Forums | MacLife

Ra wrote:

Religion is can only be good. Humankind is the problem, not "religion."

Now that doesn't make any sense.

Hank Rearden wrote:

Jaligard wrote:

How does the brutal Christian, Hitler, get lumped in with those atheists/communists?

Heck, even his religious genocide was focused on the traditional Christian scapegoats, the Jews.

...

For the record, banning religion = bad idea.

Uh oh.  Hitler.  Well, he may have been raised a Christian, pretty hard not to have been in Europe of the early 1900's.  But, considering the number of protestant and Catholic folks that he had imprisoned, tortured, and killed, I'd say that he had tossed his "faith" in the dustbin well before the Putsch.

Some say that his philosophy, at least, had some echoes of early germanic pagan religion.  But, I think that that's a slap at pagans, frankly.  To say that the man had any religion, other than worship of himself, is fairly questionable.

The guy was a professed Christian.

I'll admit that he was bad at it, but he doesn't get the atheist tag by any stretch of the imagination. That's a declarative religious position—even if the declaration is "I don't know"—and you cannot ascribe it to him without proof.

Jaligard wrote:

The guy was a professed Christian.

Maybe.  Maybe not.

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mhi … stian.html

Farmerkev wrote:

If it weren't for religion I wouldn't have some of my favorite cuss words.

I used several tonight in fact at the ball game.
They didn't like us complaining about getting hosed and called lots of T's on us. I even got to talk with a lady principle

That'd be even hotter if she was a principal.

Be imperfect all you want, but I'd at least brush up on my three Rs before chillin' with an educator.

Well sounds like we've found our pitchfork committee chair.

Oh dear....one of those parents, then?

Ra wrote:

Well, that's true in relation the the mayans. But, I assumed that Elton was not referring to the Mayans (I didn't read the article), but to Christians as an institution. I would think that the Christian religion, is good. The problem is not with religion itself, but with the humans who in the name of religion stray from the right path.

You comment appeared to apply to "religion," not "Christianity."

bratboy wrote:

Oh dear....one of those parents, then?

http://homepage.mac.com/oatmeal/MAF/maxes/twitch.gif

Not really, we've had excellent refs all year. A blown call here and there but they really we're just honest mistakes. Nobody got mad, just cheered for the kids to work harder. One local ref was a tad nasty but he has hard feelings towards a lot of the parents of the kids playing now. Several of them forced his son out of a ref job in the local junior league, the kid was on his second meth bust and was smoking pot openly in the parking lot between games. That was just a bit too much to let slide.
Tonight though was a whole different thing. It got ugly.
All in all though our reaction was in the best liberal tradition. Raise hell when the man tries to cheat you.

After reading the article, I will assume that elton was referring to "organized religion," but only to the portion of organized Christian religion that opposes homosexuality. Not all Christian denominations oppose homosexuality

Last edited by Ra (2006-11-13 10:54 pm)

Its just another separation, another wedge.

So religion fosters division? What about making that a wedge to demarcate between the religious and the irreligious? How is that any better?

And I seriously question the anti-religious bias, because they dont practice what they preach. When so many bad attitudes are created in religion, so much hate, so much death, well, what is that in comparison to the political machinery upheld and supported and endorsed by just about every religious critic? What about killing sanctioned on grounds of what area of the globe you live in or what political opinion you believe in? If religion has reason to be banned then how does nationalism or politics escape damnation? Bunch of hypocrits, I say.

Here's the deal: yeah, the world is full of divisions. Ignore them or you are no better. Disengage from hateful organizations. There is no good side, we're all living here.

StaticAge wrote:

Here's the deal: yeah, the world is full of divisions. Ignore them or you are no better. Disengage from hateful organizations. There is no good side, we're all living here.

Isn't it better to try and change them rather than disengage?

Farmerkev wrote:

StaticAge wrote:

Here's the deal: yeah, the world is full of divisions. Ignore them or you are no better. Disengage from hateful organizations. There is no good side, we're all living here.

Isn't it better to try and change them rather than disengage?

This is my opinion, but I think NO. I think it dirties your hands, upholds the system, and then your effort is absorbed into the machine. I dont think there are many people, proportionately, who like war and want suffering to exist. But they are chained by allegiance to their governments and nationalities and races and religions to reject what is in their hearts, corrupted by lies and promises that cannot be fulfilled because its those lies and promises that generate the problems, not provide solution.