If we did away with organized religion, we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in now.
You could say this at basically any point in hunan history and it would still be true
Oh! I disagree! I think religion probably served an incredible useful purpose in our social development.
Think about this: 500 years ago, or 1000, in some village somewhere, John hates Micheal. Or maybe John just wants Michael's cow or land or pants. What's stopping John from killing Micheal? Like, who's gonna even know it was him? Some magical man in the sky who sees all and knows all? And what would that guy even do! Does he have powers to send you to a horrible place? Or curse you?
Oh....
So does he have rules you gotta follow? What's the payoff?
Oh....
So how do I learn these rules, and stay on this guys good side?
Guess John probably won't kill Micheal. Not yet anyways. Best keep sky daddy happy.
Now did the "good" outweigh the bad? Did it ever? And at what point in human history did that ratio shift and the good no longer outweighed the bad? Are there reasons/situations/people where this is still a valuable tactic?
Discuss.
Most people don't want to kill other people. It turns out this is true with or without religion. We never needed it to do this. However, religion does tell people it's good to kill people from other religions.
Edit to add this quote I remembered:
The question I get asked by religious people all the time is, without God, what's to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero. The fact that these people think that if they didn't have this person watching over them that they would go on killing, raping rampages is the most self-damning thing I can imagine. I don't want to do that. Right now, without any god, I don't want to jump across this table and strangle you. I have no desire to strangle you. I have no desire to flip you over and rape you.
-Penn Jillette
A lot of religions were quite progressive at the time they came up. The proplem is that the world changed a lot, while religions didn't.
Except people don't go around killing each other for no reason with or without religion.
Capitalists would just find another way to divide the working class and oppress people. Religion isn’t the root cause of almost any conflict.
Religion isn’t the root cause of almost any conflict.
It isn't causing a genocide in Gaza. It wasn't the cause of the Crusades. It isn't why the Kurds were genocided. You're right. Religion never causes conflict. In fact, I'm listening to the Last Podcast on the Left series on the Lori Vallow / Chad Daybell murders where being ultra-rightwing Mormon nutjobs also didn't cause conflict.
What the hell are you saying? Capitalism kills. Religion kills.
Why "organized"? We see sects spontaneously emerge from belief in magic, sometimes with deadly consequences. Do away with religion altogether, organized or not is irrelevant -- and the "organized" part sometimes helps keep the lunatics under control
Greed, fear, and ignorance are the causes of all our woes.
Religion is just how the worst people look themselves in the mirror afterwards.
Oh shit, he said something in Latin. Saying something in Latin means it's always correct since it sounds so clever. Quod erat demonstrandum, the argument ends there.
Everyone knows quiquid latine dictum sit altum videtur
I just want to add Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
1: I'm not afraid of the inferior siege engine.
2: that's an amazing quote, where is it from?
Used to be an old BBS thing back in the day
Wingardium leviosa mf
Levi-oh-SAAAAAAAAAAAH you pleb
Latin and Greek are like the Ornstein and Smough of Western prescriptivism.
it's fairly easy to prove that no god exists.
jainism is a religion which negates the existence of god. islam is a religion that negates the existence of any god but their almighty.
if there did exist a god, s/he would not allow a situation where both these religions can co-exist. because any god except allah is excluded by islam, and allah themself is excluded by jainism.
ergo, god does not exist. quad erat demonstrandum.
if there did exist a god, s/he would not allow a situation where both these religions can co-exist.
All this proves is that he doesn't care about the intricacies of organised religion, not that he doesn't exist.
ah. if she does not care about the intricacies of organised religion, can we then conclusively state that all organised religions proselytising the word of god are therefore bullshit?
surely the all-powerful god, glory be in her name, would not allow false organised teligions to exist?!
If a traditional God exists, it's most likely a trans dimensional being that is vastly beyond our comprehension. It's silly to assume anything by it's behavior or lack of such.
But yes, organised religion declaring they talk for or understand such a being are obviously bullshit.
This reminds me of Ricky Gervais joke:
So you believe in one God I assume... there about 3,000 to choose from. So basically you deny one less God than I do. You don't believe in 2,999 Gods, and I don't believe in just one more.
Simple: just deny his denial. Now he has to provide proof.
So the logic is that, whoever speaks first is the one who has to prove it? In that case we can go back to the earliest time these guys ever came up that there was this single deity named God. They never proved him back then, never did so now.
I think a better way of phrasing it is that I don't know that a god exists (as in, any god, I can be quite certain that the god of the Torah or Bible is too logically incoherent to exist). I admit I don't know. But that doesn't mean I should act as though one does, especially as I wouldn't know which mutually exclusive one it would be if it did exist.
The burden of proof is on one who makes a claim to knowledge, either that a thing does exist, or that it doesn't exist. The default state is agnosticism, or admitting that you don't know, not simply disbelief.
Edit: In fact, the OP's original statement seemed to be agnostic in nature, admitting that they couldn't prove that god didn't exist, but since they couldn't prove that god did exist either, that they shouldn't waste their time acting as though it did ('pretending').
It was only the believer who misunderstood them as seeming to claim that god definitely didn't exist, but then they got into a sidetrack discussion about the burden of proof, rather than just correcting the believer's assumption about OP's belief.
An even easier way of saying it is "I'm not convinced god exists"
It has to be like the axiom said otherwise the axiom doesn't work.
Gee thanks pal.
"That's an awful nice axiom you have there. Would be down right awful if something should happen to it."
Fine. Here we go:
God exists.
I cannot prove this claim, so it must be untrue.
There, I fixed it.
The lack of omnipotence is tautological. Can a theorized seity make a rock so heavy, the deity cannot move it? If he cannot make it, he is not imnipotent. If he makes one he cannot move, then he is not omnipotent. Adding qualifications about logical consistent omnipotence is just dissembling and lame excuse making.
That’s a well charged battery
That's a triple negative. So Zenith there, having made the third strike, is out.
Wait, that's not what the three strikes rule means? Well I mean according to Zenith's logic it is. You can't tell me he's right and I'm wrong twice. My double negative cancels out to a positive.
7 idiots need to leave Lemmy forever.
About
This is the official Lemmy for the r/ReligiousCringe***** subreddit. This is a community about poking fun at the religious fundamentalist's who take their religion a little bit too far. Here you will find religious content that is so outrageous and so cringeworthy that even someone who is mildly religious will cringe.
Rules
All posts must contain religious cringe. All posts must be made from a religious person or must be showcasing some kind of religious bigotry. The only exception to this is rule 2
Material about religious bigots made by non-bigots is only allowed from Friday-Sunday EST. In an effort to keep this community on the topic of religious cringe and bigotry we have decide to limit stuff like atheist memes to only the weekends.
No direct links to religious cringe. To prevent religious bigots from getting our clicks and views directs links to religious cringe are not allowed. If you must a post a screenshot of the site or use archive.ph. If it is a YouTube video please use a YouTube frontend like Piped or Invidious
No Proselytizing. Proselytizing is defined as trying to convert someone to a particular religion or certain world view. Doing so will get you banned.
Spammers and Trolls will be instantly banned. No exceptions.
Resources
International Suicide Hotlines
Non Religious Organizations
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Ex-theist Communities
Other Similar Communities
