The religious discussion thread

[Archangel]

This thread was created to bring a local new story to light, which can be viewed below:

JACKSON, Ohio (AP) — An Ohio school district decided Tuesday night to keep a portrait of Jesus hanging in the school where it's been 65 years, denying a federal lawsuit's claim the portrait's display unconstitutionally promotes religion in a public school.

The Jackson City Schools board offered a constitutional justification of its own in voting 4-0 to keep the portrait up in its middle school, saying it must protect students' free speech rights. The vote drew cheers and applause from the dozens of people gathered in the elementary school gymnasium.

Read all of it here: http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-school-b...xzBHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0A1Rlc3RfQUZD;_ylv=3

I posted his here @ NP to see what ppl had to say on the issue. As it turns out, this sparked many debates. I've considered closing this thread but after multiple suggestions, I decided to keep it open. Feel free to join in the topics but per forum rules, please refrain from obscene, threatening, rude, or insulting posts.

 

[verbster]

Of course, this should all be obvious. But people go first with their emotions in these matters, and then try to justify them with rationality. (Which is why I should stay out if the religion and politics threads!)

yes, this is exactly the behavior religion provokes. People embrace religion because of emotion. Faith is an emotion . . . an opinion, but it is touted as though it were an ultimate truth, an inescapable resolution of eternal reward or punishment depending on behavior and adherence to a belief structure that cannot be proven, yet religious folks attempt to justify their leap of faith with rationality, which can never happen.

 

[verbster]

Naw, just trying to understand your self labeling. But I'll stop, and put you on block so I will not be disturbed by your ridiculous comments anymore. Don't bother replying to me; I will not be able to read or see your response.

Oh, and have a swell eternity.

This is laughable coming from someone who first tries to accuse a person as being against freedom of speech, and then turns around and censors that person . . . which in its own way does more to expose the hypocrisy of religion and the do-as-I-say- and believe, not what-I-do.

A swell eternity? you may honestly believe in eternal life, but don't your think that whole scenario is just a bit too simplistic and convenient?

Perhaps fear is the true cause of a belief in the afterlife. The thought of not going on is too much for most people to handle.

 

[Domainace]

yes, this is exactly the behavior religion provokes. People embrace religion because of emotion.

Not just religion. Political opinions, shopping decisions, dietary decisions. Even science, though greater efforts are usually made to remain objective.

The choice to not believe in a religion is just as emotionally based as the choice to believe in religion.
We are emotional creatures. Sometimes that's a good thing. Sometimes not.

I am not a religious person - I can't accept the myths as reality. And yet I can't help but notice that religious people tend to be happier and better functioning people than atheists. That's one reason I think it's foolish to mock them. (The other reasons including basic decency and humility.)

 

[NameOmnia]

http://bcove.me/w98gljzh

 

[verbster]

The choice to not believe in a religion is just as emotionally based as the choice to believe in religion..)

Not so sure "choice" is the right description of the decision process in either case.

I am not a religious person - I can't accept the myths as reality.

Interesting that you chose to describe religious beliefs as "myths."

And yet I can't help but notice that religious people tend to be happier and better functioning people than atheists.

Hmmm . . . that's a pretty all-encompassing opinion. What is a "better functioning" person?

 

[Domainace]

Interesting that you chose to describe religious beliefs as "myths."

Why? They are myths to me. Like I said, I'm not a religious person. However, it's not a negative thing. Myths can be a very powerful and supportive force. Think "image training." The world is build on myths, religious and otherwise. Sometimes for bad, sometimes for good.

Hmmm . . . that's a pretty all-encompassing opinion. What is a "better functioning" person?

Like I said, it's an opinion based on personal observations. I'm not trying to argue the point, just explaining why I have a favorable view of religion though I'm not religious myself.

 

[verbster]

Why? They are myths to me. Like I said, I'm not a religious person. However, it's not a negative thing. Myths can be a very powerful and supportive force. Think "image training." The world is build on myths, religious and otherwise. Sometimes for bad, sometimes for good.

I guess it depends on your definition/application of "myth." Can't speak for others, but if someone called my religion a myth, it would be hard for me to construe that application as being supportive rather than thinking it meant a false belief built on folklore and such.

Like I said, it's an opinion based on personal observations. I'm not trying to argue the point, just explaining why I have a favorable view of religion though I'm not religious myself.

Simply curious what you meant by "better functioning people."

 

[GILSAN]

Liberalism with the precious help of the cowardly Liberal media, with it's culture of Political Correctness, has silenced the cowardly Liberal Politicians into submission, when it comes to telling the truth about Islam, Unfortunately a high % of the population have been brainwashed by the above mentioned idiots in the past 30-40 years

Look at the spineless, toothless British MSM as an example. They didn't have the balls to publish the Mohammad cartoons, as did most of European Newspapers and TV's, after the Paris massacre.

Here's a well written article where Political Correctness has been kicked out of the front door and says it as it is... for a change.

This is how freedom is killed off. Little by little, piece by piece: LITTLEJOHN on how the State will cede yet more ground to terrorists in the wake of the Paris massacre

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...orists-wake-Paris-massacre.html#ixzz3OKvAS0vL

 

[RogueWriter]

This is laughable coming from someone who first tries to accuse a person as being against freedom of speech, and then turns around and censors that person . . . which in its own way does more to expose the hypocrisy of religion and the do-as-I-say- and believe, not what-I-do..

I did not censor anyone, I chose to stop listening to drivel. What's her name is free to explain her philosophical atheism-but-Gods-exist theory to everyone else who wants to listen.

 

[RogueWriter]

Look at the spineless, toothless British MSM as an example. They didn't have the balls to publish the Mohammad cartoons, as did most of European Newspapers and TV's, after the Paris massacre.

Look, I understand where you are coming from, but imo, just because you CAN publish insulting images of a religion, it doesn't mean it is a nice thing to do. Publishing those images certainly was a strike back at extremists, but I am sure it was also insulting to several million Muslims that had nothing to do with the horrendous act. I do not believe that there are no moderates in the Muslim world.

I think a more appropriate act would be to strike back in some way at those who promote terrorism, as well as finding, capturing and killing the idiots who did this.

I do also believe that the police forces in Europe need to start carrying weapons. At some point they are going to be asked to stand in between innocent people and certain death; they need to be armed.

 

[GILSAN]

Look, I understand where you are coming from, but imo, just because you CAN publish insulting images of a religion, it doesn't mean it is a nice thing to do. Publishing those images certainly was a strike back at extremists, but I am sure it was also insulting to several million Muslims that had nothing to do with the horrendous act. I do not believe that there are no moderates in the Muslim world.

I think a more appropriate act would be to strike back in some way at those who promote terrorism, as well as finding, capturing and killing the idiots who did this.

I do also believe that the police forces in Europe need to start carrying weapons. At some point they are going to be asked to stand in between innocent people and certain death; they need to be armed.

It may be wrong, but it does show the difference in tolerance of the various religions. Christians and especially Catholics have been insulted a lot more and a lot longer and by a lot more people, media and Hollywood, than Islam has, but they don't go around terrorizing and killing in the name of God.

Since they hate Western values so much. Islamic extremists and their sympathizers, (which the Liberal Media keeps saying that are only a very small minority), should go back to their countries of origin. Those that were born in Europe and want to go fight for Isis or Al Qaeda should have their citizenship stripped forever, when they decide to return to Europe.

Those that want to integrate in our society and accept our values, are more than welcome to stay.

These people who have no respect for our values should be aware that many Europeans are loosing their patience and tolerance of them. I'm hoping that UKIP wins the UK elections in May. Perhaps then these people will either start having some respect for our values, or get the hell out of Europe.

They are not worthy of living among us, and since the majority of Muslims are not very keen or willing or doing anything to put them in their place, then we, the conservatives have to start taking drastic steps to stop this, because it's more than obvious that Liberals won't do it... they have no balls to do it.

 

[verbster]

They are not worthy of living among us, and since the majority of Muslims are not very keen or willing or doing anything to put them in their place, then we, the conservatives have to start taking drastic steps to stop this, because it's more than obvious that Liberals won't do it... they have no balls to do it.

What do you mean by "drastic steps"? You might be surprised what liberals can and will do. For one thing, they can try to keep reactionary conservatives from doing something so stupid as to needlessly endanger lives.

 

[GILSAN]

What do you mean by "drastic steps"? You might be surprised what liberals can and will do. For one thing, they can try to keep reactionary conservatives from doing something so stupid as to needlessly endanger lives.

"needlessly endanger lives" That's a joke right? 3 Muslims just "needlessly" massacred 17 inocent lives in Paris and all you worry about is what the reaction from Conservatives is going to be?

The American Liberal MSM, just like the British MSM were nothing but cowards by not showing solidarity towards Charlie Hebdo by showing the Mohammad cartoons. No balls... just bending down to Muslim terrorists, once again.

And you didn't even have the decency to condemn these bastards for these heinous crimes, but you were fast off the mark to criticize Religious people. Typical Liberal. Shame on you!!! Don't bother to reply, because I'm not interested in what you have to say

 

[verbster]

And you didn't even have the decency to condemn these bastards for these heinous crimes, but you were fast off the mark to criticize Religious people. Typical Liberal. Shame on you!!! Don't bother to reply, because I'm not interested in what you have to say

Just because I don't react the way you do doesn't mean I don't think terrorists and murderers are scum. For you to say otherwise and try to shame me for my personal feelings that you know nothing about is pretty shameful itself.

 

[GILSAN]

Unbelievable!!!
Wife of terrorist who mentored two Paris gunmen is 'living on benefits in Britain after moving to UK for the Islamic environment'

What's amazing is that this terrorist called Beghal was banned from the UK on grounds of national security in 2009, raising questions over why his wife and family are free to live in Britain.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-UK-Islamic-environment.html#ixzz3ORnuo3o1

 

[iowadawg]

 

[GILSAN]

LOL... Bacon, the Weapon of Mass Conversion

 

[GILSAN]

British Imam, Anjem Choudary Admits That Islam Is Not A Religion Of Peace

At least this guy is not a hypocrite. Everyone knows were he stands

 

[verbster]

I see Anonymous has "declared war" against jihadists.

 

[GILSAN]

I see Anonymous has "declared war" against jihadists.

I saw that too. I hope they do a good job

 

[GILSAN]

'What do you expect if you insult Islam?' British hate preacher Mizanur Rahman, BACKS the Paris massacres and tells his followers 'Britain is the enemy of Islam'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-says-Britain-enemy-Islam.html#ixzz3OWGX4RbR

 

[GILSAN]

North Carolina city forced to remove memorial of soldier kneeling at a cross after $1million lawsuit claiming it was 'offensive to non-Christians'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-cross-sued-Army-veteran.html#ixzz3OcWHbKmA

Another pathetic example of the PC Pussies caving in to one person. What about the majority... don't they count anymore?

 

[verbster]

I see Boko Haram has reached a new level of cowardliness: they are using young girls as suicide bombers.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/11/africa/child-suicide-bomber-nigeria/

 

[verbster]

North Carolina city forced to remove memorial of soldier kneeling at a cross after $1million lawsuit claiming it was 'offensive to non-Christians'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-cross-sued-Army-veteran.html#ixzz3OcWHbKmA

Another pathetic example of the PC Pussies caving in to one person. What about the majority... don't they count anymore?

Lots more to this than it appears. You forgot to mention the memorial, including flying a "Christian flag" was in the town's central park, and that the lawsuit was filed by a U.S. veteran who said he filed it because he "proudly served alongside a diverse group of soldiers with a variety of different religious beliefs," and felt that "The City of King should be honoring everyone who served our country, not using their service as an excuse to promote a single religion."

Here's a good article about how the U.S. founding fathers struggled with the problems of majority rule in a government meant to protect the rights of all citizens, including those not voting with the majority.
http://www.democracyweb.org/majority/principles.php

 

[iowadawg]

I see Anonymous has "declared war" against jihadists.

Why the shit can't the government of the USA, England, etal do this?