RE: Submitting to Religion

RE: Submitting to Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

ashjor911 -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 3:48:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder When I agreed to be one of God's "servants" I agreed to obey him, his "dogma", his "law". If I didn't agree with to this I would no longer be his servant. God has the same rule..don't want to submit and obey? Fine. No one is forcing you to stay. Sorry littlewonder for removing some but I agree on 90% of what you wrote (not the Dom/sub part),

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 4:05:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tantriqu I love Douglas Adams, whom I first read several years after leaving church at 13, which is when both my hormones and my atheism began to percolate. Coincidence? I think not. Chafing under arbitrary millenia-old rules written by cranky old desert dudes was no longer for me, and the inherent racism of religion [my unproveable beliefs are better than yours, nyah nyah], and the realisation that unlike science, religion takes centuries to accept inalienable truths [the persecution of Copernicus] and the sexism of thinking women are the root of damnation ended any idealisation of a paternal godhead. Science welcomes change and new knowledge: religion abhors and aborts it. Then to read Adams was a revelation! How silly some of our rules are! The airplane that won't take off because it doesn't have enough wet-wipes! That we have inter-galactic travel, but our shoes don't fit! Who's smarter, we, or dolphins who get to swim, eat and fuck all day! Brilliant! Unlike the bible: isn't it hilarious when god makes Isaac almost kill his own son! or lets us enslave our neighbour's neighbours! or stone a woman to death who wears cotton and wool: not my sense of humour to excuse sociopathic behaviour with 'it's god's will and my right'. So, submitting to a moody anachronistic phantasm is untenable for me, and atheism is the fastest growing belief system. Thank god. Thank you so much for that colorful account! We've had a similar path, though I discovered Adams a little later (he wasn't so popular in francophone culture).

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 4:12:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplySubmissive Tantriqu.. stoning is so old testament.. ignore.. follow "new testament"!!! religion is something i have struggled with for all of my life. I don't think you can pick and chose what parts of the bible to obey.. or beleive. so then, is it really all or nothing? there is an inherent goodness.. a basic human morality that has nothing to do with god or religion. i'm good with that. but not when it conflicts with the bible.. and that is my biggest issue with "religion". ymmv SS Thank you for your contribution as well. I read a piece that was published today in USA Today that deals with exactly the bit that highlighted in your post. As atheists know, you can be good without God http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-07-31-atheism-morality-evolution-religion_n.htm Now I realize the title suggests atheism strongly, and it does, but if you read it with an open mind, you will see that you are in agreement with the author on a very key point: morality doesn't come from religion. I quote a passage: quote: Now, few of us see genocide or stoning as moral, so Christians and Jews pass over those parts of the Bible with judicious silence. But that's just the point. There is something else — some other source of morality — that supersedes biblical commands. When religious people pick and choose their morality from Scripture, they clearly do so based on extrareligious notions of what's moral. Further, the idea that morality is divinely inspired doesn't jibe with the fact that religiously based ethics have changed profoundly over time. Slavery was once defended by churches on scriptural grounds; now it's seen as grossly immoral. Mormons barred blacks from the priesthood, also on religious grounds, until church leaders had a convenient "revelation" to the contrary in 1978. Catholics once had a list of books considered immoral to read; they did away with that in 1966. Did these adjustments occur because God changed His mind? No, they came from secular improvements in morality that forced religion to clean up its act. I realize this might take the discussion slightly off track, but to interesting places I hope!

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 4:18:18 PM)
Of course it doesnt. Morality favors species propogation and was selected for.

LadyPact -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 4:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Consider the following Douglas Adams quote: Religion…has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. That’s an idea we’re so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that it’s kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is ‘Here is an idea or a notion that you’re not allowed to say anything bad about; you’re just not. Why not? — because you’re not! This would imply that o be religious, one must submit to the religion, or at the very least, it's dogma. Thoughts? We had something of a similar discussion just a little while ago. (Missokyst's post on church and believing in God.) I'm going to go with pretty much what I said there. I happen to see God and organized religion as two different things. While God is supposed to be at the core of religion, an organized religion really is just a group of imperfect people. Some make mistakes, others can't resist temptations like greed, some succumb to the lure of power within the organization, or a thousand other things that make us imperfect human beings. Now, if we know that, it doesn't seem reasonable to Me that we should never mention the times that we same imperfect people makes mistakes, loose our way, misinterpret scripture, or anything else. Those things are the fallacy of man, not God.

hardcybermaster -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 4:33:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder God is my ultimate Dom. I submit to God just as I submit to my Dom. When I agreed to be one of God's "servants" I agreed to obey him, his "dogma", his "law". If I didn't agree with to this I would no longer be his servant. Kinda like my relationship with Master...I can either agree to obey or leave. God has the same rule..don't want to submit and obey? Fine. No one is forcing you to stay. Then again I don't have that view that you can't say anything bad at all. There are times I have bad things to say...about both God and Master. But ya know, then something happens in my life that makes me realize how wrong I was...and I picture God all smirking and stuff saying "this is why I have this rule" and me saying "oh yeah..duh". leave your master,what happens? tears,arguements,general unhappiness leave god,what happens? burn in hell for all eterntity. bit of a difference. That's why hell was invented,to induce fear and keep the masses "believing"

hardcybermaster -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 4:35:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Consider the following Douglas Adams quote: Religion…has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. That’s an idea we’re so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that it’s kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is ‘Here is an idea or a notion that you’re not allowed to say anything bad about; you’re just not. Why not? — because you’re not! This would imply that o be religious, one must submit to the religion, or at the very least, it's dogma. Thoughts? One would think most Brits since they first must submit to the Monarchy would have no problems with submitting to a religion. you are a twat

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 5:24:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Submitting to religion in one's life is the admittance that one needs religious order in their life, whatever order that may be. I also see submitting to religion as being the need to belong, ( in effect; owned) and negating a person's own freedom of thought. I would also venture the submission to religion as means of giving up on the future development of humanity in favour of the past. Perhaps the responsibility of moving forward is too great to bare, so seeking protection from that responsibilty in the arms of a religion is the path many take. Thank you very much for sharing that reflection Aneirin. I really appreciated the points you brought up, especially about moving forward.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 5:31:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow I have seen people who literally submit to religion ("accepting Jesus" for example). This aspect of organized religion is perhaps most hated by the atheists. I would argue in sense of wider philosophical world view this is not what religion is about. I am also anti-atheist. I think their world is narrow, building self-imposed constraints. So, submitting to atheism could make the case as well. That's an interesting take on things. But you shouldn't generalize so much. As someone who is a defacto atheist (it is the word that describes me, not an organization I belong to), I have to say that I pick and chose the atheists (and at time theists) who's ideologies I subscribe to. As a defacto atheist, the only thing I hate about organized religion is when it oppresses its members and sometimes even people who aren't its members. If one accepts Jesus in their life, that's truly their prerogative. I do hope it brings them joy and comfort. Just because I don't understand it doesn't mean I hate it. I'm just a teeny bit more evolved than that.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 5:32:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Consider the following Douglas Adams quote: Religion…has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. That’s an idea we’re so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that it’s kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is ‘Here is an idea or a notion that you’re not allowed to say anything bad about; you’re just not. Why not? — because you’re not! This would imply that o be religious, one must submit to the religion, or at the very least, it's dogma. Thoughts? I've never had anyone tell me I couldn't say anything bad about religion. In fact our pastor encourages people to ask questions. What church are you talking about? You might have to ask that question to the late Douglas Adams! ;-) You're lucky if your pastor encourages questions. Questions in Catholic school got me detention. Imagine that, on the honor role and in detention. :)

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 5:34:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: paulmcuk Religion is a collar around the collective necks of believers by which those with the right charisma can lead them around. What's more submissive than that? When you put it that way, it sounds more like slavery than submission! ;-)

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 5:35:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if-UzXIQ5vw&ob=av2e The uploader has not made this video available in your country. Sorry about that. Can you find a Canada friendly version... or just say it in words! :)

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 5:43:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf ~FR~ Wonder what other Taoist think of these statements under the term "religion" being used in such a broad sense, but with narrow comments. Taoism is a philosophy that was turned into religion during the Han Dynasty. Most don't even consider it a religion at all. FYI, over a year ago, we had a great conversation about Taoism here.

littlewonder -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 7:17:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hardcybermaster quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder God is my ultimate Dom. I submit to God just as I submit to my Dom. When I agreed to be one of God's "servants" I agreed to obey him, his "dogma", his "law". If I didn't agree with to this I would no longer be his servant. Kinda like my relationship with Master...I can either agree to obey or leave. God has the same rule..don't want to submit and obey? Fine. No one is forcing you to stay. Then again I don't have that view that you can't say anything bad at all. There are times I have bad things to say...about both God and Master. But ya know, then something happens in my life that makes me realize how wrong I was...and I picture God all smirking and stuff saying "this is why I have this rule" and me saying "oh yeah..duh". leave your master,what happens? tears,arguements,general unhappiness leave god,what happens? burn in hell for all eterntity. bit of a difference. That's why hell was invented,to induce fear and keep the masses "believing" Actually if I was to leave Master there would be no tears or arguments. I would simply walk away, concentrate on my own issues and that would be the end of it. He knows that, we've talked about it. Leave God and I walk away, work on my issues and move on. I don't believe in the burning hell and neither does my religion. Those are YOUR ways of dealing with relationships...not mine.

cloudboy -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 8:22:18 PM)
From the Book of Eli: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqHxOQWW_Nw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAs4z9GV84Q

Aswad -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 8:34:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather what the fucking fuck? and you wonder why i doubt the sanity of a person the moment they espouse a belief in god. Don't confuse cause and effect. Give an irrational person religion, and they will pursue it irrationally. Give a rational person religion, and they will pursue it rationally. It's been pointed out several times on this board, sometimes by me, that the NT actually specifically makes the comment that the OT remains valid. Instead of attempting to figure out what to do with that, people tend to attempt to figure out how to ignore it. This is a function of the human capacity for compartmentalizing contradictory information, I would assume. quote: deists are weak minded, cowards who require their delusional invisible, incorporeal floating fire breathing dragon to enable them to face the reality of the world and their own mortality. While I could care less that you think me a weak minded coward, I would appreciate if you refrain from accusing me of being incapable of facing reality or mortality, as the latter accusation lacks the subjectivity of the former one, and you've poor- if any- grounds for making an objective accusation. Health, al-Aswad.

Punkt -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/1/2011 9:21:57 PM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjQ8eqeTy-U

mnottertail -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/2/2011 6:57:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if-UzXIQ5vw&ob=av2e The uploader has not made this video available in your country. Sorry about that. Can you find a Canada friendly version... or just say it in words! :) Losing My Religion REM

kalikshama -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/2/2011 7:57:58 AM)
I'm going to repost the link without the commentary, because I found the article very interesting: The following is an excerpt from The Demon-Haunted World: Science As A Candle In the Dark by Carl Sagan. http://www.users.qwest.net/~jcosta3/article_dragon.htm

LadyAngelika -> RE: Submitting to Religion (8/2/2011 4:56:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if-UzXIQ5vw&ob=av2e The uploader has not made this video available in your country. Sorry about that. Can you find a Canada friendly version... or just say it in words! :) Losing My Religion REM Merci :)

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875