Religion the great divider.

Sure looks that way from the outside au. Although it seems more like a division between those who trust faith-based thought versus reason-based thought (regardless of actual religious belief)

Your assumption that those who use reason therefore have no faith, and vice versa is an obvious logical fallacy. It is like saying those who use their arms do not use their legs.

real life, how do you know right from wrong? By reason or by religion? If god commands that you behave a certain way, but it seems illogical, do you disobey or do you do as he expects?

If you have only yourself to tell you right from wrong , then what if your notion of right includes stealing? Is it therefore right?

If my notion of right is "It's mine if I can get it,"-- Does that make it right?

If a man's notion of right is "I can have whatever I want and it is stifling to my psychological well being to withold it from myself." -- Is it right to get whatever I want, in whatever manner I chose to get it?

Every law written by a Congress or a town council is based on SOMEONE's notion of what is right and wrong. If the majority agree that keeping folks over 60 alive is too expensive, is it therefore right to kill them?

If your "logic" alone is your notion of right and wrong, and everybody else determined what was right "for them", what would the world be like, Eorl?

So your answer is "by religion" ?

You can see the point I am making and therefore avoiding giving a direct answer. Does your definition of right and wrong come from your own reasoning or from the "teachings" of a god ?

I'll answer your other questions once you've answered mine.

Belief in the existence of unnatural and supernatural beings and the accompanying belief that these beings have power over us has been a scam since the first shaman said "Uhoolo spoke to me in a dream last night."

==
"I believe in the God of Love."
"I don't."
"Then I shall have to kill you."
==

"We must not allow homosexuals to have a place in decent society."
"How come?"
"Because the Bible says so."
"Doesn't the Bible also say you can sell your daughters and hold slaves?"
"That doesn't count."
"You mean like the part that says you should offer the other cheek to your enemy?
"Yeah."
"and the part that says you should sell everything and follow Christ."
"That's just an analogy."
"Sure it is."
"Well, it is."
"Didn't the Apostles do that?"
"We can't all be Apostles."
"Where does it say that?"
"You have to be practical."
"Where does it say that?"
"We don't have to give up everything to be Christian."
"So you say."

==

Joe(Conservations with myself and God, a specialty)Nation
=====

Joe; how cynical!

[accurate!, but cynical]

Totally agree Joe.

But does it divide the USA? Into what divisions?

I suggested faith-based vs reason-based decision making.

real-life suggests people use both, I think they are mutually exclusive.

Re: Religion the great divider.

How is this different from any other time in our past? You just don't like it because most religious people disagree with you on the issues, and because the setting of religious policy is beyond your, or the courts' jurisdiction. Some day soon, you'll probably be persecuting the religious.

Joe, always able to distill out the tap water and get to the essence.

I always got a kick from the history of the Amish and Mennonite branches of Anabaptists. Coming over to the New World , on the same boat Jacob Ammon and Menno Simon got into a disagreement about "washing of feet" as a form of symbolistic supplication. They disagreed as to when it was appropriate and how often and to whom should the act be offered. Well Menno and Jake, had sides taken up on their behalfs. (Remember this was on a boat on which everyone was escaping from religious persecution). By the time the Boat landed in Philadelphia, these guys had already divvied up their respective "flocks" and never talked much.
It reminds me of the "Life of Brian" when Brian was running from his followeres and he lost his sandal and those who picked it up began arguing the symbolism of the sandal.

I concur with the thesis of this thread entirely.
From my own life
"Are you a Christian"
"Yeh, Im Catholic"
"Oh , then your not a Christian, your a CAtholic"
"But"
"Youre not saved"

"MOMMMMMMMEEEEEE"

If I was under the impression that I had special powers, let's say I thought I could make it rain on Wednesdays, and, due to a particularly good stretch of meteorology, it rained on sixteen Wednesdays in a row and thus inspired a number of others to join with me as .... Precipitants, I would be in a pretty good position to influence their lives. Suppose on the seventeenth Wednesday, there were clouds but no rain. I could declaim loudly that some of the members of the Precipitants must not be adhering fully to the tenets of the creed.

Now, to an outsider, I would appear delusional and the outsider would be right, but to a believer who wants the special powers to be continued in order to feel somewhat in control of their own existence, I would only struggling to bring on the divine.

Religious people believe they hold, or are in the hold of, special powers. They are not, but because we do not restrict the free exercise of religion, they are free to bring their deluded sensibilities into the making of laws that affect us all.

In order not to diminish their Holy Day, we were restricted from buying or selling goods of any kind on Sundays. Because of their view on the sanctity of marriage, States did not allow divorce and sexual relations between consenting adults outside of a marriage bond was illegal. Women were not allowed to participate in legal matters nor vote.

We do grow up as a nation and these things now seem arcane, but they were once the fabric of our lives.

We are now being told that, because of Scriptural mis-givings, citizens of the USA cannot form marriages, even after years of faithful companionship. We are being told that scientific research in certain fields cannot be performed under government aegis because it might threaten a peculiar religious tenet.. We are being told that particular scientific knowledge cannot be taught in our schools without a comparison to a non scientific system of beliefs based on a superhuman's special powers.

Perhaps he could make it rain on Wednesdays.

It is not that the setting of religious policy is beyond my reach, it is that the setting of the jurisdiction of my country's laws is not beyond theirs.



Let me add one thing further: In the nineteen sixties, there was no better friend to justice in the USA then the religious organizations of America. Standing fully tall with Martin Luther King, the believers of this country marched and sang and lobbied and broke down the barriers of injustice and racial hatred.

In the nineteen sixties, there was no better friend for world peace than the religious organizations of America. The Catholic Bishops spoke out against the War in Viet Nam, priests went to jail for their opposition. Protestants rallied for nuclear dis-armament and detente and they too marched and protested and expressed their hope for an early end to the war. Who do you think was running the anti-draft demonstrations??

In the nineteen sixties, there was no better friend to the downtrodden, the under-employed, the illegal migrant worker than the religious organizations of the USA. Thousands worked for fair labor laws and amnesty programs and unionizing programs and education programs.

I know. I worked with them or I sent money or I read about their exploits in the paper and said "This is good."

Where did those folks go?

Has the battle over abortion and evolution and homosexuality so consumed them that they no longer seek the peace of Christ,
but only to shelter themselves in their own safe chambers??

Joe(What kind of uniform will be assigned to our children?)Nation

Brandon

Wrong again, you are indeed consistent. I couldn't care less what religious people believe and how the wish to worship. What does concern me when these self righteous individuals attempt thru legislation to impose their beliefs on me? I believe strongly in freedom of religion how ever I believe just as strongly in freedom from religion.
I would also note that generally it is the religious who have been the persecutors not the persecuted.

My point is that your method of choosing right and wrong is very subjective. I believe in an objective standard of right and wrong.

It is not "either" reason "or" religion. The false dichotomy that you try to set up is very transparent. I use both my mind and my faith to make choices every day.

Unfortunately, you cannot seem to hold yourself back from veiled insults at the intelligence of anyone who makes moral choices based on their faith.

While claiming liberality of opinion and an open mind, you are actually only tolerant of those who agree with you.

Yours is a recipe for social chaos and anarachy. If each of us decides right and wrong based on our own convenience, then it's no wonder you believe in evolution because it is animal-like behavior that your society will produce.

Nations that have been built on the rule of law, especially the Ten Commandments and a background understanding of Biblically based morality have produced societies where freedom flourishes, differences are tolerated; with stable governmental and societal institutions.

and that is my point right there. I agree. My right and wrong are subjective, yours are objective. Therefore there is a division. Without your faith in your god, would you turn to the same source for your morals? I think not.

As for insults, you'll know if I've decided to insult you. If you are worried I think it's stupid to think there is a god, or to think anyone could know what a god would want.... well yes I do. I won't apologize for that. It's my worldview and I might suggest it's a view you are not very open to either.

Unless you have never been in favor of or against any law in your life, you are also attempting to impose your beliefs on them. You take to yourself the right to ram your beliefs down peoples' throats based on whatever drives your system of ethics, but deny people whose ethics are based partially on religion the same privilege.


Did you sleep through the class about Hitler?

Page 2 and already a Hitler reference....

That was pretty quick.

Didn't Hitler believe he was somehow going to establish the 1000 year reign mentioned in revelation, the third reich?

He had the cooperation of the Catholic and Lutheran clergy.

"Gott mit uns"

Which part of my argument are you disputing, specifically? Are you disputing any of my argument, or is this comment just meaningless fluff?

Yes, it is considered an insult to ask " Hey Bud, did you use your faith , OR YOUR BRAIN to decide that?" Did you think no one could recognize it? That is the level to which your discourse has sunk because you have had to admit that your concept of right and wrong is a subjective, fly-by-the-seat-of-the-pants, make it up as you go along process.

Therefore, it is a recipe for social chaos and anarchy. So, as far as your method being logical or practical..... it isn't. The society that follows your method is destined for disaster.

If anyone can decide to do whatever they want to do, when they want to do it and claim it is right just because they decided it, then no one's life or goods are safe. That much is obvious. So you have to resort to insults, i.e. that anyone who differs from you must not use their brain. How sad.