Religion, is it harmful or is it benign or is it good?

[Dan~]

According to dawkins type atheism, theism is dangerous, wrong, corrupt and irration.

I consider some religions are faulty. Some things like buddhism seem good and harmless.

Religion is a group of people all holding the same belief and the same goals, mostly.
The agreement people meet to preform a service or a study to deepen their progress on the mutual goal.

Example:
Jehovah's witnesses meet around 2 or 3 times a week and read a massive amount of literature.
They all have a mutual goal. They want to build a loving resionship with Jehovah.
They want to be ready when the world ends and the new system of god's goverment arrives.
They have a consensus and all agree on a certain moral code, which you must follow to gain god's friendship and approval.

Now islam i don't know much about but I'd like to. And I believe
they have a moral code, and rituals and study, and the goal is to gain god's favor again, either in heaven or on earth.

A religion is a theory. A theory based not on our experience now, but that these people long ago saw god and miracles.
So we assume the material is good and pure. And that's just how it goes.

Dawkins thinks his theories are better than religion's theories.

That's what it all boils down to.

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

A religion is a theory. A theory based not on our experience now, but that these people long ago saw god and miracles.
So we assume the material is good and pure.

Except the three big religions, monotheist religions, Book based religions -- Judaism. Islam, and Christianity -- all take their Book far more serious than you characterize it.

They consider their Book God's Word to them, and their way to be obedient to God. And their Book teaches that if you are disobedient to God God will send calamity upon you. But if you are obedient to God God will send blessings, and give you a part in His kingdom.

Is this harmful? We can clearly see that it has been harmful in the past, and, is harmful even today. Causing Hitchens (non-god rest his soul) to justly proclaim that : "God is not good."

And causing our American government, and others, to become ever more totalitarian ... Islam extremists have forever changed America, not for the good, and so in a sense the Islam religion has psychologically conquered America.

You tell me if that's good or bad.

And I really like Tube Cat ....

[omar]

I think that religions have to be analysed by its ideals and not just about it has been practiced, because religion is something you can mispractice. For example, people bring up 9/11 immediately as undisputed evidence of of the harmful effects of religion, but people have to consider whether that was Islam or islamicism? Was it Islam or a corruption of Islam?
Overall I think that religions posit the integration of the group. Communion with God or the correct practice of a divine truth means an openness to the stranger. When matters get out of hand and religion is carried at the tip of a spear then to me that reveals irreligious considerations being observed. What does such and such group gains from the quick franchising or defranchising of the stranger at hand?
Religions can be monarchical and simply celabrate worldly success. But religions are also and even stronger, the houses of the poor, the dispossessed who live for a day of success. That last day seems like a day of violence and revenge, but those are sentiments that disqualify communion. Rather it is a day of law, of fairness, and usually followed by an eternity of it. The real obsession with this can be detrimental because it closes the believers from possible evolution, maturation of new ideas, a vital, live exchange with God, substituting that instead with a conservation of what amounts to a magic potion or spell. I agree with hitchens that such is the danger, but disagree that such is the norm or the standard.

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

I think that religions have to be analysed by its ideals and not just about it has been practiced, because religion is something you can mispractice. For example, people bring up 9/11 immediately as undisputed evidence of of the harmful effects of religion, but people have to consider whether that was Islam or islamicism? Was it Islam or a corruption of Islam?
Overall I think that religions posit the integration of the group. Communion with God or the correct practice of a divine truth means an openness to the stranger. When matters get out of hand and religion is carried at the tip of a spear then to me that reveals irreligious considerations being observed. What does such and such group gains from the quick franchising or defranchising of the stranger at hand?
Religions can be monarchical and simply celabrate worldly success. But religions are also and even stronger, the houses of the poor, the dispossessed who live for a day of success. That last day seems like a day of violence and revenge, but those are sentiments that disqualify communion. Rather it is a day of law, of fairness, and usually followed by an eternity of it. The real obsession with this can be detrimental because it closes the believers from possible evolution, maturation of new ideas, a vital, live exchange with God, substituting that instead with a conservation of what amounts to a magic potion or spell. I agree with hitchens that such is the danger, but disagree that such is the norm or the standard.

Bro Omar, no insult meant -- good thoughts about religion -- but it strikes me as enabling religion.

[Ierrellus]

According to dawkins type atheism, theism is dangerous, wrong, corrupt and irration.

I consider some religions are faulty. Some things like buddhism seem good and harmless.

Religion is a group of people all holding the same belief and the same goals, mostly.
The agreement people meet to preform a service or a study to deepen their progress on the mutual goal.

Example:
Jehovah's witnesses meet around 2 or 3 times a week and read a massive amount of literature.
They all have a mutual goal. They want to build a loving resionship with Jehovah.
They want to be ready when the world ends and the new system of god's goverment arrives.
They have a consensus and all agree on a certain moral code, which you must follow to gain god's friendship and approval.

Now islam i don't know much about but I'd like to. And I believe
they have a moral code, and rituals and study, and the goal is to gain god's favor again, either in heaven or on earth.

A religion is a theory. A theory based not on our experience now, but that these people long ago saw god and miracles.
So we assume the material is good and pure. And that's just how it goes.

Dawkins thinks his theories are better than religion's theories.

That's what it all boils down to.

Religion is banign, harmful and good! It is relevant and irrelevant. It is theory and fact. It is miraculous and mundane. It is progressive and regressive. This is the larger picture.

[Moreno]

According to dawkins type atheism, theism is dangerous, wrong, corrupt and irration.
.

To me this is similar to saying something like society is dangerous wrong corrupt and irrational. Look at all the wars society causes - and I am sure some indigenous people have said this from a real outside perspective. Religion is not simply a belief or even set of beliefs, it is a whole mass of actions and relationships that speaking in confidence about the effects of this seems like hubris to me. I mean, there's a reason scientists work in labs, if they can: to cut down the variables and to set up control tests.

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

Religion is banign, harmful and good! It is relevant and irrelevant. It is theory and fact. It is miraculous and mundane. It is progressive and regressive. This is the larger picture.

Religion is a product of human nature, and suffers all the foibles, flaws, as well as positives, of human nature.

But to be honest I don't trust religion. It has failed to live up to its advertisements.

[Stoic Guardian]

And causing our American government, and others, to become ever more totalitarian ... Islam extremists have forever changed America, not for the good, and so in a sense the Islam religion has psychologically conquered America.

Gotta disagree with you...

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

And causing our American government, and others, to become ever more totalitarian ... Islam extremists have forever changed America, not for the good, and so in a sense the Islam religion has psychologically conquered America.

Gotta disagree with you...

You obviously aren't paying attention ...
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=how+america+changed+after+9%2F11&oq=america+changes+after+9%2F11&gs_l=hp.1.0.0i13i5j0i22l3.4735.29761.0.35206.36.28.5.3.3.0.317.4210.0j24j3j1.28.0...0.0...1c.LsolKZh-4_A&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=158101d518659935&biw=853&bih=448

[Typist]

Except the three big religions, monotheist religions, Book based religions -- Judaism. Islam, and Christianity -- all take their Book far more serious than you characterize it.

The majority of people in all three of these faiths are not committed ideologists, for the simple reason that the majority of all people are not committed ideologists. Most people, theists, atheists and others, are not even that philosophical.

As evidence, consider that the Christians at least are bringing rock bands in to their churches to keep attendance up. It seems the faithful are not especially fascinated by the sermons.

Religion is much larger than just ideological assertions.

[Moreno]

And causing our American government, and others, to become ever more totalitarian ... Islam extremists have forever changed America, not for the good, and so in a sense the Islam religion has psychologically conquered America.

Gotta disagree with you...

You obviously aren't paying attention ...
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=how+america+changed+after+9%2F11&oq=america+changes+after+9%2F11&gs_l=hp.1.0.0i13i5j0i22l3.4735.29761.0.35206.36.28.5.3.3.0.317.4210.0j24j3j1.28.0...0.0...1c.LsolKZh-4_A&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=158101d518659935&biw=853&bih=448

So if someone argued that US foreign policy in the Middle East and elsewhere caused the radicalisation of some Islamic people, does that mean the US is 'really' the cause of 9/11. And would that be a secular based foreign policy or a religious one?

[Ierrellus]

Religion is banign, harmful and good! It is relevant and irrelevant. It is theory and fact. It is miraculous and mundane. It is progressive and regressive. This is the larger picture.

Religion is a product of human nature, and suffers all the foibles, flaws, as well as positives, of human nature.

But to be honest I don't trust religion. It has failed to live up to its advertisements.

Be a "majority of one".

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

The majority of people in all three of these faiths are not committed ideologists, for the simple reason that the majority of all people are not committed ideologists.

But they all have a core of hardliners that members adhere to and that define the ideology. And the laity follows the clergy. More often than not, than good, it's the hardliners that produce the problems.

Religion is much larger than just ideological assertions.

"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -- that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

[Typist]

But they all have a core of hardliners that members adhere to and that define the ideology. And the laity follows the clergy. More often than not, than good, it's the hardliners that produce the problems.

Yes, every ideology has it's hardliners, and that's where most of the problems come from. The meaningful divide is not theism/atheism, but sensible/fanatics.

With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -- that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

Thank you for posting some hard line ideological atheist gibberish for us to use as an example.

Please show me the theists who have killed as many people as the explicitly atheist Stalinist regime, or Maoist regime.

This evidence is always ignored and rationalized by those who claim to be loyal to evidence. Please, go ahead, and make my case by ignoring and rationalizing it.

[Moreno]

"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -- that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg

oh, that's good to know. I thought some good communists and neocons and non-religious colonialists managed to do evil. What a relief I was merely hallucinating.

[Stoic Guardian]

Yes, every ideology has it's hardliners, and that's where most of the problems come from. The meaningful divide is not theism/atheism, but sensible/fanatics.

[Typist]

Yes, every ideology has it's hardliners, and that's where most of the problems come from. The meaningful divide is not theism/atheism, but sensible/fanatics.

Thank you for applauding the fundamentalist agnostic fanatic. Please join me on the Holy Jihad to burn all the fanatics at the stake!