Religion See religion is an existential threat to our society

Remove this Banner Ad

Gethelred

Brownlow Medallist
May 1, 2016
19,227
40,026
AFL Club
Carlton
Im going to repond with left wingers favourite catch phrase.

"Im on the right side of history".

i just want to speed it up.
Dude, at least one of us has the sense to keep our idle musings where they belong, instead of cluttering up the SRP to be forgotten again in time for the seven o'clock news.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

kickazz

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 12, 2010
9,979
13,798
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
No need to ban religion, just keep the old "separation of church and state" thing alive and well.

That is, "thank-you Pentecostal nutbag for your opinion. You are entitled to it. But we are the government and we make the laws on earth"
 

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,333
21,433
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
Ive literally just posted what it would entail. You ignored it and made up your own explanation and am now arguing against your own made up version. Thats losing ones marbles.
You said we should "ban religions", only to immediately say we shouldn't do that?

What's wrong with you?

You then said "people can believe in religion ... i just dont want them acting on it".

So would you ban religious observance? I mean, isn't that a case of people "acting on their religion"? And you're against that.
 
Last edited:

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,333
21,433
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
See Seeds walk. See Seeds run. See Seeds founder around, looking for a point or an argument with which to back up something absurd.

Good Seeds.
Ask Seeds to explain how discrimination on the basis of gender or sexuality is actually "racism". He says it's "exchangeable". Seriously.

This guy is a human category error who doesn't even understand his own principles.
 

Evolved1

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 14, 2013
9,739
12,342
The lockdown state
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Phil Ivey
That threat doesnt mean you dont try. The only way to get a better world is to actually try. Under your argument we never would of got rid of monarchies.

And why should we be tolerant? We arent tolerant of thieves, disease, poverty, corruption, snake oil merchants. Why should we be tolerant of something that is clearly wrong and doing damage to society. In the past it had some virtues but it has none in a modern society.

and when i say ban i dont mean criminalising it or rounding people up or closing churches. I mean making sure all schools are independent of religion propoganda and all kids at schools are taught what religion actually is and why it is false. I mean removing all subsidies for religions. I mean removing the right to ignore laws everyone else has to follow based off religious reasons.
The goal of secular society is separation of religion and state, not promotion of atheism. Your solutions to genuine issues often rely on overt authoritarianism. It's like using a cane toad to control cane beetles.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,726
40,653
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Tax them, regulate their charities, allow for safer revenues for abused religious victims to come forward

Once you do that then most grifters would go somewhere else
All good but i think you also need to provide children an avenue where they arent bombarded with religious propoganda all the time. And the obvious avenue is schools. Schools need to be independent. Allow kids to go to church on the weekends but also given them independent schools free of the relgious propoganda on weekdays.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,726
40,653
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
You said we should "ban religions", only to immediately say we shouldn't do that?

What's wrong with you?

You then said "people can believe in religion ... i just dont want them acting on it".

So would you ban religious observance? I mean, isn't that a case of people "acting on their religion"? And you're against that.
All these years and you still dont get my lingo. Soft ban dude. implement rules that effectively make religous belief die in the arse because it becomes untenable with exisiting in modern society.

Yes you can still observe your religous holidays and go to church but remember all those behaviours your god tells you is right and wrong? The things that are the very essence of your beliefs. We are only going to accept them only if they already accord with our own rules. You arent going to be able to bypass societies laws on religous grounds anymore when they dont fit with them. We are also going to teach your kids what religion actually is And that sky fairies do not exist. sure you can still teach them whatever you want at home and at church on weekends. But your kids are going to learn the real truth about the world and what religion actually is at school. We are also going to take away all your financial advantages that provide you with reach to spread your lies.

you can exist. But no one will want to be a part of you anymore. to be honest this is already kind of happening. I just want to speed this process up.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,726
40,653
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
The goal of secular society is separation of religion and state, not promotion of atheism. Your solutions to genuine issues often rely on overt authoritarianism. It's like using a cane toad to control cane beetles.
im advocating an athiest humanist state.

democracy is free to reign within the boundaries of an athiest humanist goal.

i would hardly call it authoritarian when the only thing you are outlawing is made up nonsense and declaring human welfare is the goal of government. In fact its the opposite of authoritariansim which is a state where anything but human welfare is the goal of government. A religious state is authoritarian as it states the will of god is the goal of government and not the welfare of people.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
57,225
66,567
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
From a psychological point of view there is a strong, strong susceptibility in many people to hand responsibility for the chaos of success and failure around them to the hands of something higher - part of a rationalising and coping mechanism but also as a way to not drive our pattern seeking conscious minds mad trying to find the cause of all events we don't yet understand.

For most of human history that has been religion in some form.

I would argue that when you remove religion from those people who need it, or deny that answer to them, they find a replacement and that can be even more dangerous. At least with the imaginary friend coping mechanisms the powerful being can't reach down and influence real life in a material way, when it's replaced you get both the fundementalists AND the people/person/group they have empowered reaching into the world to influence it.

People need to be part of something bigger than they are. Take away someone's god and they will invent a new one. They might even collectivize under something like nationalism to be part of something.

So let them pray.
Let them gather on the weekend and pour water on babies.
Let them drink tea and ask how each other are doing.

Don't let them influence politics.
 

Gethelred

Brownlow Medallist
May 1, 2016
19,227
40,026
AFL Club
Carlton
All these years and you still dont get my lingo. Soft ban dude. implement rules that effectively make religous belief die in the arse because it becomes untenable with exisiting in modern society.

Yes you can still observe your religous holidays and go to church but remember all those behaviours your god tells you is right and wrong? The things that are the very essence of your beliefs. We are only going to accept them only if they already accord with our own rules. You arent going to be able to bypass societies laws on religous grounds anymore when they dont fit with them. We are also going to teach your kids what religion actually is And that sky fairies do not exist. sure you can still teach them whatever you want at home and at church on weekends. But your kids are going to learn the real truth about the world and what religion actually is at school. We are also going to take away all your financial advantages that provide you with reach to spread your lies.

you can exist. But no one will want to be a part of you anymore. to be honest this is already kind of happening. I just want to speed this process up.
Revealed: Seeds is an alt account for FireKrakouer.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,726
40,653
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
From a psychological point of view there is a strong, strong susceptibility in many people to hand responsibility for the chaos of success and failure around them to the hands of something higher - part of a rationalising and coping mechanism but also as a way to not drive our pattern seeking conscious minds mad trying to find the cause of all events we don't yet understand.

For most of human history that has been religion in some form.

I would argue that when you remove religion from those people who need it, or deny that answer to them, they find a replacement and that can be even more dangerous. At least with the imaginary friend coping mechanisms the powerful being can't reach down and influence real life in a material way, when it's replaced you get both the fundementalists AND the people/person/group they have empowered reaching into the world to influence it.

People need to be part of something bigger than they are. Take away someone's god and they will invent a new one. They might even collectivize under something like nationalism to be part of something.

So let them pray.
Let them gather on the weekend and pour water on babies.
Let them drink tea and ask how each other are doing.

Don't let them influence politics.
agree with your opening statement. Im not sure we can say they need gods though. Athiests who dont fall into nilhism are perfectly happy. Meaning can be found in many forms that dont relate to fictions. Both at an individual level and and a broader community/societal level. You dont need gods to find meaning. You dont need evil causes to find meaning.
 

Pie eyed

Premium Platinum
Jun 26, 2007
40,035
18,633
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Magpies
No need to ban religion, just keep the old "separation of church and state" thing alive and well.

That is, "thank-you Pentecostal nutbag for your opinion. You are entitled to it. But we are the government and we make the laws on earth"
This would work if you had politicians, especially Prime Ministers, not beholden to Churches and cults.
 

The Cryptkeeper

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 9, 2006
17,356
19,956
Left of centre.
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Super Tottenham....from the Lane.
From a psychological point of view there is a strong, strong susceptibility in many people to hand responsibility for the chaos of success and failure around them to the hands of something higher - part of a rationalising and coping mechanism but also as a way to not drive our pattern seeking conscious minds mad trying to find the cause of all events we don't yet understand.

For most of human history that has been religion in some form.

I would argue that when you remove religion from those people who need it, or deny that answer to them, they find a replacement and that can be even more dangerous. At least with the imaginary friend coping mechanisms the powerful being can't reach down and influence real life in a material way, when it's replaced you get both the fundementalists AND the people/person/group they have empowered reaching into the world to influence it.

People need to be part of something bigger than they are. Take away someone's god and they will invent a new one. They might even collectivize under something like nationalism to be part of something.

So let them pray.
Let them gather on the weekend and pour water on babies.
Let them drink tea and ask how each other are doing.

Don't let them influence politics.
The things is, the religious won't have one without the other. The indoctrinated are so certain of their "God given" view on life that they insist on imparting that view wherever they can.

The bit in bold is an absolute impossibility.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
57,225
66,567
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
The things is, the religious won't have one without the other. The indoctrinated are so certain of their "God given" view on life that they insist on imparting that view wherever they can.

The bit in bold is an absolute impossibility.
I agree. I think the need is in humans for that driven purpose, part of the team. Political and activist groups are expressions of this and they know it, look at how China handles expressions of anything of a higher power than the state.

Your devotion should be to the state.

Harnessing that human condition is very effective.
 

The Cryptkeeper

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 9, 2006
17,356
19,956
Left of centre.
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Super Tottenham....from the Lane.
I agree. I think the need is in humans for that driven purpose, part of the team. Political and activist groups are expressions of this and they know it, look at how China handles expressions of anything of a higher power than the state.

Your devotion should be to the state.

Harnessing that human condition is very effective.
Interesting.

Agree that humans need a purpose. I am not convinced that one's devotion should be to the State though. I firmly believe in democracy but we seem to be unable to come up with a system that is truly democratic. We democratically elect a leader/government but then by extension of this we then have to tolerate the individual decisions of those elected even though those decisions may be unpopular ones, or not in the collective interest.

As an example, the LNP seem to win elections based on their economic policy (the bona fides of this are a topic for another day) and we are prepared to sacrifice social policy in the process. Or vice versa. When in reality an economically conservative yet socially progressive government is what most of us would like. Yet you can't have a plebiscite to decide the future of every bill that is tabled. And then some decisions are reliant on others...
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
57,225
66,567
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Interesting.

Agree that humans need a purpose. I am not convinced that one's devotion should be to the State though. I firmly believe in democracy but we seem to be unable to come up with a system that is truly democratic. We democratically elect a leader/government but then by extension of this we then have to tolerate the individual decisions of those elected even though those decisions may be unpopular ones, or not in the collective interest.

As an example, the LNP seem to win elections based on their economic policy (the bona fides of this are a topic for another day) and we are prepared to sacrifice social policy in the process. Or vice versa. When in reality an economically conservative yet socially progressive government is what most of us would like. Yet you can't have a plebiscite to decide the future of every bill that is tabled. And then some decisions are reliant on others...
I agree with you that the purpose shouldn't be to the state, that was a reference to another example of humans filling an inherent need to belong being corrupted to serve the power and will of others.

If you were designing a system where the state, or a particular party, were to have control handed to it by devoted cult members then removing value from things that they would otherwise find fulfillment in, such as family, local community etc would be how you go about it, creating the void that they fill to solve all your problems - but as with other faith you don't need to actually have your problems solved to remain faithful.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad