Goodbye Religion

I had high hopes for ID - until I dug deeper and there were no facts, only speculation, still faith based.

Will read this article, thanks.

 

I think one key mistake that is frequently made is that one who rejects of organized religion is assumed to be atheist/agnostic. It had to be repeated several times in the recent @NormsBookClub discussions that religion and faith are not equivalent. The data in the article is all about churches.. the author seems to assume that it means something more.

 

Safe?

 

Don't let the door hit you on the rear end on your way out, religion.

 

Thanks, Tom, always refreshing to see good news. Roger Ebert said some months ago that one of our greatest problems is that children believe what their parents tell them. Thank goodness most kids stop listening or we'd still be living like savages in the savannah.

 

Whoopsy! Inflammation is in the eye of the side being gored, apparently

 

Safe? Perhaps RobH might get an allergic reaction while reading the article and interpret some meaning where none exists.

I hope he pipes in. Interesting in knowing if Jenny McCartheists extend their faith-based beliefs to religion. Each is entitled to his opinion, let's hear both sides.

 

Why, so we can get derided?

There is only one reason these types of threads are started. When is the last time you saw a thread named "Did you know that God loves you?" or "God doesn't care about your past, only your future?"?

Just saying...

 

No religion/atheist/agnostic are indeed bundled together.

However, one of the survey linked to in the article also notes a significantly increased belief in evolution, which is another indicator of decreased theism.

I know a high school teacher who, in her 10 years of teaching, has noticed that her students have become decreasingly religious. The only problem is that their religion or theism hasn't been replaced by scientific wonder; their view of the world has become more narrow and self-centered.

 

Spidey, being a good loving person, believing in God as a purely faith-based belief, doesn't a religion make. God's temple is inside of us; we have the capacity for love, and thus whenever we love instead of hate, we do God's bidding.

That's good enough for me. I don't need to support financially a religion for that. I don't need to support a local church for a support group.

So, no derision. Derision, bad manners, cussing at other members = being bad, negative. Not the path to love.

Let's rather discuss the need for a religion. I've taken a few University theology courses through the Catholic Church just a few years ago. It did not make me more religious, rather the opposite.

A religion is a support group, with an elected leader, that the group supports in exchange for services (pro-populous mass). Any Catholic priest will never charge money for his personal services. You pay for his transportation or in the case of a marriage, renting the Church for X hours, including cleanup. Same thing for all the Protestant & Christian variants.

The young crowd don't adopt & read newspapers. They use the Internet. Many don't see a need for marriage; common law is good enough and protect both sides, and protects the children.

So the topic - is religion necessary?

Not, do you believe in God. The US founding fathers believed in God, printed it on the money In God We Trust. They designed the constitution for freedom of religion.
(yet burned witches!? - oh yeah, that was before the constitution, right?)

I don't question my belief in God, my belief in the power of love. I DO question all religions, their usefulness.

 

Some of what you say I completely agree with, the rest just seems cynical. The church is the body of Christ, we are His hands and feet and two are better than one. Most importantly is the relation between self and God but also is the relation with other (believers). If that grouping of people you are refering to as religion then I disagree. If you are referring to a person in Rome dictating spiritual things, then I agree.

 

Exactly. Those threads are very conspicuous in their absence, and considering your belief I regard it an appalling lapse of responsibilty that you and others DON'T start those kinds of threads with the same earnestness I put up threads advocating atheism.

Wht aren't you?

If the reason is you expect such threads would be derided more than championed, then there's a very strong message in that supposition: you haven't got enough confidence in the strength of your position to put it forward and back it up. You confine yourself to being only defensive in pro-atheism threads, or in Chuck's case, just whining. Those postures don't buttress your belief, they reinforce the notion that the beliefs are shabby, and weak.

Put your money where your mouth is, as they say, and start threads that declare "God Loves You", and make the case. Stand up for it. If it's as strong as you claim, it'll withstand derision and its champions will outnumber the ridiculers.

Personally, if I were the god you believe in, I'd be VERY disappointed with you for NOT gritting yoiur teeth and getting the message out, NOT in a defensive whine about how unfair all the criticism is, but in advancing the message itself as forthrightly as possible.

That's what I do here to advocate reasons for atheism, without the goad of some god to make me do it, but for the sheer sake of what I believe serves the best interests of progressing civilization.

No reason you shouldn't be doing the same.

 

Good post, except the phrase "In God We Trust" has only appeared on U.S. coins since 1864 and on paper currency since 1957. You can't blame that on the founding fathers.

On a similar note, the under God in 'one nation "under God" ' wasn't added to the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954 during the McCarthy era fanaticism.

 

Thanks AK. With posts like this I don't need to.

 

Betcha a quarter in some scenarios where people are dying left and right (war, catastrophe, etc....), when things happen to people that are far beyond their control (i.e. Earthquake/tsunami in Japan) ....

that under the above circumstances, more than few people come running back to some type of faith or religion or what have you.

 

Which brings up a couple of big questions. Can a nation with 'in god we trust' written on its money honestly say it accepts freedom of religion? And how is it 'special interests' are able to not only set the agenda, but get its way?

 

I'll support legislation TOMORROW to take IGWT off of all US Currency, and (while we're at it) out of the Pledge of Allegiance!

This is an unpopular view with my fellow Christians, but Jesus said (something like) “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”.

My thinking is that the establishment clause (often and incorrectly listed as the "separation clause", found in the US Constitution...as amended) wasn't incorporated into the COUS to protect the government from religion, but the other way around.

Besides...the way we're mucking up finances in this country (and others) do you really want GOD's name on a greenback???

 

Feel free to start one if you are so inclined.

Icarus