' as you out it, the logic of religion. I am simply too skeptical to believe in it. How should someone simply believing in God and an afterlife make them more intelligent? Someone's faith does not affect their intellect, and vice versa.

 

They must also be some of the most misrible unhopeful people in the world as they have nothing to look to, no faith to follow or any source to lift themselves up when times are bad.

 

'Misrible'? Using proper spelling always helps in the Senate Chambers.

 

If you think all atheist's lives are miserable, I could easily prove you completely wrong if you knew something about my life. Faith does not result in a better life. I think I can safely say this, as I once believed in God. When times are bad, what about friends, family, and life itself?

 

And here I was, hoping that all followers of religion could be as tolerant of other beliefs as Jae Onasi.