Believe what you want to believe...

Altanzitarron

Tamer Of The LOLzilla
#1
Despite being an atheist I've never had a negative view of religion as long as it inspires people to explore the better parts of their nature. A good act commited out of a faith that I don't share is better than no good act at all. Idealogical differences seem incredibly trivial when compared to the welfare of our species.

What sort of attitude do you have towards this? Is anything permitted as long as it results in good regardless of religion?
 

PonderCloud

Registered Member
#2
On the whole I approve of the core idea of most religions. I think they teach valuable lessons on morals, and having a firm belief in such things is often a good thing. However I disapprove of religions which encourage zealous bigotry. One must accept that one can be wrong before one can truly appreciate faith and belief -- this applies to atheism just as much as theism. I dislike the religious folk who cannot accept the possibility of their being wrong, even when logic points the other direction, or those who use God as an excuse -- for instance, one such example I heard recently was from a religious friend who doesn't use condoms. He said, and I quote, "If a girl gets pregnant God intended it to happen," which seems ridiculous to me.

I also attended a Christian church session last week and took part in discussion about Creation and evolution. They were teaching completely false information about evolution to children and pushing home the "absolute fact of Creation", and to me that is unacceptable in any case but in particular to children. Teaching belief is one thing; passing false information to purposefully mislead others is something else entirely.
 

quantumechanic

Registered Member
#3
That would require a veeeery precise definition of the word "good". As it is, it can be interpreted in so many ways and is so subjective that the good of the theist will not neccessarily correlate with the good of society.
I suppose that if a new religion popped up preaching only good (as society in general would define it) acts and loving then, theoretically, it could be good for society, regardless of whether it is true or not.
I however, have no faith in religion as a force for good. Violent people keep looking for excuses to enact their violence, and religion, for all its good intentions, will always provide a convenient one. Take away religion, and you take away one more excuse. I suppose one could argue that you also take away excuses to do good, but I don't think that good people need excuses. Luckily, in modern society, it is widely accepted that it is the bad acts which need to be justified, not the good ones.
 

Altanzitarron

Tamer Of The LOLzilla
#4
quantumechanic, that's a very good point and something I should have clarified from the get go. By "Good" I was referring to things of a physical nature. Feeding the poor, caring for the sick, helping someone in peril etc. Acts which improve the quality of life for another person
 

EllyDicious

made of AMBIGUITY
V.I.P.
#5
To tell you the truth, I'm not totally against religions as long as they provide [as previously said] moral values about life, society, family ... etc.
Religion is a good moral source [up to a point].
But when it becomes a way of life, then that's when I start to oppose it.
Sure, anything with good results is permitted no matter if it comes from religion.
But I don't want it to be part of your every breath.

Just as I don't like strong atheist if they have a problem with me believing in God.
 

Merc

Certified Shitlord
V.I.P.
#6
Religion has done a lot of great things for us but they're often overshadowed by the tens of millions of people that have died throughout history because of it. Religion is just the concept, people are the ones that abuse it or utilize it for terrible things. That being said, as long as "good" is defined as something I agree with then yeah then I see no problem what faith it came from.
 
#7
I also attended a Christian church session last week and took part in discussion about Creation and evolution. They were teaching completely false information about evolution to children and pushing home the "absolute fact of Creation", and to me that is unacceptable in any case but in particular to children. Teaching belief is one thing; passing false information to purposefully mislead others is something else entirely.

Just out of curiosity, what was the "false information" they were teaching? Also, did it really surprise you that a Christian church was teaching Creation as being the only truth?
 

Wade8813

Registered Member
#8
...those who use God as an excuse -- for instance, one such example I heard recently was from a religious friend who doesn't use condoms. He said, and I quote, "If a girl gets pregnant God intended it to happen," which seems ridiculous to me.
Maybe he should jump off a cliff - after all, if he falls, then God intended for it to happen... :rolleyes:

Your friend doesn't seem to realize that there are natural consequences to our actions, and while it's true that God could intervene, He often doesn't choose to.

I also attended a Christian church session last week and took part in discussion about Creation and evolution. They were teaching completely false information about evolution to children and pushing home the "absolute fact of Creation", and to me that is unacceptable in any case but in particular to children. Teaching belief is one thing; passing false information to purposefully mislead others is something else entirely.
I can't speak for that church specifically, since I don't know what they were teaching, but I'd guess that for many churches, any disinformation about Evolution they're putting out is because they honestly believe it's true - they just don't know any better.

And really, I got bad information about Evolution from my high school biology teacher (at a public school).
 

PonderCloud

Registered Member
#9
The false information I mentioned was that evolutionary theory "in a nutshell" was essentially: "A bug lays an egg; when that egg is hatched, the bug that comes out is completely different bug entirely" -- which, of course, is nothing like the true theory of evolution. I was quite disgusted about it considering that it was being taught to children and young adolescents, who are much more susceptible to believing the words of adults. It doesn't matter if you believe in the theory of evolution, but to state it as something it isn't just to reinforce the belief of Creation? That just seems wrong.
 
#10
The false information I mentioned was that evolutionary theory "in a nutshell" was essentially: "A bug lays an egg; when that egg is hatched, the bug that comes out is completely different bug entirely" -- which, of course, is nothing like the true theory of evolution. I was quite disgusted about it considering that it was being taught to children and young adolescents, who are much more susceptible to believing the words of adults. It doesn't matter if you believe in the theory of evolution, but to state it as something it isn't just to reinforce the belief of Creation? That just seems wrong.
Is it at all possible that since they were teaching young children, that they were trying to simplify things? I really don't see any reason why a Christian church should be expected to get into an in depth discussion with kids about something they don't believe. A math teacher doesn't concentrate on teaching kids how to reach the wrong answer to an equation, he teaches them how to find the right one. Same with the church, they are teaching their children the right way and not concentrating on the wrong one.