christians scare me

[Moonraker]

I majored in History at school and I remember my teacher saying no war was over religion. The classroom challenged him and in every case we came up with he showed that politics or profit were the true motives. Cloaking the real motives with religion makes war more acceptable to people and more willing to fight. You may be willing to die for God and a heavenly reward but would you die to make somebody richer? There is a great scene in movie Braveheart when the Scotish soldiers see the size of the English army doubt sets in:

Young soldier: I didn't come here to fight so they can own more lands; then I have to work for them.
Veteran soldier: Nor me. Alright lads. I'm not dying for these bastards! Lets go home.

But when Wallace appealed to a higher motive, nationalism, they stayed and fought. Religion, like nationalism is just a motivator for the masses. Incidentally for those soldiers it didn't really matter who won, English or Scots, they would still be "working" just a different nobleman owning the land.

[Moonraker]

I've never heard of any states passing laws against contraception and a quick Google search didn't come up with anything about that.

Contraceptives were illegal in Ireland until 1978 in accordance with a Papal Encyclical, entitled "Humanae Vitae" which banned artificial contraception. “Unnatural” contraception and the promotion of such was illegal and could lead to prosecution under the 1935 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act.

[mkemse]

I've never heard of any states passing laws against contraception and a quick Google search didn't come up with anything about that. In fact, most state governments promote contraception (through the use of condoms, at least) as a means of protecting against the spread of STD's. It is possible that some states have banned DISCUSSION of contraception in public schools, simply because it brings up that awful specter of sex to our wondrously pure children. But I don't believe an actual ban would get past the Supreme Court. At least not as it stands now.



I think you would be hard pressed to find ANY country that didn't undergo SOME form of revolution in their past. Even when those revolutions fail they tend to have a pronounced influence on the country. Yes, even England.

Thorne,

I agree, I beleve it was a mandate by the Church and not a State Laws to prohibit Condom use, please correct me if i am wrong

[Thorne]

Contraceptives were illegal in Ireland until 1978 in accordance with a Papal Encyclical, entitled "Humanae Vitae" which banned artificial contraception. “Unnatural” contraception and the promotion of such was illegal and could lead to prosecution under the 1935 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act.

Yeah, I can believe it, but that's not part of the US, which is what I was referring to. Nations, on the other hand, HAVE, and some still DO, criminalize contraception. But I would be willing to bet that in every case there is a religious proscription behind the law, as in the Encyclical you mention.

[Thorne]

Thorne,

I agree, I beleve it was a mandate by the Church and not a State Laws to prohibit Condom use, please correct me if i am wrong

I haven't done much research on this, so I'm mostly doing some guesswork here, but I would venture to say that any laws restricting the use of condoms were instigated by church mandates.

[silver9]

I think that to have religion dominating a country is both bad a good, and it all depends on what the religion is doing really.

Like here in England, there is a Christian basing in our laws and this has helped shape our country into being one of the best places to live and work, with good benefits and free health care and schools etc.
Yet things such as Sharia Law are, in my opinion, very damaging, as it subjugates women to a level that should never happen; with raped women being stoned to death for adultery; and the same goes for hard-line Christians in the South of America, where their beliefs are so fundamental they justify the most disgusting behavior

However, I think that when these religions create systems that are evil and wrong - it is not in the original intention of the God they worship.

'Christians' such a Bush may be destroying the planet, but that is totally against the teachings of the Bible; he should be a 'steward' of the Earth and protect it and all the animals on it, not hurt them and damage the environment; and though there is debate over the amount that war and death is condoned in the Bible, I still believe that it does not agree with going to war over such things like Oil and for more money.

Also, wars have rarely been fought over religion, it is normally a mask for something political or economic, and saying it is done for religious reasons is purely a justification and an excuse.

Christians, like everyone else, can be very good people, and just because there are a lot of people setting a bad example for the religion, it does not mean they are right in any way or following their religion as it was meant to be.

[MsCream]

Well I am a christian but not like the ones you find in the churchs,I pray to god and trust him but I still do my own things.I try my best to help by doing good things and not making things even worse.I think of myself as a christian but a different kind of one,one that has an open mind too life.I look at it like this "TO EACH HIS OWN"

[icey]

I majored in History at school and I remember my teacher saying no war was over religion. The classroom challenged him and in every case we came up with he showed that politics or profit were the true motives.

and in every case in history its shown that the church reigned over both money and politics and even ruled the monarchs.

regarding the laws in Ireland until the late 1970's which isnt all that long ago, who decreed contraception was wrong and made sure it was illegal all those years? the catholic church.
luckily religion doesnt have quite the same power in politics now but it still has a hell of a lot of sway and my guess is it always will do.

[Thorne]

and in every case in history its shown that the church reigned over both money and politics and even ruled the monarchs.

regarding the laws in Ireland until the late 1970's which isnt all that long ago, who decreed contraception was wrong and made sure it was illegal all those years? the catholic church.
luckily religion doesnt have quite the same power in politics now but it still has a hell of a lot of sway and my guess is it always will do.

It will, as long as people are willing to pay their hard earned money to support a church which is very reluctant to give it back. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Catholic churches around the world which are struggling to keep their heads above water, with priests who are truly concerned about the welfare of their parishioners. Yet the Vatican, the Catholic Church, is one of the wealthiest entities on the planet. And that is where they get their power from.

If the people would insist that their donations to the church STAY with their church, and not go to line the cassocks of every red hat in Rome, they would be a lot better off, and so would the rest of the world.

[mkemse]

It will, as long as people are willing to pay their hard earned money to support a church which is very reluctant to give it back. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Catholic churches around the world which are struggling to keep their heads above water, with priests who are truly concerned about the welfare of their parishioners. Yet the Vatican, the Catholic Church, is one of the wealthiest entities on the planet. And that is where they get their power from.

If the people would insist that their donations to the church STAY with their church, and not go to line the cassocks of every red hat in Rome, they would be a lot better off, and so would the rest of the world.

Or take away their Tax Exempt Status, that would change things

[TomOfSweden]

I was at a wedding yesterday when I started to think of this thread. It was a Baptist Church wedding. It scared me on a purely emotional level. One thing is to understand the Christian God theory on paper and have intellectual discussions about it. But I see myself as a fairly open minded kind of guy... but that really freaked me out.

The freakiest thing was that the priest was talking about God like a person. Not like the creator of the universe and creator of all rules and boundaries. It was as if God was going to come and help them over-come difficulties, as if those difficulties weren't put in place by God to begin with. An omnipotent being is responsible for everything... Anyhoo. He wasn't talking about the Christian God... he was talking about Superman.

It got better since I was placed right next to the priest at the dinner and we had a great time. He was a great guy and a super sport. We got him to wear his neck thingy as a head-band. He did remove it the second a camera came up. He "didn't want his congregation to see that picture on the Internet". I thought it was funny. Anyway... I established that this guy was totally anti-intellectual. He had no fucking clue. He didn't give a rats ass about logical consistency. He just didn't worry about it. He just wanted to feel good and find meaning in life. Now that is scary. If we replace reason with pure emotional satisfaction, we've removed all morality. We can justify anything with our faith.

But this being a Baptist wedding didn't prevent it from being a kick-ass party. One of the best parties I've ever been to. Now I'm a bit hung over and resting will commence.

[Thorne]

If we replace reason with pure emotional satisfaction, we've removed all morality. We can justify anything with our faith.

But this being a Baptist wedding didn't prevent it from being a kick-ass party. One of the best parties I've ever been to. Now I'm a bit hung over and resting will commence.

It is scary. But not at all surprising. After all, the whole purpose of religion, other than to give preachers a relatively cushy job, is to make people feel better about their poor lot in life so they don't revolt against those in power.

But those must have been Swedish Baptists, Tom. Here in the southern US, you'd be hard pressed to find any alcohol at a wedding.

[Ownedfyre (mm1)]

OMG! Thorne, that was just so funny I laughed out loud. It is so true too!!!! Even at family reunions!

[TomOfSweden]

It is scary. But not at all surprising. After all, the whole purpose of religion, other than to give preachers a relatively cushy job, is to make people feel better about their poor lot in life so they don't revolt against those in power.

I doubt being a priest in Sweden is a cushy job, and since there's hardly any religious people in Sweden... they're hardly a threat to anybody in power. Nah... that's not it.

I actually liked him a lot. I got a total BDSM-master vibe from him. He was a born dominant. I think he sincerely enjoys being worshipped and being "gods instrument" on earth. After all God and the entire church is nothing but a massive fetish (in the religious sense of course and not in the hanky panky way you are thinking I meant).

I have no doubt in my mind he actually loves his congregation and cares deeply about people around him. I got total honest love vibes from that guy. I think his heart was pure. He just wasn't a particularly deep fellow.

I saw the ceremony as nothing but a massive D/s sex orgy... but with clothes on. I mean... the couple had to get on their fucking knees to get the blessing from God.... having their eyes in the priests crotch height. And he was speaking about God and Jesus just like people speak about their boyfriends. It was like a love song to Jesus.

But then again... without Christian religious ceremonies having overly sexual connotations I doubt it would have been able to replace paganism. So I guess I shouldn't have been so surprised.

Maybe that is the secret of Christianity. It made all sex outside the marriage and outside the church illegal. (as was encouraged in Paganism), as a method to become more popular. I mean... we all know that most people like to have their sex strongly regulated The existence of this site is proof of that. Anyhoo... it's a theory.

But those must have been Swedish Baptists, Tom. Here in the southern US, you'd be hard pressed to find any alcohol at a wedding.

I think it's a result of religion being so marginalised. Priests here have to adapt and be more like people in general if they are to have any hope of attracting people to the churches. There's plenty of churches in Sweden with no active congregation at all. They get converted into fancy houses for the rich.

[MMI]

I'm puzzled by the statement that the separation of Church and State is more pronounced in England than in USA. In England, the Church of England is the Established Church. It is the "national church" if you like to put it that way. In Scotland, the Church of Scotland is the Established Church. (They are not the same thing under different names, btw. CofE is simpy a rebel offshoot of the Roman Catholic Church while the CofS is anti-Catholic, Presbyterian and non-episcopalian.)

The Queen is head of both Churches - she changes her religion as she moves back and forth over the border. The Prime Minister, whatever his religion (or even if none), has the power to appoint bishops to the Church of England.
So Church and State remain inextricably linked over here. They will remain that way because they are both very wealthy organisations, and this wealth has to stay in the "right" hands.

The trouble is, hardly anyone goes to Church nowadays. A handful of old ladies and a sprinkling of people who are choir members or organists or have some other reason for going. No-one gives a tuppenny damn who the Archbishop of York is these days, even if he has been brought all the way over from Africa.

Interestingly, because of the EU's "open borders" policies, thousands of Polish people have come over to the UK to have babies or to work as plumbers and as a result, there are now more Roman Catholics in the country than there are Anglicans (CofE). The Established Church is a minority religion, therefore! (My brother-in-law is a plumber of Polish descent, so maybe I shouldn't knock it!)

So, although Church and State remain linked, and will for the foreseeable future, the people, all disillusioned by religion and politics, are becoming increasingly detached from the Establishment.

(My answer to the original question, by the way, is that ALL politicians are scary, whether they have a religion or not. There's not one I would trust; not one I would endorse with my vote. It's far too valuable to give away to the likes of them.)

[bellelapine]

While the US was founded by primary secularists, you will never hear any of the extremist Christians (this includes the moral majority and a fair amount of the American Evangelicals) admit that. These are the people who earnestly believe the bible is written literal history and often then misinterpet the meanings of the passages.
I was actually quite shocked to find that a lot of the members of the administration of the US open the bible for "guidance" instead of looking at the consequences and information they have been given. To use a book to help you make a decision instead of basing it on reality and facts, is frankly disturbing.
The seperation of Church and State was meant to save the Church from the political arena, and the people from the Church. It was meant to be a choice, hence Freedom of Religion, which can mean (contrary to popular belief) freedom from religion. I personally was hopeful that the US would move away from supremely conservative Christianity, however with the implimentation of "Abstinence Only", the increased focus on marriage being only between a man and woman (woman being the primary baby makers), and the ridiculous blocks on advancement in medicine due to so called ethical disapproval (I'm all for people who want to have abortions donating the fetus to science for stem cell research)...it looks like the US has devolved into an almost dark ages, rip van winkle mindset.
If you are pagan, athiest, believe a man and man or a woman and a woman can get married, are pro choice, or are what the Christians consider a sexual deviant you become an outcast in a sense. People have become afraid of what they don't understand instead of moving forward to become educated about it.
I hope the US can overcome this plateau of intellectualism before it turns into "Idiocracy".

[Tufty]

Maybe not the right place to post this, but the thread heading caught my eye after reading this in our local Newspaper:

A SECOND drug addict has won his freedom by impressing a Christian from a small local church.

*********, 28, made death threats with an eight-inch knife, then ten minutes after police released him from custody, pointed a gun at two eyewitnesses and threatened to kill them, the Crown Court heard.

Last November, **********, 29, appeared before magistrates for stealing from the till of the shop where he was assistant manager.

Today, both are free men after a man known as Bishop Stephen Robson or Father Stephen Robson, of the British Eparchy of the Celtic Orthodox Church, intervened on their behalf.

I know one of these men and, believe me, he would have no hesitation in slitting your throat just for looking at him in the 'wrong way!'

It's so nice to know that our Christian neighbours are helping to empty our overcrowded prisons and put these 'reformed' characters back onto the streets.

[ObjectivistActivist]

Well, obviously, the less value a person has the more they deserve help, and good will. I'm totally unsurprised by this happening. Sickened, but unsurprised.

[denuseri]

thier is a thin line , or at least since the late 1700's between church and state, its no wonder the two are so tied to each other, the main problem isnt in the religious system, its in the people practicing a given system, moral guildlines are sorta nessesary to a well ordered society erst we live in a state of constant warefare, yet overregulation is bad, truth be told people will find a way to do as they will regaurdless, no church or goverment rules anybody more than they allow them to do so, choice allways exists even if that choice is to die in resistence as opposed to kneeling in submission, eventually i hope the whole planet and or our species will grow the frak up and stop telling each other what to do or believe,,

[mkemse]

eventually i hope the whole planet and or our species will grow the frak up and stop telling each other what to do or believe,,

I agree let people believe in what they want andwho what they want individualy and leave them alone

[Tufty]

eventually i hope the whole planet and or our species will grow the frak up and stop telling each other what to do or believe,,

I agree let people believe in what they want andwho what they want individualy and leave them alone

I agree 100%

[ObjectivistActivist]

thier is a thin line , or at least since the late 1700's between church and state, its no wonder the two are so tied to each other, the main problem isnt in the religious system, its in the people practicing a given system, moral guildlines are sorta nessesary to a well ordered society erst we live in a state of constant warefare, yet overregulation is bad, truth be told people will find a way to do as they will regaurdless, no church or goverment rules anybody more than they allow them to do so, choice allways exists even if that choice is to die in resistence as opposed to kneeling in submission, eventually i hope the whole planet and or our species will grow the frak up and stop telling each other what to do or believe,,

Morality is entirely possible and, in fact, preferable without it hinging on the existence of the supernatural.

[denuseri]

however much many may wish to debate the supernatural ,,thats the place where religion and philosophy differ, an even thinner line by some peoples standards, belief vs knowledge is a long time delima, moral perptitude and belief systems based in faith of supernatural kind are linked from the beginnings of human history as far as we can tell arceologically speaking, it wasnt until quiet recently that humanity has begun to accept a completely self motivated morality system, though in actual practice, what we say and do is just as important as what we think about doing and or as we do,,as far as a hindge upon which to swing, preferability is in the eye of the beholder, perspective is a very important aspect conserning the desireablility of one moral system vs another, for instance some may say my comments are adversarial, while others may precive them as conciliatory,

[MissElizabeth87]

As a Christian, I believe that I should be trying to take care of the earth... not destroy it. Christians aren't perfect just because they have a belief system. It's not fair to say that just because someone is an atheist and doesn't believe their actions have eternal consequences, they're allowed to screw up... but a Christian who does believe their actions have eternal consequences is not allowed to make mistakes. Being a Christian doesn't make anyone less or more human.

Anyways... I'm just sayin... That's not really a fair statement. I know quite a few non-Christians who believe Global warming is a bunch of crud and aren't environmentally concerned.

And another side note: George W. Bush does NOT represent all Christians, kay?

[Rational Head]

every single theist irrespective of his religious stream, be it monotheistic islam and christianity or sikhism or polythiestic hellenism or paganistic patheistic Hinduism and Jainism or agnostic budhism, is a serious danger against humanity.
Anyways, that is a different issue, going a little away from the original thread discussion going on, I have a list of some ten questions which every *intelligent theist should try to answer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4...eature=related
Enjoy the questionaire.

[Alex Bragi]

every single theist irrespective of his religious stream, be it monotheistic islam and christianity or sikhism or polythiestic hellenism or paganistic patheistic Hinduism and Jainism or agnostic budhism, is a serious danger against humanity.
Anyways, that is a different issue, going a little away from the original thread discussion going on, I have a list of some ten questions which every *intelligent theist should try to answer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4...eature=related
Enjoy the questionaire.

Well, I think that link is simply atheist propaganda. No, I don’t have the answers to those very perplexing questions. But, of course, answers aren't what atheist are looking for when they ask them, are they?

On the flip side can an atheist really fully explain faith healing, how the universe began and how it will end (e.i. infinity), exactly what happens to our energy when it leaves our bodies, and all those other unanswered questions?

What always intrigues with these kinds of discussions/debates is that the very thing theists and atheists have in common is they’re dogged believe that they are so right and the other side is so wrong.

[Thorne]

Well, I think that link is simply atheist propaganda. No, I don’t have the answers to those very perplexing questions. But, of course, answers aren't what atheist are looking for when they ask them, are they?

I agree with you here, Alex. The "conclusions" arrived at by the narrator there were as fallacious and idiotic as those of the religions he was mocking. You could just as easily replace his "God is imaginary" argument with, "God is an iguana: he likes bugs, not people!"

On the flip side can an atheist really fully explain faith healing, how the universe began and how it will end (e.i. infinity), exactly what happens to our energy when it leaves our bodies, and all those other unanswered questions?

Growing up Roman Catholic I was always told the God is infinite, no beginning and no end. A nice, simple way to avoid figuring out where he came from in my mind. But if God can be infinite, why can't the universe? Why does it have to have a beginning and an end?

What always intrigues with these kinds of discussions/debates is that the very thing theists and atheists have in common is they’re dogged believe that they are so right and the other side is so wrong.

Exactly! These hard-core atheists are as dogged and dogmatic in their disbelief as the theists are in their belief! It's just religion in another guise.

[John56{vg}]

To me Christians are not the problem, Fundamentalism is the problem. Dogmatic, never-swaying, fanatical fundamentalism.

Atheists can be as dogmatic and fundamentalist as a Muslim Mullah or a rabid Teleevangelist.

I consider myself a Christian in that I follow Christ's overriding teachings. Treat your neighbor as yourself, GOd is LOVE, etc. But fundamentalists believe they hold ALL the answers and they want you to hold those answers as well to validate them. If you don't you are inferior and not worthy and somehow damaged.

I also believe in spirits, because I have experienced them. I don't know how they operate, but I believe in my eyes and experiences.

Christians don't scare me, Fundamentalists of all stripes, DO.

:-)

[MissElizabeth87]

Thorne:

just religion in another guise.

I have been saying this for years!!!

And I totally agree... fundamentalists are scary, no matter what religion they are. This is how we get Islamic Terrorists, and crazy idiots like the "christians" who are on TV all the time making such bad names for the rest of us.

[TomOfSweden]

On the flip side can an atheist really fully explain faith healing, how the universe began and how it will end (e.i. infinity), exactly what happens to our energy when it leaves our bodies, and all those other unanswered questions?

What always intrigues with these kinds of discussions/debates is that the very thing theists and atheists have in common is they’re dogged believe that they are so right and the other side is so wrong.

I think you've fallen into the Creationist trap. Creationist debates tend to slide into whether or not atheism is just another religious faith and reduce it to that. As if it is two different sides debating meta-physics.

The difference is that atheism doesn't make claims of the sort and can't. It's not what atheism is. Atheism is simply the rejection of one particular religious theory. Usually Christianity in these western parts. A Christian is per definition an atheist as far as Islam is concerned. Atheism is as much a religion as not playing tennis is a sport.

But let's say atheism gets to represent the rejection of all religions. It's a huge leap to say that an atheist by default prays at the altar of science. Believing in specific scientific theories is a question of faith, and accepting scientific evidence above other types of evidence is very much a question of faith. There's no breaking the atheistic creed by believing in faith healing, unicorns and the theory of relativity... all at the same time. That's not what it means. Atheists can quite cheerfully reject both religion and all science.

But let's go along even with this. Let's for sake of argument say that being an atheist means that one thinks science is the measure of all truth. I doubt many atheists would agree, but just for the sake of it, let's do it. How does the fact that they can't explain faith healing or the origins of our universe give an ounce of credibility to any non-scientific theory? Stuff we don't know... we don't know. We can't really say anything more than that.

I hope I've managed to kill off any ideas of that atheism and theism are some kinds of binary sides to chose between. It's much more complicated than that. There's either belief systems which have complete theories of everything, (religious or not) and belief systems that accept that we don't know everything to draw such conclusions, (religious or not).

Discussions like this tend to limp along where theists and atheists attack the dumbest and most superficial ideas from each group and both sides think the other is missing the point. Those discussions doesn't go anywhere and are hardly helpful. Please guys, lets avoid it. Discussions like this always need to get broken down into specific discreet areas. Like, did Johnsson's kid get better because of a miracle, or was it just chemistry? ...or how do we know the Bible is the word of God?