Jump to content


Click to shop at Weed Seed Shop
Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Ban All Abrahamic Religions.




  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#61 Asmo

Asmo

    Slo motion rider

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 35,021 posts
  • LocationThe pulsing cavern

Posted March 19 2017 - 04:52 AM

This is why some figured out on page 2 this thread is not the best place to properly discuss such a topic :P

#62 Cliff Unicorn

Cliff Unicorn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 387 posts
  • LocationSomewhere under the rainbow

Posted March 19 2017 - 05:00 AM

God doesn't exist.That's why he/she is there

 

Whoa!

Can I ask did you make it yourself?



#63 Ged

Ged

    No Fantasy Required.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,486 posts
  • LocationSticking around.

Posted March 19 2017 - 05:54 AM

Whoa!

Can I ask did you make it yourself?

Yes all my own pseudo-profundity,

 

Actually just trolling.

 

I'm a moron.


  • Cliff Unicorn likes this
"What has posterity ever done for me!" - Groucho Marx.

#64 Asmo

Asmo

    Slo motion rider

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 35,021 posts
  • LocationThe pulsing cavern

Posted March 19 2017 - 08:32 AM

^
Jesus loves you :grouphug:
  • Cliff Unicorn likes this

#65 Cliff Unicorn

Cliff Unicorn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 387 posts
  • LocationSomewhere under the rainbow

Posted March 19 2017 - 01:02 PM

Yes all my own pseudo-profundity,

 

Actually just trolling.

 

I'm a moron.

 

Trolling? No, I don't think so omg!

You nailed it imo  :D Thanks man

 

1ZDw8_s-200x150.gif


  • Asmo and Ged like this

#66 Okiefreak

Okiefreak

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,174 posts

Posted March 20 2017 - 08:19 AM

This is why some figured out on page 2 this thread is not the best place to properly discuss such a topic :P

I agree, but despite the problems of taking the OP seriously, (s)he does illustate examples of faulty logic that might be useful to understand. And since this thread is already underway, I'll continue here to discuss them here. The OP illustrates a blatant form of the "some are, therefore all are' fallacy that we've seen in action on other threads in the Politics forum, especially from Six-eyed Shaman.(Antifa is "leftist", Antifa is violent. Therefore Leftists (including moderate liberals) are somehow associated with violence.) Here, the pattern is pervasive: This Abrahamic religious group did something bad at some stage in history, some other Abrahamic group did something else bad at another. Therefore, they're all bad so lets ban them all. No mention of the good religious groups have done in building hospitals or other forms of organized altruism. No mention of the fact that many Abrahamic religious groups have histories of opposing violence: e.g., the Quakers, and were not involved in the violent activities: e.g., Disciples of Christ, UCC, Methodists, etc. When bad atheists are brought up, we get tortured arguments that religion was somehow responsible.

 

Illustrating this pattern is the OP’s invoking of circumcision as a reason for banning Abrahamic religion. A ban on all Abrahamic religion for this reason is obviously overbroad, since a majority of Abrahamics don’t endorse the procedure, although some individuals may do it for medical or other non-religious reasons. Except for Coptic Christianity, Christianity, the largest Abrahamic faith, does not require circumcision. Male circumcision is a religious practice of Jews and Muslims. For Jews, it was a way (possibly borrowed from ancient Egypt) of marking off the children of Israel as distinctive and a sign of their covenant with YHWH. For Muslims, there is no mention of it in the Qur'an, but it is prescribed in the Hadeeth and Sunnah.as a rite of entry into the Muslim community.  "Female circumcision", or cliterodectomy, otherwise known as female genital mutilation, is a custom of particular Muslim groups in Africa (and some traditional African religions, as well) and has neither medical nor religious grounding.

 

Many non-Jews and non-Muslims, including atheists practice circumcision for medical reasons. It has been shown to have certain health benefits, such as reducing the risk of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and HIV transmission in males. But medical opinion is divided over whether or not these benefits outweigh the risks and the problem of inflicting the irreversible procedure on infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics came out definitively in favor of the procedure for infants, saying "There is clear evidence that supports the health benefits of circumcision," I realize that Intact America has made opposition to circumcision into a cause and considers the procedure a human rights violation. This controversy like the ones over vaccination and fluoridation of water, has little to do with religion, except to show that there is a body of medical opinion that favors the procedure quite apart from religious beliefs. Those who want to ban Judaism and Islam because of this might consider banning medical science as well. Wouldn't it be more efficient just to ban circumcision?


Edited by Okiefreak, March 20 2017 - 09:00 AM.


#67 Saul50

Saul50

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 17 posts
  • LocationBrazil.

Posted March 20 2017 - 08:59 AM

I am agnostic, that is, I have no religion, but I disagree with the banishment of all the Abrahamic religions, because it would be an act of intolerance against more than half of the world population. I am in favor, however, of combating all kinds of religious fundamentalism. By the way, the author of the initial post did not refer to the intolerance practiced by another Christian faith: the various currents of Protestantism.



#68 Okiefreak

Okiefreak

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,174 posts

Posted March 20 2017 - 05:19 PM

It is not a freedom, it is a brainwashing of babies to force them to believe a delusion. Saying religion is a freedom is like saying Nazi babies are free babies. The babies were brainwashed to be nazis, and the religious were brainwashed to be religious. The 10% of religious people who weren't brainwashed into it, are just idiots.

 

The intellectual limitations of our OP are obvious, but the issue raised here may be worth exploring further. I think it would be inappropriate to do so on this site, so i'll open a new thread in the Atheist section of the Philosophy and Religion Forum entitled "Is Teaching Religion to Children a Form of Child Abuse?"


Edited by Okiefreak, March 20 2017 - 05:23 PM.


#69 MeAgain

MeAgain

    Dazed and Confused

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,143 posts
  • LocationDobbstown, Malaysia

Posted March 20 2017 - 06:18 PM

I agree, but despite the problems of taking the OP seriously, (s)he does illustate examples of faulty logic that might be useful to understand. And since this thread is already underway, I'll continue here to discuss them here. The OP illustrates a blatant form of the "some are, therefore all are' fallacy that we've seen in action on other threads in the Politics forum, especially from Six-eyed Shaman.(Antifa is "leftist", Antifa is violent. Therefore Leftists (including moderate liberals) are somehow associated with violence.) Here, the pattern is pervasive: This Abrahamic religious group did something bad at some stage in history, some other Abrahamic group did something else bad at another. Therefore, they're all bad so lets ban them all. No mention of the good religious groups have done in building hospitals or other forms of organized altruism. No mention of the fact that many Abrahamic religious groups have histories of opposing violence: e.g., the Quakers, and were not involved in the violent activities: e.g., Disciples of Christ, UCC, Methodists, etc. When bad atheists are brought up, we get tortured arguments that religion was somehow responsible.

 

Illustrating this pattern is the OP’s invoking of circumcision as a reason for banning Abrahamic religion. A ban on all Abrahamic religion for this reason is obviously overbroad, since a majority of Abrahamics don’t endorse the procedure, although some individuals may do it for medical or other non-religious reasons. Except for Coptic Christianity, Christianity, the largest Abrahamic faith, does not require circumcision. Male circumcision is a religious practice of Jews and Muslims. For Jews, it was a way (possibly borrowed from ancient Egypt) of marking off the children of Israel as distinctive and a sign of their covenant with YHWH. For Muslims, there is no mention of it in the Qur'an, but it is prescribed in the Hadeeth and Sunnah.as a rite of entry into the Muslim community.  "Female circumcision", or cliterodectomy, otherwise known as female genital mutilation, is a custom of particular Muslim groups in Africa (and some traditional African religions, as well) and has neither medical nor religious grounding.

 

Many non-Jews and non-Muslims, including atheists practice circumcision for medical reasons. It has been shown to have certain health benefits, such as reducing the risk of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and HIV transmission in males. But medical opinion is divided over whether or not these benefits outweigh the risks and the problem of inflicting the irreversible procedure on infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics came out definitively in favor of the procedure for infants, saying "There is clear evidence that supports the health benefits of circumcision," I realize that Intact America has made opposition to circumcision into a cause and considers the procedure a human rights violation. This controversy like the ones over vaccination and fluoridation of water, has little to do with religion, except to show that there is a body of medical opinion that favors the procedure quite apart from religious beliefs. Those who want to ban Judaism and Islam because of this might consider banning medical science as well. Wouldn't it be more efficient just to ban circumcision?

I am against the banning of any legitimate religion, however I do think that those religions that promote belief systems that are contrary to facts, or that rely solely on unfounded acts of faith do damage to the social and scientific norms of today's civilizations as they promote non rational thinking.

 

Having said that I also think that belief systems that are contrary to facts and those that rely solely on unfounded acts of faith are necessary at a certain level of individual and societal development, and I recognize the occasional necessity of non rational thought.

 

The problem seems to me to be not that these types of religions exist, but that civilization in general does not recognize the need for these religions, and further, and more importantly, does not recognize that there comes a time when all individuals and societies need to outgrow these very religions and move on to a more inclusive understanding of the universe, just as we have abandoned our beliefs in fairies, magic, mythic beings, and multiple Gods.

But, again, at the same time acknowledging that all individuals in general pass through phases of belief in each of those areas as they grow from childhood into adults. 


  • NoxiousGas likes this

 

"Oh, how sweet it is to hear one's own convictions from another's lips"

~ Goethe

 

 


#70 NoxiousGas

NoxiousGas

    Old Fart

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,895 posts
  • LocationIn the bowels of all mankind

Posted March 20 2017 - 06:47 PM


But, again, at the same time acknowledging that all individuals in general pass through phases of belief in each of those areas as they grow from childhood into adults. 

 

YUP, groups, nations, religions, etc. all go through the same "growing and maturing" patterns as individuals do.

 

 

stuff is reflected/repeated across myriad levels of existence....


"Do the walls close in and suffocate ya,
you ain't got no friends and all the others they hate ya,
does the life you been leading gotta go?"

"get your shoes and socks on people,
it's right around the corner"

"the poodle bi-i-ites,
the poodle chews it"




Click to shop at FS Books