Religion is a Mental Illness

[tzor]

You can compare with your ancestors lands and find that the US has more murder, more gun crime, more gangs, more crime in general than most of Europe (hard to compare with some places elsewhere due to recording etc).

No it doesn't. And if it wasn't for the fact that I am about to donate blood, I would go to my living room and pull out the stat book that proves this is not the case.

[john9blue]

i don't think the variable of "religious people" has changed much at all. again, we don't really have any non-religious societies like ours to compare homicide rates with.

If the independent variable (per-capita religious people) has hardly changed, yet the dependent variable (homicides) has, then this does not look good for that independent variable. The change in the dependent variable can be explained by other relevant variables (e.g. greater ability to receive gains through trade instead of pillaging, change in mannerisms--no thanks to religion, change in governance, etc.). Thus, we don't need to look at a totally non-religious society to undermine the allegedly peaceful role that religion takes. You could also compare 99% religious countries (Islamic, N. America) with 80% religious countries (Black Metal Motherland, Scandinavia).

i never said that the decline of homicide was due to religion. i said that a decline in religion (which has not happened to any meaningful extent) would lead to an increase in homicide. just because the dependent variable changes due to one thing doesn't mean it can't change due to another thing.

[AAFitz]

no, you're thinking of "leftism"

"religion" is the reason we aren't killing each other and nuking ourselves off the fucking planet.

crazy fucks like you are what happen when most people abandon religion

Yeah, thank God for religion. Wars have never been fought for religious reasons.

[Woodruff]

But in the case of politics, a rational debate can be had.

You haven't been on Sean Hannity's forums, have you.

We have both political and religious threads on these forums and their nature is very different.

One example does not a rule make. Again, I point out the Hannity forums; all hell breaks loose in politics, but the religious forums remain very civil.

In the real world politics has developed this cult of personality, and more's the pity because it's harmful to the process, but the basic rules of the debates are well established and while the best choices may not always be made, at least the process is (to an extent) transparent and we know why we're writing law X to deal with problem Y (ignoring the behind the scenes lobbying stuff which I'm also not a fan of at all)

(In my best George Takei voice) Oh My.

You really don't know politics, do you?

That bill they are trying to prevent children getting shot up in schools ... it doesn't do a thing to keep guns from the criminals.

The "farm" bill ... it's 80% food stamps and if anyone touches that the President is going to veto it.

NOTHING IS WHAT IT CLAIMS TO BE. Hell, even the "Affordable Care Act" isn't affordable.

Indeed..."Patriot Act", anyone?

[thegreekdog]

no, you're thinking of "leftism"

"religion" is the reason we aren't killing each other and nuking ourselves off the fucking planet.

crazy fucks like you are what happen when most people abandon religion

Yeah, thank God for religion. Wars have never been fought for religious reasons.

I super puffy heart this argument. It's based in so much fact it hurts. /sarcasm

[tzor]

Indeed..."Patriot Act", anyone?

I am not so sure ... it does "act" patriotic, even though it is nothing of the sort.

[Woodruff]

Ummm...http://planetivy.co.uk/offbeat/52494/spanking-in-the-name-of-god/

[Woodruff]

Ok, first of all...only six months in jail, they only have to serve ONE MONTH OF IT PER YEAR, and their other children (there is apparently at least one) isn't taken away from them?

This is some serious bullshit.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/03/19275007-homicide-convictions-upheld-for-wisconsin-parents-who-treated-dying-daughter-with-prayer?lite

Never mind that the whole idea of a "faith healing privilege under the child abuse statute" is also some serious bullshit, given how often this sort of thing seems to happen. And 17 states have this privilege in their laws? Egads.

[chang50]

Ok, first of all...only six months in jail, they only have to serve ONE MONTH OF IT PER YEAR, and their other children (there is apparently at least one) isn't taken away from them?

This is some serious bullshit.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/03/19275007-homicide-convictions-upheld-for-wisconsin-parents-who-treated-dying-daughter-with-prayer?lite

Never mind that the whole idea of a "faith healing privilege under the child abuse statute" is also some serious bullshit, given how often this sort of thing seems to happen. And 17 states have this privilege in their laws? Egads.

And the defence attorney talks as if the murderers are the victims,seriously if I knew these scum it would take all my self control not to kick the crap out of both of them.Maybe they could pray for me to stop and see if it had more effect this time round.No civilised country would even consider their lame defence...

[PLAYER57832]

Think about it.

Pederasty is pretty much a mental illness, as well as a heinous crime.

All of Islam is pretty much batshit. Same with Scientology. I mean, come on!

Nice try at trolling.

Some could argue any thinking is an "illness" of the brain. It all gets down to what you want to consider normal or not. Just thinking itself is not very "normal" in the animal world.

[warmonger1981]

If a Deity is imposed on a person, does that person not become a prisoner to that particular Deity. Being that the person has not been exposed to a Deity. Isn't religion used as mental warfare and not so much as physical warfare. It is easier to control through the brain than by physical shit.

[Haggis_McMutton]

i never said that the decline of homicide was due to religion. i said that a decline in religion (which has not happened to any meaningful extent) would lead to an increase in homicide.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2012/0815/Atheism-on-the-rise-around-the-globe

Atheism is on the rise in the United States and elsewhere while religiosity is declining, according to a new worldwide poll. “The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism,” conducted by WIN-Gallup International headquartered in Switzerland, found that the number of Americans who say they are “religious” dropped from 73 percent in 2005 – when the poll was last conducted – to 60 percent. Those who said they were “convinced” atheists rose from 1 to 5 percent. And 33 percent of the people polled said that they don’t consider themselves as a “religious person."

[john9blue]

i never said that the decline of homicide was due to religion. i said that a decline in religion (which has not happened to any meaningful extent) would lead to an increase in homicide.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2012/0815/Atheism-on-the-rise-around-the-globe

Atheism is on the rise in the United States and elsewhere while religiosity is declining, according to a new worldwide poll. “The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism,” conducted by WIN-Gallup International headquartered in Switzerland, found that the number of Americans who say they are “religious” dropped from 73 percent in 2005 – when the poll was last conducted – to 60 percent. Those who said they were “convinced” atheists rose from 1 to 5 percent. And 33 percent of the people polled said that they don’t consider themselves as a “religious person."

this is unsurprising. i guess we will have to wait and see the results of this new trend, then

[Woodruff]

i never said that the decline of homicide was due to religion. i said that a decline in religion (which has not happened to any meaningful extent) would lead to an increase in homicide.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2012/0815/Atheism-on-the-rise-around-the-globe

Atheism is on the rise in the United States and elsewhere while religiosity is declining, according to a new worldwide poll. “The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism,” conducted by WIN-Gallup International headquartered in Switzerland, found that the number of Americans who say they are “religious” dropped from 73 percent in 2005 – when the poll was last conducted – to 60 percent. Those who said they were “convinced” atheists rose from 1 to 5 percent. And 33 percent of the people polled said that they don’t consider themselves as a “religious person."

What is a "convinced" atheist? I mean...I'm CONVINCED, but I also realize I could be wrong. So it doesn't seem to me that's a good term for a "non-agnostic atheist", which I presume it's supposed to be?

[chang50]

i never said that the decline of homicide was due to religion. i said that a decline in religion (which has not happened to any meaningful extent) would lead to an increase in homicide.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2012/0815/Atheism-on-the-rise-around-the-globe

Atheism is on the rise in the United States and elsewhere while religiosity is declining, according to a new worldwide poll. “The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism,” conducted by WIN-Gallup International headquartered in Switzerland, found that the number of Americans who say they are “religious” dropped from 73 percent in 2005 – when the poll was last conducted – to 60 percent. Those who said they were “convinced” atheists rose from 1 to 5 percent. And 33 percent of the people polled said that they don’t consider themselves as a “religious person."

What is a "convinced" atheist? I mean...I'm CONVINCED, but I also realize I could be wrong. So it doesn't seem to me that's a good term for a "non-agnostic atheist", which I presume it's supposed to be?

You are correct Woody the term is essentially meaningless,'convinced' of what?That you are an atheist ie you don't believe in the existence of gods?By that standard all atheists are convinced of their own atheism obviously.If it means you know gods do not exist ie you are a gnostic atheist,then where are all the agnostic atheists,in my experience the majority?Clumsy and careless use of language at best,not untypical of polling organisations.

[crispybits]

I think that some (particularly but not exclusively) religious people get confused by atheism. Many atheists are also not sure how to use the various terms effectively.

In christian terms I am a "convinced" atheist - I firmly believe that the God of the bible does not exist.

In general terms I am an agnostic atheist - I don't think that God exists but for certain definitions of God I remain open to the possibility as an unknown and in theory unknowable fact of reality. If he does exist I have my own best guesses about what he is and how he works but I accept that these are only guesses and have no more validity than the crazy person over there in the straightjacket who claims to be carrying on constant conversations with him where he is telling them to eat only willow bark and to spend every Thursday doing nothing but trying to suck toes (their own or someone else's).

[chang50]

I think that some (particularly but not exclusively) religious people get confused by atheism. Many atheists are also not sure how to use the various terms effectively.

In christian terms I am a "convinced" atheist - I firmly believe that the God of the bible does not exist.

In general terms I am an agnostic atheist - I don't think that God exists but for certain definitions of God I remain open to the possibility as an unknown and in theory unknowable fact of reality. If he does exist I have my own best guesses about what he is and how he works but I accept that these are only guesses and have no more validity than the crazy person over there in the straightjacket who claims to be carrying on constant conversations with him where he is telling them to eat only willow bark and to spend every Thursday doing nothing but trying to suck toes (their own or someone else's).

I wish I had a penny for every time someone,usually a theist,tries to tell me what my atheism must entail,or that it is a religion,or even a worldview.It's almost as if they cannot grasp that individuals can take a position on a single issue without massive societal support and reinforcement.Confused hits the nail squarely on the head.

[john9blue]

I think that some (particularly but not exclusively) religious people get confused by atheism. Many atheists are also not sure how to use the various terms effectively.

In christian terms I am a "convinced" atheist - I firmly believe that the God of the bible does not exist.

that doesn't make you a convinced atheist, that makes you a convinced a-jehovist (or whatever you want to call the god of the bible)

In general terms I am an agnostic atheist - I don't think that God exists but for certain definitions of God I remain open to the possibility as an unknown and in theory unknowable fact of reality. If he does exist I have my own best guesses about what he is and how he works but I accept that these are only guesses and have no more validity than the crazy person over there in the straightjacket who claims to be carrying on constant conversations with him where he is telling them to eat only willow bark and to spend every Thursday doing nothing but trying to suck toes (their own or someone else's).

only partially agnostic, though.

I wish I had a penny for every time someone,usually a theist,tries to tell me what my atheism must entail,or that it is a religion,or even a worldview.It's almost as if they cannot grasp that individuals can take a position on a single issue without massive societal support and reinforcement.Confused hits the nail squarely on the head.

i wish i had a penny for every time someone, usually an atheist, tries to tell me what all my contradictory christian beliefs must logically entail, or that it's a bad influence on society, or even a poison. it's almost as if they cannot grasp that god can do amazing things that go beyond human understanding.

i just tried to show you how stupid your post was by counterexample, but if you need further clarification, then let me know.

[crispybits]

Re: the first bit to me

Yeah sure, but in western cultures where religion is predominantly christian, it is my experience that professing atheism tends towards the assumption by others that you are predominantly a non-christian flavour of atheist (if that makes any sense at all). That assumption is wrong for some atheists, but when a survey says about "convinced atheists" I would guess that a fair amount of the people that gave this answer were convinced about the non-existence of the biblical God rather than anything that could possibly fall under any definition of God ever made. Not everyone gives all this hokum much thought or time.

Re: the last bit to chang

This falls under the remit of how we judge a truth value of a claim. The following are very different:

- I believe X is true. The belief that X is true entails some philosophical consequences and I should be willling to defend those consequences if I wish to put forward my positive claim about the truth of X and have it widely accepted.

- I believe that there is not sufficient evidence to say if X is true or false. There are no further consequences to this belief except that I must honestly evaluate any further evidence put forward by those who believe that X is true.

[Phatscotty]

So all these people like this were mentally ill? What does that say about what they were fighting for and ready to risk?

If you only understood what it is you actually debase...

[NoSurvivors]

85% of the world, not to mention 85.8% of your beloved America, believe in a god of some sort. Don't you think calling 85% of the world "crazy fucks" is a stupid idea?

[tzor]

What is a "convinced" atheist? I mean...I'm CONVINCED, but I also realize I could be wrong. So it doesn't seem to me that's a good term for a "non-agnostic atheist", which I presume it's supposed to be?

"Convinced" is a sloppy term; it probably best maps to "strong." I don't consider you a "strong" atheist, at least as it is commonly understood. (Dawkins is a strong atheist.) I would place you somewhere between weak and strong on the scale.

Positive atheism (also called strong atheism and hard atheism) is the form of atheism that asserts that no deities exist. Negative atheism (also called weak atheism and soft atheism) is any other type of atheism, wherein a person does not believe in the existence of any deities, but does not explicitly assert there to be none.

[john9blue]

Re: the first bit to me

Yeah sure, but in western cultures where religion is predominantly christian, it is my experience that professing atheism tends towards the assumption by others that you are predominantly a non-christian flavour of atheist (if that makes any sense at all). That assumption is wrong for some atheists, but when a survey says about "convinced atheists" I would guess that a fair amount of the people that gave this answer were convinced about the non-existence of the biblical God rather than anything that could possibly fall under any definition of God ever made. Not everyone gives all this hokum much thought or time.

well, they probably should. it's intellectually dishonest to say that god can't possibly exist just because you had some bad experiences with fundamentalist christian parents as a teenager.

Re: the last bit to chang

This falls under the remit of how we judge a truth value of a claim. The following are very different:

- I believe X is true. The belief that X is true entails some philosophical consequences and I should be willling to defend those consequences if I wish to put forward my positive claim about the truth of X and have it widely accepted.

- I believe that there is not sufficient evidence to say if X is true or false. There are no further consequences to this belief except that I must honestly evaluate any further evidence put forward by those who believe that X is true.

my issue was that he was so apparently bothered by people who try to tell him how his beliefs are inconsistent, illogical, or indefensible, when he does the EXACT SAME THING to others. hypocrites, man...

[jonesthecurl]

Not exactly though I see where you're coming from -
All christians start from the same basic premise and the same sourcebooks. Of course they don't all agree with each other, but it is possible to point out things that, if they reject them, they're not being consistent.
Atheists don't have a basic reference work to test their atheism against.

For example, I would say (and have said before) that my basic position can be stated thusly: the universe appears to me not to need a god or gods to explain why it's the way it is. I see no reason to posit "god". I have no idea what the characteristics of "god" would be were there one, or where it would fit in to the universe I have encountered, or what the effect of that "god" would be upon it.

[BigBallinStalin]

85% of the world, not to mention 85.8% of your beloved America, believe in a god of some sort. Don't you think calling 85% of the world "crazy fucks" is a stupid idea?

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=191872&start=180#p4221932

No they don't.


Most people of Germany at one time supported a really stupid form of government. I really don't see how "majority does herpderp" is a good argument.