Religion Made Me Do It

Forums: Spirituality And Religion
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Have read several times on here that religion makes people do things that I do not like, agree with, etc. - therefore many hate 'religion' for that reason.

Most of the the descriptions are actually supernatural-like. 'Religion made him blow up the buildings' as if a supernatural possession of sorts took place. Religion didn't make him do anything - it was choice (free will) to blow up the building.

For those who do not believe in the supernatural about God - why would you believe in the supernatural about people?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,391 • Replies: 28

No top replies

Your assumptions are flawed. I know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything. The religion is used as a justification by people who would otherwise not have an excuse for their behavior. It can also immunize the fanatic from criticism--i did if for Jesus, i did it for Allah, i did is for Krishna.

It cannot be ignored that people believe an impressively broad range of impossibly stupid things because of their adherence to a scriptural canon, from which they proceed to justify in their own minds the horrors they commit. Your average 11th century Frank was not necessarily homicidal while lounging at home, but turn him loose in Palestine, on a "crusade" for which he was solicited by the Pope, and while all of his sins have been remitted because he agreed to "take the cross"--and you've got an entirely different kettle of fish.

Eric Rudolph is arguably a homicidal maniac--but the "Christian Identity" lunatics who try to make a hero of him, and the fundamentalist creeps who helped him to evade the FBI don't have that excuse. Many among the Christian Right have made him out to be a hero and a martyr who fought the pro-abortion "homosexual" agenda (Rudolph's own public words). The issue is not whether or not religion made Rudolph plant bombs--the question is how people who claim to love and believe in a loving, peaceable and forgiving god support and give aid and comfort to a murderer, other than because of the bigoted agenda of their religious belief.

0 Replies

I agree with what Setanta wrote.

0 Replies

[quote="Setanta"]Your assumptions are flawed. I know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything...[/quote]

[quote="Wilso"]I don't hate you. I hate what religion makes people do, and how it is used as an excuse for some of the most foul behaviour. If it makes you feel better about your beliefs to denigrate my rationality, I can live with that.[/quote]

0 Replies

I think Set was saying that no lucid person here would say that religion makes anyone do anything.

0 Replies

As i said before, i knew at that time of no one who says that religion makes anyone do anything. If Baddog has a problem with Wilso, he should address his whine to Wilso, rather than attempting to suggest that what Wilso says constitutes " . . . those who do not believe in the supernatural about God" and then attempting to suggest that ". . . why would you believe in the supernatural about people?" is a reasonable question which follows logically upon the unfounded assumption that Wilso speaks for all people who do not share his imaginary friend superstition.

As for whether or not Wilso is lucid, i'd have to demur on such a judgment when the topic under discussion is organized religion--which differs from Baddog in that i can't recall ever having read a lucid argument coming from Baddog.

0 Replies

By the way, Baddog's fallacious attempt to reason from the particular to the general (i.e., arguing from Wilso to establish a description of everyone whose opinion of religion offends Baddog) is known as the composition fallacy. Basically, Baddog is attempting to say that as Wilso is an atheist, all atheists must think like Wilso. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what passes for logic at Baddog's house.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

By the way, Baddog's fallacious attempt to reason from the particular to the general (i.e., arguing from Wilso to establish a description of everyone whose opinion of religion offends Baddog) is known as the composition fallacy. Basically, Baddog is attempting to say that as Wilso is an atheist, all atheists must think like Wilso. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what passes for logic at Baddog's house.

Woweee!

Thanks for expending so much energy on me; I appreciate the flattery. Your alleged knowledge of my intentions are - well - almost supernatural! :wink:

Did it trip your trigger that I proved your assertion: "Your assumptions are flawed. I know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything..." as false? (Even though it was not personal.)

Please stay on topic if possible - or you can do as I did; and start a thread with your concerns/thoughts.

0 Replies

I never mentioned any names, you know.

0 Replies

baddog1 wrote:

Thanks for expending so much energy on me; I appreciate the flattery. Your alleged knowledge of my intentions are - well - almost supernatural!

Did it trip your trigger that I proved your assertion: "Your assumptions are flawed. I know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything..." as false? (Even though it was not personal.)

Please stay on topic if possible - or you can do as I did; and start a thread with your concerns/thoughts.

I am completely on topic--when a topic is based upon a flawed premise, it is completely appropriate to point out that the premise is flawed. I have alleged no knowledge of your intentions, i have simply described the fallacious method you have employed. Finally, you did not "prove [my] assertion as [sic] false"--when i asserted that i knew of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything, that was true. It remained true until you quoted Wilso. It is not false now, no more than it was when i said. It would only be false if i now continued to assert that i know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything, which i am not stating. So, it remains true that at the time i made the statement, i knew of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything.

You're not very good at this sort of thing, are you? You really must be pathetic at rhetorical debate if you actually think that it involves any significant amount of energy to dispense with the kind of horseshit you're peddling here.

0 Replies

By the way, demonstrating that Wilso said that doesn't get you any further down the road with your song and dance. If you want to know why Wilso says that, you should ask him.

0 Replies

Howdy, Set.

0 Replies

Howdee, Boss.

I ain't had no coffee yet today, even though it is the middle of the afternoon. Maybe i should chug a few cups and get really cranked up.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Maybe i should chug a few cups and get really cranked up.

0 Replies

Well, i already got one bag of yard waste out to the front porch, now i'm resting up to do the other one.

0 Replies

Coffee helps one rest and brings the mind into focus.

0 Replies

You are just as stuffed full of . . .

0 Replies

. . . french toast. But I'm startin' to git hungry again.

0 Replies

I had an Okie friend who, long about midday of a work day, used to say:

Jeetyit?

Nope.

Wanna?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

baddog1 wrote:
Thanks for expending so much energy on me; I appreciate the flattery. Your alleged knowledge of my intentions are - well - almost supernatural!

Did it trip your trigger that I proved your assertion: "Your assumptions are flawed. I know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything..." as false? (Even though it was not personal.)

Please stay on topic if possible - or you can do as I did; and start a thread with your concerns/thoughts.

I am completely on topic--when a topic is based upon a flawed premise, it is completely appropriate to point out that the premise is flawed. I have alleged no knowledge of your intentions, i have simply described the fallacious method you have employed. Finally, you did not "prove [my] assertion as [sic] false"--when i asserted that i knew of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything, that was true. It remained true until you quoted Wilso. It is not false now, no more than it was when i said. It would only be false if i now continued to assert that i know of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything, which i am not stating. So, it remains true that at the time i made the statement, i knew of no one here who says that religion makes anyone do anything.

You're not very good at this sort of thing, are you? You really must be pathetic at rhetorical debate if you actually think that it involves any significant amount of energy to dispense with the kind of horseshit you're peddling here.

I wonder what a conversation [with you] might be like - if you possessed the ability to focus on the on topic(s) and refrain from pathetic attempts at dispelling and/or ridiculing another. Check that - I do not wonder what that would be like. I now recall that this is a pattern of yours and also recall why I previously chose to ignore your replies. Thanks once again for the time spent; but you may now go elsewhere and spew for I will do my best (in the future) to recall your limited abilities.

0 Replies

Religion Made Me Do It

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know