Support NeoGAF

[les papillons sexuels]

Fundamentally the idea of faith present in all religions is the determining factor in my decision to call all religions bad.

I've yet to hear a single argument made in the name of faith which can prove it's positive nature.

 

[BigJonsson]

I'd love to see where Israel falls on that list

 

[C4Lukins]

Any poll which lumps all religion together like that is pointless.

I agree with this. It is like asking whether or not politics, philosophy, the arts, superstition, war, tastey food, leaders, literature and on and on is a force for good. They are all topics dependent on a wide range of opinions and factors that lumping the good and the bad together into a singular giant ball is silly.

Religion is not a force for good nor a force for evil. It is not a single idea that can be represented so narrowly.

 

[Hammer24]

Where is that "Religion is of the Devil" shirt when you need it.

 

[Dilly]

Religion shouldn't interfere with society. Keep religion personal and I have no problems with it.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

I agree with this. It is like asking whether or not politics, philosophy, the arts, superstition, war, tastey food, leaders, literature and on and on is a force for good. They are all topics dependent on a wide range of opinions and factors that lumping the good and the bad together into a singular giant ball is silly.

this is a straw man argument, unless you participated in the poll you can't comment on how religion was defined, for it might be clearly explained to all participants, religion is only an umbrella term used in the article so to provide the reader with a generalization of what the poll is about.

 

[C4Lukins]

this is a straw man argument, unless you participated in the poll you can't comment on how religion was defined, for it might be clearly explained to all participants, religion is only an umbrella term used in the article so to provide the reader with a generalization of what the poll is about.

So how can any of us comment on it? And people need to stop using "straw man" every time they disagree with someones viewpoint. I am not misrepresenting the opposing opinion by inventing some stupid argument that they did not make. I did not attack the poll that was made, but merely stated my opinion based on the vague question posed in the OP.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

:lol :lol :lol

While Europe was in its Middle Ages. Muslims were going their Golden Age and science and inventions were being expanded upon and were miles ahead of Europe. I guess history books just teach from Western prospective. :|

The current state of Muslims can be attributed, the Mongol Invasion. Later, it was due to colonialism and the rise of Wahabism in middle east, and horrible economic strategies that pushed Islamic scientific work back.

I never said the Muslim world wasn't ahead of Europe... at all. Try not to put words into people's mouths.

Invasions -> extremist's blame it on divergence from the Qur'an -> retardation of scientific advancement and subsequent suppression for centuries -> dominance of extremist religious thought in the Muslim world -> much lulz ensue.

Now it's basically impossible for them to catch up.

 

[nubbe]

The greatest nation god has graced the world with

 

[HK-47]

Religion shouldn't interfere with society. Keep religion personal and I have no problems with it.

Personal spirituality is great. Its organized religion where I feel things start turning sour.

 

[Zapages]

I never said the Muslim world wasn't ahead of Europe... at all. Try not to put words into people's mouths.

Invasions -> extremist's blame it on divergence from the Qur'an -> retardation of scientific advancement and subsequent suppression for centuries -> dominance of extremist religious thought in the Muslim world -> much lulz ensue.

Now it's basically impossible for them to catch up.

Go back to your History Books! :|

1) Mongol Invasion of Baghdad occurred in the mid 13th Century.
2) Wahabism did not start until like the 18th Century.
3) Bad economic decisions occurred because the Ottomans controlled much of the trade to China and India. But with the discovery of the new world. The influx of gold rattled the economic structure of the Ottomans. As Ottoman's economic structure was backed by Gold.
4) Furthermore the leaders of Ottomans were into Arts at that time then pushing more inventions. As the Industrial Revolution was just arriving into Ottoman territories on eve of WW 1.

 

[Chairman Yang]

I'm continually amazed at the fact that people keep debating this topic. Its a subject where you can't have any common ground. Someone will bring up an example of a secular state that is progressive, then someone will bring up an example of a disastrous secular state. Someone will bring up an example of a relatively prosperous religious state, then someone will bring up the example of a backwards theocracy.

The best way to go about this would be "agree to disagree" but then someone will say something like "that kind of thinking is harmful to our progress" and it just starts over again.

My opinion? I agree with the person who said that the question is meaningless. If they had asked "Which religions do you believe are a force for good?" or "Which religions do you believe are harmful?" we could get more useful data that doesn't just simply represent the religiosity of a certain place. And the fact is, there are SEVERAL religions out there, but the layman only knows of judeo-christian religions, and thus decides to think of "religion" as Islam+Christianity+Judaism

It's not a meaningless question at all.

Most people understand that they're making a generalization when they answer "good" or "bad". They're taking a whole large host of beliefs, traditions, and practices, lumping them together, and then making a judgment. Yes, there may be exceptions and caveats, but it's absolutely reasonable to make a broad evaluation.

Let's say the poll question asked something like "are corporations good for the world?" or "is globalization good for the world?" or any sort of similar idea. Sure, the questions are generalizations, but they're still interesting to discuss and it's still worthwhile to poll people for their general view on the topic.

 

[avaya]

Scandi's > All.

Deal with it.

 

[Binabik15]

I'd love to see where Israel falls on that list

Israel: this list is anti-semite, nazi scum

 

[jaxword]

It can be both good and bad - but I'd say that it's in both cases not really the "religion" itself that is the cause of it.

During a fiery debate in Congress Hall, Vermont Representative Matthew Lyon, one of Jefferson’s strongest allies, spat tobacco juice in the face of the Federalist’ Connecticut Representative Roger Griswold. Griswold then picked up a cane and charged at Lyon, who quickly grabbed a pair of fire tongs from the fireplace to defend himself. They were of course separated.

I'm from a hardcore Christian family; I see this every day.

 

[JayDubya]

Religion is an influential force. It can be, and has been, used for both good and evil.

Though "good" and "evil" are largely a part of your own philosophy / morals, and for many, those come from... well...

In other words, I too find this question to be ridiculous, and wouldn't vote on such a thing.

 

[kswiston]

Rejecting Evolution while downright stupid does little in the long term as far as harm. Science will always been pursued by those who care about science and those who dont will always go bah humbug.

Evolution is the central concept of biology. Evolutionary concepts are used in the advancement of medicine, disease and pest control, crop development, animal conservation, and plenty of other useful fields. Rejecting evolution is like rejecting polarity in chemistry.

Also, while it is true that those who care about science will pursue it, wide scale rejection of basic scientific principles turns away potential students from entering the field and handicaps those that do go on to biology by improperly preparing them for university. Not to mention the fact that scientific funding is largely controlled by businessmen and politicians. If these people in charge reject basic scientific principles in favor of religious beliefs that have no place in the political and economic decisions of most developed countries, it hurts science in a very real way. Scientific progress is not free.

Even now, the United State's former dominance in fields like biotechnology is quickly diminishing as countries like South Korea push ahead while Americans languish under poor scientific education in public schools, and political meddling in scientific funding.

 

[Kafel]

yay France !

 

[Dan Yo]

Fundamentally the idea of faith present in all religions is the determining factor in my decision to call all religions bad.

I've yet to hear a single argument made in the name of faith which can prove it's positive nature.

Most faiths ask that the follower do good and be charitable to others. They also compel those that are inclined to do bad things, to refrain from doing them, as even though human beings and the authorities are fallible, God sees all.

 

[jaxword]

Most faiths ask that the follower do good and be charitable to others.

Over the next one year, Jefferson and Adams went after each other mercilessly, ridiculing one another at every opportunity (monarchist was an often used term), right up to Election Day.

 

[Zenith]

Unsurprisingly, the countries that commit the most evil in the name of religion think it's a force for good.

 

[Dan Yo]

The majority of people do not do this.

Perhaps not, but I don't see why you would blame a faith for asking them to do good, just because many choose not to follow its direction.

 

[Pakkidis]

Very poor question.

If religion is used for good then good things will come, if religion is used for bad then bad things will come.

 

[jaxword]

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.

 

[Tobor]

Well, I'm proud of 35% of Americans. Hopefully we can turn the corner in my lifetime.

 

[SuperAngelo64]

Any poll which lumps all religion together like that is pointless.

Dude, this is GAF.

Just give up. :lol

 

[Pandaman]

why?

because every other religion is wrong, duh.

once again im proud to be canadian!

 

[Jasup]

Religion is all about controlling people with an authoritarian rule establihed on divine (and I'm not talking about the drag queen) but dictated by people.

Religion is a vehicle used to force people to think and act in a certain way by people of authority, without consideration. Even if it's used "for good" the premise of religion is, in my view, abhorrent and evil.

 

[Joel Was Right]

This reminds me of a debate I heard a few months ago on the impact of teaching the history of a particular race or minority. What happens in these classes is that those of that race are ones that predominantly fill up the enrolment spaces, and so you have an environment where you're introducing young people to the persecution of their ancestors. The motive behind these classes was to get a mixed class, obviously. But that rarely ever happens and so some critics feel that its creating a persecution complex in the minds of those kids, and encouraging them to view society from a racially polarised view.

In regards to these polls; you might as well rename them 'do you believe in God', because that's what they essentially reflect.

 

[Dan Yo]

I do not blame faith for anything. I come from a very religious background.

I do, however, say it is a tool, and like any tool, if it is not used properly, then it can do terrible acts of damage.

Faith is the belief in the unprovable, the unknowable, the things we can't know. This can inspire humans to great things beyond normal men. It can inspire great leaders and bring about massive change as groups of people follow and bring about that change.

However, this can be easily warped. If people use "faith" as the only guidance, then this bleeds into decision making and "if I believe it, it must be true" becomes the mantra for day to day life.
"Do good" is too vague an instruction. People cannot handle that degree of freedom; if we ask a homosexual-hating preacher, he'll say God told him this is Good.

When the tool of faith runs contrary to fact, reason and evidence, then it has become warped and has become a tool for evil.

Look at how people fight so hard against something as basic as evolution. Look at the sheer hatred towards homosexuals. Look at the many religious-fueled wars in the world.

It does not matter what my, or your, or anyone's personal views of faith are--because the reality is that it is causing massive harm all across the world.

I don't see much proof that when faith runs contrary to evidence it automatically and inevitably becomes warped into a tool of evil.

There are people that don't put all of their trust in evolution? Big deal.

"Homosexual-hating" is a strong word for those that oppose gay unions. I know more non-religious people that express their distaste and hatred for homosexuals than religious people. Religious people tend to hate the action, not the person who commits it, and would not harm anyone, whether they agree with what they do or not.

My mother for instance, is one of the most extremely religious people you would ever know, she has gay friends and treats them with the respect and dignity she would give to any other human being, despite not supporting gay marriage. I have acquaintances that are full blown atheists, who were never raised in a religious household, that talk about gays as if it wouldn't bother them to beat them into a pulp and leave them to die on the side of the street.

As for religious-fueled wars, there are plenty of wars that are fueled by greed for money and power. Things that many (all?) faiths teach against.

I have not heard any real convincing argument that the world's troubles are any more or any less due to people having faith in a higher power.

 

[Mael]

Yay! I guess that law from the beginning of the last century had effects

 

[Ikael]

Fundamentally the idea of faith present in all religions is the determining factor in my decision to call all religions bad.

I've yet to hear a single argument made in the name of faith which can prove it's positive nature.

Thing is, despite of centuries of association, faith is not a religion - exclusive virtue. It is a virtue by itself, and like anything, it is healthy on proper doses. In order to live in a civilized society, we need to have a certain degree of faith in other fellow humans. Having faith your loved ones, or in yourself is a great thing.

Having a little faith on the human genre allows you to don't live in a constant fear, and as my atheist philosophy teacher once said, it is the oil that let's civilization work: whenever I take my car I trust and believe in the other drivers, because albeit yes, it is possible that one day one of them might drive in the opposite direction of the traffic and kill me in a a horrible car accident, but If I let that sink into me I wouldn't drive at all. Hell, I wouldn't even go out of my house, what if someone rapes me and kills me? Are you going to blindly discard that possiblity?

A constant state of skepticism toward others means living in a constant state of distrust and fear. A healthy dosis of faith, in the truest sense of the world, prevents you from failing into horror and paralysis. I would dare to say that it is a quite positive thing, yep.

 

[gutter_trash]

LOL Hitchens picking Catholic opponents all the time for his debates.. what a cop out IMO

if Hitchens had balls, he would debate with Muslim opponents

Catholics.. pfffff they are the easier going Christians to debate... now try an Evangelical Doomsday Ratpture type instead

 

[MrHicks]

mass willful ignorance is a good thing for the planet now?

 

[Vamphuntr]

Proud to be Canadian!

 

[Zzoram]

LOL Hitchens picking Catholic opponents all the time for his debates.. what a cop out IMO

if Hitchens had balls, he would debate with Muslim opponents

Catholics.. pfffff they are the easier going Christians to debate... now try an Evangelical Doomsday Ratpture type instead

I think the point is to debate the less crazy religious folk to make it more of a challenge.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

mass willful ignorance is a good thing for the planet now?

If it influences people to live more fulfilling lives with a solid set of morals and values that promote hardworking and generosity, I think that's more important than "willful mass ignorance".

 

[Tabris]

I LOVE BEING CANADIAN

We just seem to be 1 more step ahead of everyone... except maybe the Swedes. Damn those Swedes being more progressive than us! ... but they are also known for their xenophobia... so Canada wins again!

 

[ChoklitReign]

So much nationalism ITT. smh

 

[soul creator]

The Armor of God, or the Top One Reason Religion is Harmful

long article, but sums up why one might still think that religion is inherently bad, on balance, even if you point to plenty examples of "good" religions.

Many believers will argue that the harm done by religion isn't religion's fault. Many will point out all the wars, bigotry, fraud, oppression, quashing of science and medicine, and terrorizing of children done for reasons other than religion. And many will argue that, even when this stuff is done in the name of religion, it isn't really inspired by religion at all. It's inspired by greed, fear, selfishness, the hunger for power, the desire for control... all the things that lead people to do evil.

And they'll have a point. I'm not saying that religion is the root of all evil. I'm not arguing that a world without religion would be a blissful Utopia where everyone holds hands and chocolate flows in the streets. (And then we all die, because the chocolate is drowning us and we can't swim because we're holding hands.) I don't know of any atheist who'd argue that. I know that the impulses driving evil are deeply rooted in human nature, and religion is far from the only thing to inspire it.

I'm saying that religion provides a uniquely stubborn justification for evil. I'm saying that religion is uniquely armored against criticism, questioning, and self-correction... and that this armor protects it against the reality checks that act, to a limited degree and in the long run, to keep evil in check. I'm saying that religion takes the human impulses to evil, and cuts the brake line, and sends them careening down a hill and into the center of town.

Yes -- even moderate religion. Not to nearly the same degree as extreme religion, of course. If all religion were moderate, ecumenical, separate from government, supportive of science, and accepting of non-belief... well, atheists would still disagree with it, but most of us wouldn't much care.

But moderate religion still does harm. It still encourages people to believe in invisible beings, inaudible voices, intangible entities, undetectable forces, and events and judgments that happen after we die. And therefore, it still disables reality checks... making people more vulnerable to oppression, fraud, and abuse.

and since the typical response to this is "what about buddhists/unitarians/etc.!", she touches on that in the comments

I think UU is something of a special case, in that it's a "religion" that doesn't require actual religious belief for membership.

But... well, that's actually sort of my point. Like I wrote in my piece on secular Judaism, I don't have a problem with people using the trappings and traditions of religion to form communities and connections with their history and their family.

I just don't think I'd define that as religion.

When I talk about progressive religion, I'm not talking about people who preserve the rituals and structures of religion in a secular, non-supernatural manner. I'm talking about people who still have actual religious beliefs in God and the soul and whatnot.

I'd put UU (or at least, the non-believing members of the UU) in the same category as secular Judaism. It's a nice, clever way of preserving the positive aspects of religion while rejecting the unsupportable belief in the supernatural. But I wouldn't define it as religion.

of course, some might say "that's not fair, how come the word religion can't apply to those as well?" Which can be an everlasting debate. I take the approach as well that if you don't involve supernatural entities at some point, you don't really count as a religion, but even if we concede that certain buddhists sects and unitarians count as religions that still doesn't change the larger issue: believing in unverifiable, invisible, supernatural entities, and using that as a basis for anything in the real world, is overall a negative thing.

And since there are at least 4 billion believers in those types of religions, we shouldn't pretend like it's some irrational generalization when someone mentions that "I think religion is a negative factor overall".

 

[pgtl_10]

I will vouch for you on this.

The European renaissance and enlightenment probably wouldn't have happened without the knowledge brought back from the Muslim world during the crusades.

Yeah I was under the impression that the Monguls were the ones who suppressed as a means to make the existing Muslim empire lose its intelligence.

 

[jaxword]

Jefferson, by virtue of his position as Vice President, was responsible for counting the Electoral College ballots received from the states. With only Georgia to go, Jefferson was leading Adams by 69 to 65 votes. The four Georgia electors had voted in favor of Adams, which tied the contest.

However, Jefferson realized that the Georgia electoral ballots did not fulfill the requirements laid out in the Constitution:

 

[Dude Abides]

Religion is like any other superstitious ooga-booga hokum - harmless until people start taking it seriously.

 

[HK-47]

LOL Hitchens picking Catholic opponents all the time for his debates.. what a cop out IMO

if Hitchens had balls, he would debate with Muslim opponents

Catholics.. pfffff they are the easier going Christians to debate... now try an Evangelical Doomsday Ratpture type instead

Why make it easy on himself?

 

[jaxword]

So much nationalism ITT. smh

I'm an American white boy going into med school from a middle class Christian family. Am I allowed to be nationalistic about being as generic as possible?

 

[SoulPlaya]

Any poll which lumps all religion together like that is pointless.

First post nailed it.

 

[SouthernDragon]

But yet scientific progress was one of the things suppressed by Islamic leaders centuries ago which is why most Muslim countries are so backwards compared to the rest of the world.

What? After the fall of the Roman Empire, Islamic civilization was one of the bastions of knowledge that remained in the area. They contributed much to math and science.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Lard]

LOL Hitchens picking Catholic opponents all the time for his debates.. what a cop out IMO

if Hitchens had balls, he would debate with Muslim opponents

They wouldn't argue, they would just kill him.

 

[Kraftwerk]

SO... why do so many people care what others believe in? I don't follow any religion myself, but i mean i see so many people flaunting and flexing in this thread going ' fuck yeah' because they won. Won what exactly? Some internet poll not respecting other peoples beliefs? All i have to say is that if you don't respect other peoples beliefs, i don't have any respect for you. Not saying that you NEED my respect...just sayin.

 

[Chairman Yang]

First post nailed it.

It really didn't. Why does lumping together religions invalidate the question? Can't people evaluate something in the aggregate?