h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It never ceases to amaze me how a conversation about matters of faith can degenerate so quickly into personal attacks and dribble, what is it about this particular topic of conversation (especially conversations on the Christian faith) that send people over the ridge? It appears that people on both sides of the question react from fear and for the life of me I can't think why...If you believe in the God of the bible why the need to defend him so verhemently when at His trial he did not speak on His own behalf knowing it was pointless that those present could not or would not hear...and for those who don't believe why is it so important that everyone else think the same as they do...stikes me that what goes on behind these conversations is the really interesting conversation....

Religious faith powers religion. Religion oppresses people, kills people, creates and sustains bigotry and enslaves people to the worship of fictional beings.

That's why I get so het up about it.

Because the more that 'believers' are able to continue spreading their 'belief', and its 'mandate', the more it helps ensure that all the worse aspects of faiths are continued also. Plus I htink some people get a bit fed up at the blinkered outlook of certain 'believers', and their inability to consider the flaws in their faith...

sweeping statments and generalisations that sound angry and aggressive...I am reading only one side of the story here everything has a pro and a con why list only the cons? What are the alternatives what would you build a civilisation on?

What's aggressive about those answers?
I can see that they are generalisations, but then they were honest answers to your question and it's overgeneralising that is flawed.

There are no pros to religion and faith that cannot be provided equally well if not better by secular means.

You seemed to be commenting from a Christian perspective in the original post - if so - tell me are you adherent to that faith? Do you not eat shellfish? Would abide by God's laws on keeping slaves if godless laws didn't prevent you from keeping them? Would you stone your child to death if it were unruly or cursed you?

In the secular democracies our society is already for the most part laws, political practice and morality that have no biblical basis. They come from the desire to live in a fair and just society. Not one of a barbaric bronze age tribe.

The thing is, it's really hard not to appear aggressive when not agreeing with someone's deeply held and cherished beliefs, look at how aggressively believers have responded through the years to people who deny the prevailing version of religious orthodoxy. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Africans, Native South Americans, and many more all slaughtered or enslaved in their millions in the name of religion. Look at the extremes of current Muslim fundamentalism. I heard on Radio 4 the other day that the Anglican Church is going to start a sort of missionary movement in this country as their numbers are dropping so alarmingly. Remember, as well as being a set of beliefs, religion is also a massive industry, people depend on it for their wealth, status and employment. Religion abhors a vacuum, it cannot by it's nature sit alongside atheism, agnosticism, or competing religions, sooner or later the animosity will out.

I always find it interesting (if tiresome and narrow-minded) that those 'with' faith seem convinced that if you dont believe in some form of supreme being and/or a prophet for said being, or at the very least, some form of heirarchy of higher beings working as a managment service, that you must be a person without principle, morals or empathy for your fellow human being.

I also find it hard when hard-line atheists are of the mind that those with any form of spiritual belief or feeling, no matter how benign, must be stupid.

Not necessarily stupid, just wrong.

Around here the feeling is certainly toward them being stupid, Azathoth. That's what ends up coming out in the arguments is that anyone feeling that there could be 'something else' is dismissed as being delusional and willing to base all their opinions and moral choices on false inventions, which makes everything they say, feel or do entirely invalid because obviously a hard, fact-based reality is the *only* possible one. (and my suggestion that that is, in itself, just a belief, has had me hauled over coals in the past).

Individuals may be a little more liberal or less aggressive, but it's a view that is expressed in many ways on this site. And I disagree with it, strongly.

Although I dont agree with it however, I do admit that *some* 'believers' are just irritatingly delusional, narrow minded and frustratingly ignorant towards those who they claim to be having 'discussions' with.

I dont claim to have the truth of the matter however, and I'm not convinced that anyone does. Which is why I object to such extreme and absolute judgements of others based on what is just a theory, no matter how you look at it.

I think people of faith are ignorant, not stupid.

>>It never ceases to amaze me how a conversation about matters of faith can degenerate so quickly into personal attacks and dribble<<
I think I can perhaps answer the OP. This excerpt is from Qur'an but the Bible has similar passages:

7 And know that the messenger of Almighty God is among you. If he were to obey you in much of the government, ye would surely be in trouble; but God hath endeared the faith to you and hath beautified it in your hearts, and hath made disbelief and lewdness and rebellion hateful unto you. Such are they who are rightly guided.
8 It is a bounty and a grace from Almighty God; and God is all-Knowing, Wise.
Qur'an - The private apartments

So emotions fly, because it's about matters of the heart ...

What I am interested in is how people of no religious faith decide on what and how they will implement a fair, compassionate society what is the foundation, who decides and how?

In Australia much of our law is derived from a Judeo/Christian tradition and I have been taught that this is the case for other western countries too.

Rather than address personal statements directed at me I am looking for an exchange of ideas, so if the statement does not further the discussion lets refrain from making it to argue on stupid/ignorant rather than the means to producing a society is counterproductive, to say that there is no positive only negative is redunant instead why not list the positves and look at alternatives in society.

I am not interested in people converting others to their way of thinking regardless of where they stand but in a simple exchange of ideas of what and how society can be made better either with or with out faith is that possible to have this kind of conversation on this site ....

Bearing in mind that the conclusions you draw about anothers thinking speak more about your own than theirs

Oh and as stated in my first email and the point I started this thread that I am still interested in why people feel as strongly as they do on these issues? Not in what has gone on done down through the ages (correctly or incorrectly) but on a personal level what repells or attracts you why do you feel the way you feel...

That people can state their experience with out being right or wrong simply stating what it is they feel, what it is they believe free of anothers insults or needing to defend them lets see if the dogs of fear can be restrained

In terms of personal morality, I dont feel like I need a higher being to hold me to account, I understand that doing harm to others (mental, emotional, physical...) is a bad thing. I dont need to know why, it feels wrong.

I would say that if you needed to, you could go back to basic society and figure out what guidelines will encourage growth and harmony and legislate against things that will divide or damage your cultural/societal/family groups. That doesn't require a god figure. Unless the people wont listen to you and you need a higher authority to back up your own so as to gain control and create order...

I do think that the number of people who will harm others (by harm I mean any action which negatively impacts them and their ability to function and survive. Deliberately impairing another's options or opportunities) is reasonably low, all things being equal. Unfortunately all things are not equal and morality is grey. Which makes it difficult to identify those who CANNOT understand what is riht and wrong by nature as opposed to those who have had their values skewed by nurture (or lack of!).

I understand that doing harm to others (mental, emotional, physical...) is a bad thing. I dont need to know why, it feels wrong.

how do you know, who taught you and what was the teaching based on?

how is man legislating differnt to say a god figure laying down rules?

I do think that the number of people who will harm others (by harm I mean any action which negatively impacts them and their ability to function and survive. Deliberately impairing another's options or opportunities) is reasonably low,

On this point I wonder about the various conflicts around the world presently that are doing just that severely affecting people in places such as Zimbabwe, PNG, Indonesia/East Timour not to metnion events like Britt lapthone where the higher authorities are involved in the perpetration of hurt

<>

and most of the punishments in the bible are death in one form or another

over the years we have moved away from the barbarity of a middle eastern bronze age tribe and now have one of the finest justice systema in the world

adittedly if we took the bibles view on crime and punishment there would be less crime and the prisons would be empty.

drugs...hang him
theft...strike off his hand
murder...behead him
adulatory... stone them
he said Jehovah...stone him
he said wouldn't it be good if we were all nice to each other...crucify him

just think how much money the govt. would save

no prisons, no unemployment

and if we reused all the executions for organ transplants

no sick people

in the words of seven of nine irrelevant

if we have how did we move away and what did it get based on

what is the difference from our rules verses a deitys rules

What I meant was, we didn't get where we are today because we a) fundamentally want to harm one another (we're social animals, we have to work together to survive, fundamentally. Well, we had to... Until there were enough of us to need to compete. I dont believe that competition is relevant any more, it's now a synthetic and unnecessary habit which is ncouraged by 'leaders') and b)because we needed to be told how to get along socially by a higher being.

Laws, rules, commandments. However you lay it down, it's all about social control and giving the vulnerable/victim some recourse over the victimisers. Of course as often as not the perptrator of a crime is also a victim. Something that not even religious texts seem to have taken into account in a way that has filtered down into law.

A question: Why should a lack of faith in any sort of higher being or order mean that I (or anyone) has nothing on which to base their judgements on what's acceptable and non acceptable behaviour?

Animals pass on survival information to their young. Why shouldn't humans? Why does it have to come from god? Why cant these things be based on the physical world and our racial experiences?

Animals pass on survival information to their young. Why shouldn't humans? Why does it have to come from god? Why cant these things be based on the physical world and our racial experiences?

Not sure why the reference to racial experiences rather than human or are you refering to specific cultural difference engendering diffferent responses and if so how did this come about and why?

My understanding of some religious texts is that they do recognise that everyone is a victim at some level and encourage all to forgive and be compassionate whether people choose to follow it is is another matter just as some choose not to follow our societal rules

I agree that we are relational and that competition is foisted on us by economics more than anything, studies I have read confimrm statistically we all do better when we work together

"In Australia much of our law is derived from a Judeo/Christian tradition and I have been taught that this is the case for other western countries too."

It's not the case in the UK, is not the case in France, Sweden, Norway, Canada, New Zealand or the United States. I would be curious as to why after what I said about how our laws in the democracies are not drawn from the bible why you chose to put forward this lie about your country?
And just what in your opinion is the "Judeo/Christian tradition"? Is it the tradition of persecution of the Jewish people by western Christianity?