University Students Are Being Failed In Exams Because They Quote Sayings From The Bible Or Qur'an As Scientific Facts

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It is necessary to be tolerant in order to be reasoned and reasonable in personal conduct with others. Being open minded about people having religion doesn't mean losing your reasoning abilities. I think religion is entirely a personal matter.

I disagree that being reasoned and reasonable always matters more. Why should it? When those beliefs manifest themselves in actions and behaviours that affect others then they should be criticised and challenged. Religion is hardly a personal matter - how is it so when you admit that parents brainwash their children to make them believe in some nasty, immoral God and try to enslaven their minds by forcing them to worship something that doesn't exist? And what of religion's role in politics. Look at defamation laws that Islamic states want to get the UN to endorse and the Irish law on defamation of God.

 

I am not sure what you think I meant by toleration. If half the people on the Island claimed to KNOW that the Little People (fairies) existed, that they their commands and rules must be obeyed, that they were immoral beings, and that they threatened eternal punishment to those who deny their existence and other people thought this was ok, then I think intolerance would be appropriate for any rational person. We shouldn't tolerate the mental abuse of children, the respect that religion has in society, and should not tolerate many of the forms in which religion has influence in society.

 

I don't know what you mean by being open-minded about it. I recognise what religion is, and recognise that others have beliefs, and I understand how people are either indoctrinated or how many become believers. I also recognise that there are people who believe in bigfoot or ones who have been kidnapped by aliens. I would also have to recognise someone belief is their religion was based on the worshipping of the sun or believer in fairies. But such beliefs don't deserve any respect (although the kidnapping seems more credible). You can't respect such beliefs if you recognise that are based on no evidence and reliance on some ancient book which isn't a trustworthy source in any case. And you certainly can't respect those who live their lives by those beliefs and take actions because of them.

[Albert Tatlock]

LDV - the bloke that wants to kill Santa.

[Terse]

(fairies) existed, that they their commands and rules must be obeyed, that they were immoral beings, and that they

Isn't that an entirely different thread?

[Chinahand]

Jesus and Mo has some bearing on our debate. His cartoons are I think quite a perceptive take on the religious culture wars.

 

One

 

"More often than not prayer doesn't cure cancer, but when it does it is proof of its miraculous power"

 

Two

 

Three

 

The issue of religious tolerance is very very difficult - Every day congregations are told that certain lifestyles are beyond the pail and people who live like that are destined to be punished by God. You have to ask what affect that has on the people so indoctrinated, and whether that makes for the general good.

 

Religions tend to have one group of people who are destined for God's blessing and one group who aren't - they tend to have attitudes that society should be structured a certain way - for example the role of women in society - and that freedom of speech should not be allowed when it criticizes or mocks their beliefs.

 

These are not tolerant attitudes - and for non-believers to be told they have to be tolerant of religions' intolerance is really quite an irony.

 

Every day congregations around the world are told that LDV's lifestyle is a demonic corruption of God's plan. I can fully understand LDV's anger at this deliberate indoctrination. The Churches want to be specially priviledged to be homophobic, to take public money to provide health care services but be able to deny certain birth control options to people coming to them for help etc.

 

My view of religion is that it should be a private affair, and in the public space all must be treated equally.

 

One of my sons has an after school activity in a church hall - on the wall the Sunday School class has painted two pictures - one is a world with God - all light and happiness - the other a world without God - pain, suffering, evil.

 

That is the image the Sunday School children are being taught about me and my children. I am without God and wish my children to be raised to be able to make their own choices when they are old enough to understand that the world is more complicated than a world of sweetness and light for those who follow the one true faith (which ever one it is) and a world of evil corruption for those who do not. Religions disagree - they want to take in Children when they are young and set them on their path to salvation - it isn't a coincidence that Faith Schools are predominantly primary. I don't think I am wrong i being concerned by that.

 

There is no way whatsoever I'd want to be associated with curtailing the rights of parents to raise their children in a particular faith, but I draw the line when I am also told I have to accept the intolerances such an upbringing may bring to the public space.

[Lao]

I totally agree with you Chinahand on not giving in to the expectation to be tolerant of religious intolerance or any other kind for that matter.

 

For me its about not giving in to social/political/religious apathy, if rights are being curtailed something must be said.

 

its like Niemöller said,

 

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Every day congregations around the world are told that LDV's lifestyle is a demonic corruption of God's plan. I can fully understand LDV's anger at this deliberate indoctrination. The Churches want to be specially priviledged to be homophobic, to take public money to provide health care services but be able to deny certain birth control options to people coming to them for help etc.

My issue with religion is largely based on the fact that I would like to live in a society with people who don't have beliefs when there isn't the slightest bit of evidence. And it makes it worse when such beliefs are actually pretty awful considering them amount to treating yourself as a servant/slave. I wouldn't worship God even if I knew he existed.

I actually think that the Church should not be subject to legislation if it discriminates against those who want to be members of it. Let them crack on.

I do however see a different situation when you have Catholic adoption agencies being forces to end their discrimination, because that bigotry affects the lives of the children who need placing in a home and those adopting are not members of the church. Yet if some religious person who is gay wants to try and change their church then that is a fight that he must win within the church, not with the help of legislation.

[Lonan3]

Belief systems have been around for many thousands of years - they will not disappear within a single, or even several, generations.

Education and development will erode them, but only very slowly. Condemnation, vitriolic attacks, or even violence will only make their position become more entrenched.

In the so-called 'Christian societies' - the only ones of which I have any direct experience - fewer and fewer people attend regular church services; more and more people declare their belief as a kind of safety net, just in case there happens to be something in it.

 

THIS SITE gives an interesting picture of developments, partly based on the 2001 census.

 

Less than half of the British people believe in a God, yet about 72% told the 2001 census that they were Christian, and 66% of the population have no actual connection to any religion or church, despite what they tend to write down on official forms.

Between 1979 and 2005, half of all Christians stopped going to church on a Sunday.

 

2006 12507 people were polled, finding that only 35% in Great Britain believe in any kind of God or supreme being, compared to 27% in France, 62% in Italy, 48% in Spain, 41% in Germany and 73% in the USA 35%

2006 Poll of 4000 older teenagers in Cornwall found that only 22% could affirm that they believed in God, and 49% said they didn't.

[DjDan]

Do you know that God has never answered the prayer of an amputee? Do you know this? God can answer prayers in many ways. I cannot of course answer for God - but I would only say that through miracles, God really can do anything.

 

I think you find he cant.

Liverpool have being praying for years to win the league and it aint happined yet

 

haha, but if Liverpool did win the league... would you agree that that is a miracle??

[Freggyragh]

OK Dan, in the Bible, God regenerated / fixed an ear in front of a number of people, most being Roman non-Christians, but there is no record (as far as I know) of a miracle cancer cure. There are many recorded examples of cancer going into remission, usually in conjunction with the best efforts of the medical profession, that could be described as miraculous, but could also be described as lucky. I am willing to agree that goodwill, love and state of mind would be contributory factors in such cases, and that prayer, and membership of a church group could be of enormous benefit. However, there is not one verifiable account of an amputee experiencing the regeneration of a limb. If you suggested to an amputee that if he truly believed in Christ and prayed really, really hard that his leg would grow back you would be taken for a fool. In fact, it is as ridiculous a proposition as Santa's ability to deliver presents to every child in the world on one night. Literal belief in the Bible will inevitably cause you to believe foolish things, sometimes dangerously foolish things. That is not to say that Christianity is therefore foolish, or a fairy tale, but that it is a human construct that has rituals and observances that help people deal with the vagaries of life, and may lead to spiritual awakening - treating it as anything else is delusional and dangerous.

[Chinahand]

My biggest problem is that DjDan sincerely believes that God has listened to and answered his specific prayers - but God has also ignored the prayers of countless mothers praying for their dying infants, people suffering heniously from the vageries of the environment, or people enslaved in barbarity.

 

I think I would prefer an entirely silent God to one who only answers one plea in a million.

 

Where is the free will argument when 200,000 people are crushed due to a tectonic plate slipping - Mars and the moon are now geologically dormant; all their internal energy has disipated and earthquakes are no more - why does God allow earthquakes to arbitarily create mass suffering on this earth, while ending them on its sister planets?

 

For every prayer answered thousands, nay millions, are left to suffer and die. Why?

 

I cannot reconcile that with a loving God - but then again when I read the bible I see little evidence of such a being.

[Albert Tatlock]

For every prayer answered thousands, nay millions, are left to suffer and die. Why?

It'll lead to chaos if everyone gets what they want - just watch 'Bruce Almighty'.

[Chinahand]

Your right Albert - but I am not asking why God doesn't always intervene, so I will inverse the question. Why when God is silent in the vast majority of cases, does he provide sometimes trivial relief in a world full of suffering.

[Lost Login]

A man having terminal cancer... and the doctors saying he will die. During a routine scan/treatment, they realise that to their amazement, the cancer has completely gone.

 

That would be a miracle.

 

On a smaller level... a man prays for something specific, and something wonderful. Sometime later, that prayer is answered specifically. That would also be a miracle.

 

There are a great variety of miracles, and many thousands of people can testify of having witnessed a miracle in their life.

 

But to you, the non-believer... i would be wasting my time if i was to go into any specifics with you - and you know it.

 

I never understand why if something unexpectedly happens that is good then to believers it is a miracle but something bad is not.

 

e.g. DJ states that cancer going unexpectedly would be a miracle. If that is the case then surely getting cancer unexpectedly, or not recovering from Cancer when a patient is expected to are also miracles.

 

To me you should treat unexpected the events the same whether good or bad, not decide to accept those that reinforce beliefs but ignore those that that do not.

 

The rains come to save famine = miracle, rains fail to cause famine = not. Why?

[jimbms]

It is a little harder to brainwash the gullable with bad events

[Lost Login]

Your right Albert - but I am not asking why God doesn't always intervene, so I will inverse the question. Why when God is silent in the vast majority of cases, does he provide sometimes trivial relief in a world full of suffering.

 

My question is more fundamental than that, which is not why does he not intervene, but why did he not create a world where cruelty exists and intervention is deemed necessary. Surely if God created Man etc he could have ensured that we had not one once of malevolance in us. A world without creatures that burrow through eyes, or that has floods, famine, earthquake, eruptions.