Would you like to see the death of religion.

JimiTime

I asked this on another thread in response to another hivemind rant:) Basically, would you like to see the death of religion? I know that there are alot of you who don't mind it, once it stays away from the classroom etc, but even the moderate atheist, would you actually be happy to see it die?

-Edit- If any atheist answers no, could you explain why?

Hivemind187

Yes, except for my religion.

JimiTime wrote: »

I asked this on another thread in response to another hivemind rant:) Basically, would you like to see the death of religion? I know that there are alot of you who don't mind it, once it stays away from the classroom etc, but even the moderate atheist, would you actually be happy to see it die?

See my response in the other post.

And I was taking the micky Jimi.

Dades

Yes - through proactive secularism

JimiTime wrote: »

would you like to see the death of religion?

Not at all, which is just as well as it will never happen either.

Sleepy

I have to admit I think it would be a good thing. One less excuse for mankind to wage war on each other and it could only help further our understanding of the universe we live in.

JimiTime

Yes - through proactive secularism

Dades wrote: »

Not at all, which is just as well as it will never happen either.

I assume you are an atheist? if so, why wouldn't you like to see it die?

Zombrex

JimiTime wrote: »

I assume you are an atheist? if so, why wouldn't you like to see it die?

Dude, he's not a atheist .. he is the atheist

(see his sig)

Zombrex

JimiTime wrote: »

I know that there are alot of you who don't mind it, once it stays away from the classroom etc, but even the moderate atheist, would you actually be happy to see it die?

Yes, so long as that isn't a trick question and you aren't going to infer much from that (ie I'm not going to support any law that outlaws or bans religion)

Hivemind187

Yes, except for my religion.

Honestly, I can just think of millions of things it would be better to spend all that energy and resources on.

Yes - with the exception of personal beliefs.

No, I wouldn't. Though churches with far too much money should be strongly encouraged to do more charity, I suppose.

5uspect

Yes - through proactive secularism

I would be happy to see religion to run its course and become about as important to people as the plot of Eastenders, and then maybe Glenroe. I wouldn't be interested in seeing this happen through any kind of legislation or force just rational debate.

Ultimately tho I'd imagine its here to stay.

Hivemind187

Yes, except for my religion.

JimiTime wrote: »

I asked this on another thread in response to another hivemind rant:) Basically, would you like to see the death of religion? I know that there are alot of you who don't mind it, once it stays away from the classroom etc, but even the moderate atheist, would you actually be happy to see it die?

The original response to this question

Hivemind187 wrote:

I would be extatic with the global realisation that we, as a species, have progressed beyond the point of needing the grotesque cabaret of religion.

In a sense, I suppose yes, I would. But you'll obviously take this out of context and claim that I am looking to begin an atheistic pogrom agaisnt theists.

The fact is that if religion were to dissapear tomorow Atheists wouldnt really be affected since we have already divested ourselves of that particular accoutrement ... it would only mean that we have come full circle to the default position of no theological beliefs.

Clear enough?

Edit: oh ... and I was clearly making fun in the quoted post ... for the most part.

Sleepy

bluewolf wrote: »

No, I wouldn't. Though churches with far too much money should be strongly encouraged to do more charity, I suppose.

Well, given that one of the primary (if not the primary source) of the Catholic Church espoused charity and they didn't listen to him, I'd like to see how anyone else could encourage them to adhere to their own supposed principles! lol

JimiTime

Yes - through proactive secularism

If any atheist answers no, could you explain why?

JimiTime

Yes - through proactive secularism

Wicknight wrote: »

Yes, so long as that isn't a trick question and you aren't going to infer much from that (ie I'm not going to support any law that outlaws or bans religion)

:D No, its not so that I can set up a conspiracy theory that atheists are planning to feed us to Lions.:D

Hivemind187

Yes, except for my religion.

JimiTime wrote: »

If any atheist answers no, could you explain why?

I would assume that many atheists are not as "passionate" as others and can happily live in smirking tolerance of the religions viewing them, perhaps, as an amusing anachronism or pantomime.

Thus the continuance or dissipation of the the church is of little consequence to them as they have no vested interest.

Hivemind187

Yes, except for my religion.

JimiTime wrote: »

:D No, its not so that I can set up a conspiracy theory that atheists are planning to feed us to Lions.:D

HA! Shows what you know

Yes - with the exception of personal beliefs.

Different things work for different people, I suppose. And while there's bad things to say about religion, they do charity stuff etc, and many people do seem happier for it.
Basically I think blaming a lot of problems on religion itself is a bit simplistic since the people behind it are still the same.
If you mean say... trying to legislate against it being practised anywhere or something, I'm sure the reasons for saying no to that are obvious enough. If it dies out... well then it dies out. I suppose it would be interesting to see what people do without it.

I'm not an atheist though

JimiTime

Yes - through proactive secularism

Hivemind187 wrote: »

HA! Shows what you know

While yer at it, can ye get rid of chavs, oh and steve staunton:)

Hivemind187

Yes, except for my religion.

JimiTime wrote: »

While yer at it, can ye get rid of chavs, oh and steve staunton:)

Drawing up the pogrom plans as we speak ...

... how many BeeGees are left?

JimiTime

Yes - through proactive secularism

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Drawing up the pogrom plans as we speak ...

... how many BeeGees are left?

Can't forget Paris Hilton neither, though there wouldn't be much meat there for the lions. Maybe, a Paris Hilton Soup:)

Anyway back on topic, before i end up making a list:)

robindch

Yes - through natural causes

JT wrote:

would you like to see the death of religion?

Referring to the "death" of religion is over-dramatic. But having said that, I'd certainly be first down the bar for a beer if the pope and the rest of them suddenly upped one day and announced that it was all a load of cobblers and couldn't yiz all just get out and be nice to each other for a change?

More seriously, I'd certainly like to see religion change into the mutually beneficial and supportive social glue that it claims to be, but that's unlikely ever to happen as that's certainly not what religions are "for", any more than the principal interest of trade unions is the jobs of their members.

Religions won't die, but they'll certainly continue to evolve socially and culturally. In the future, they'll be doing and saying things which are as different to today's carry-on, as today's is different to the Middle Ages. The only thing that will remain the same is religion's unyielding, not to say savage, interest in itself.

Incidentally, that letter from the Islamic community to the pope last week is a good example -- and I'd expect, perhaps a few centuries from now -- that religions will have dwindled to the point that they've more to lose by remaining in conflict than they do by making common cause. And perhaps a few centuries after that, people will look back on Jesus and the other guy in the same way that the members of both religions now look back on Zeus, Jupiter and the rest. And will scratch their chins and wonder what actually went on in all those big buildings and did people really think that you would live forever if only you believed you would.

Dades

Yes - through proactive secularism

Wicknight wrote: »

Dude, he's not a atheist .. he is the atheist

Actually now I'm just an atheist. Kinda like when superman became mortal - except I keep my superpowers.

JimiTime wrote: »

If any atheist answers no, could you explain why?

I can see first hand the comfort religion offers on a personal level. In fact I'm off to a removal tonight and will no doubt witness it there. But once it moves out of the personal realm and into public life/policy I lose my fluffy feelings toward it. Beliefs are personal and shouldn't be impressed on those that don't share them.

Zombrex

Dades wrote: »

I can see first hand the comfort religion offers on a personal level. In fact I'm off to a removal tonight and will no doubt witness it there. But once it moves out of the personal realm and into public life/policy I lose my fluffy feelings toward it. Beliefs are personal and shouldn't be impressed on those that don't share them.

Your response if kinda why I wanted to be careful about how I answered the question.

If religion dies a natural death that would imply, at least to me, that people have found a way to find this comfort in a non-supernatural fashion. Therefore the death of religion doesn't mean that people who used religion for comfort are now miserable, or left without a crutch. It actually means they are happy, because otherwise they would still use religion.

Religion dies when no one feels the need for it any more. If no one feels the need for it any more then there isn't really a down side to this death.

ScumLord

I'd like to see religion upgraded rather than eradicated. I see God as the answer to 2 question; Where did the universe come from and how does it work. Religion can be a great tool for social interaction, meditation and making the most out of the only tool capable of working out the mystery of God, the human brain. I'd like to see a new religion that centres around mind and sole well being and compassion for your fellow man. I think to ignore something that's been ingrained into our minds for 10s of thousands of years can't just be thrown aside without repercussions.

I don't see "God" at all, like the all powerful king as set out by people 1000s of years ago that didn't know any better. It could be anything from an equation to a normal occurrence. Just incase I come across all holy in what I said.

Dades

Yes - through proactive secularism

Wicknight wrote: »

Religion dies when no one feels the need for it any more. If no one feels the need for it any more then there isn't really a down side to this death.

You'd wonder how that could ever be, given the "attachments" we make to people during our lives, and the loss we feel at their passing. Though I guess that's only one aspect of it.

Zombrex

Dades wrote: »

You'd wonder how that could ever be, given the "attachments" we make to people during our lives, and the loss we feel at their passing. Though I guess that's only one aspect of it.

Well that was going to be my next point, I don't see this ever happening for a very long time, and even then with will probably be the the shifting of what we understand by orgnised religion to a more personal "I've an friendly spirit on my shoulder" type new age stuff.

Personally I would be happy with the shift from "This happens when you die" to "I don't know what happens when you die, but I hope its nice" Certainty of life after death causes a lot of the problems I associate with religion. But it is also the most powerful aspect of it.

Son Goku

No to be honest, I wouldn't. I'm actually fond of churches and a lot of religious thought, probably because of my interest in medieval history. Besides if it makes people happy, it doesn't really matter.

What I would like to see an end to is:
1. An unyielding opposition to plain facts.
2. Opposition to things which only help people's lives such as contraception.*

Religion isn't the only source of these things; however I think it is the main contributor to number 2. However even then it is only the very religious.

*I particularly don't like objection to contraception as it is one of the foundations of the liberation of women.

JimiTime

Yes - through proactive secularism

Wicknight wrote: »

Dude, he's not a atheist .. he is the atheist

(see his sig)

Aha! Just seen that now:)

Tigrrrr

Sleepy wrote: »

I have to admit I think it would be a good thing. One less excuse for mankind to wage war on each other

Firstly, I'd just like to mention that I don't adhere to any religion whatsoever.

Secondly, no offence, beacuse that is a common opinion, it's just that it's completely daft. Look, religion is weird. Sometimes to the point that it's comical. But would removing it make the world more peaceful?

No, of course not. Nor does keeping it make the world more peaceful, despite what believers say.

People are people. They use any excuse in the book to kill, maim, rape, steal and make corrupt. They use video games to do it, skin colour, ethnicity, they even use democracy to do it! Need we ban democracy? Video games?

Lets not kid ourselves here. Getting rid of religion isn't getting rid of one less excuse, another equally bizarre "excuse" would be crafted in its place. Religion isn't the problem. People are the problem.

and it could only help further our understanding of the universe we live in.

You think that religion is currently obstructing the advancement of scientific knowledge at its frontiers in any realistic way? I mean, sure some crazies want to teach creationism in some incest-riddled Florida backwater, but it hardly amounts to some crazed nun pushing Stephen Hawking's wheelchair-slash-voice synthesizer down a stairs.

robindch

Yes - through natural causes

Son Goku wrote:

Besides if it makes people happy, it doesn't really matter.

You're forgetting -- or omitting -- what happens when lots of people get together who think that they all believe the same thing. And that it would be great if everybody else thought the same as they did. The mass-effects of individual belief giving rise to the emergent phenomenon of religion...

I'm in Jakarta at the moment where ten days or so ago, there were a spate of attacks in the south of the city by muslim gangs on bars, restaurants and nightclubs where "immoral" activities of one kind or another were rumored to be taking place. I'm sure these attacks made the individual gang members feel great, an adrenaline-fuelled moral crusade; what could be more fun! But I'm afraid to say that their beliefs and the grossly anti-social tendencies that are legitimized and encouraged by them, most certainly do matter in a civil society.

.

Son Goku

robindch wrote: »

You're forgetting -- or omitting -- what happens when lots of people get together who think that they all believe the same thing. And that it would be great if everybody else thought the same as they did. The mass-effects of individual belief giving rise to the emergent phenomenon of religion...

I'm excluding people like this. What I mean is, a priori, before you factor in people with a tendency to think like the ones you describe above, there is nothing inherently wrong with thinking something incorrect which makes you happy.