RE: Does being religious mean that you are:

RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (Full Version)

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

[Poll]

Does being religious mean that you are:

More moral than the non-religious

13% (8)

As moral as the non-religious

36% (22)

Less moral than the non-religious

18% (11)

chose none of the above as I refuse to voice an opinion yet still vote

31% (19)

Total Votes : 60

(last vote on : 5/14/2014 8:05:37 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 3:31:06 PM)
Coming to this late, and will admit to not having read through the entire thread, but do want to add my two cents. Morality and belief in god(s) are not one and the same thing at all. It is, of course, possible to be moral and not believe in god(s). If you remove belief in god(s) from any religion on the face of the planet, you are left with a philosophy about how to live one's life. This philosophy can be followed whether one believes in god(s) or not. Being "religious", in my mind, means you BELIEVE in god(s). The non-religious, agnostics, atheists can be moral, and even follow a philosophy or approach to life without having to believe in the existence of god(s). I don't believe in god(s). But I believe in living in a moral way. I take the best that ALL religions have to offer philosophically, and simply reject aspects of religions that I find immoral, outdated, or ridiculous. And there is plenty in EVERY religion that is, in fact, immoral. It is all a matter of perspective.

MstSebastian -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 3:45:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Morals on the other hand, means 'acquired from the group'... individuals don't create moral values, they either go along with, or don't go along with what the group has created. Now you're just making up you own faux definitions and issuing non-reality based pronouncements. K. The definition he offered may not be based in any sort of etymology I know, but he is right that morals are group-based. Plus, morality is relative. What is or is not moral is determined by the people involved in a situation, the specifics of the situation, and the culture from which the people, themselves, hail. There is no universal morality. It is all relative.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 4:18:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MstSebastian The definition he offered may not be based in any sort of etymology I know, but he is right that morals are group-based. Plus, morality is relative. What is or is not moral is determined by the people involved in a situation, the specifics of the situation, and the culture from which the people, themselves, hail. There is no universal morality. It is all relative. Your opinion notwithstanding, a sense of fairness is inherent in our nature and neither situationally determined nor relative. K.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 4:21:26 PM)
quote: Now you're just making up you own faux definitions and issuing non-reality based pronouncements. K. Definition of ETHOS : the distinguishing character, sentiment, moral nature, or guiding beliefs of a person, group, or institution Merriam Webster http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethos e·thos NOUN: The disposition, character, or fundamental values peculiar to a specific person, people, culture, or movement: "They cultivated a subversive alternative ethos" (Anthony Burgess). Greek thos, character; see s(w)e- in Indo-European roots http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/ethos mo·res plural noun Sociology . folkways of central importance accepted without question and embodying the fundamental moral views of a group http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mores mores (n.) 1907, from Latin mores "customs, manners, morals" http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=mores&searchmode=none Viktor Frankl Humans are called upon, on the grounds of their freedom and responsibility, to bring forth the best possible in themselves and in the world, by perceiving and realizing the meaning of the moment in each and every situation http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Viktor_Frankl Projection: a defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own negative attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world instead. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting faults onto others http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection hyp·o·crite noun 1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrite?s=ts Religious: SYNONYMS - Pious implies constant attention to, and extreme conformity with, outward observances. It can also suggest sham or hypocrisy: a pious hypocrite. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religious

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 4:49:47 PM)
Is there some reason you didn't include either "ethics" or "morals" in that list of definitions? [:D] K.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 4:53:41 PM)
Because you called me a liar for the definitions of Ethos, and Mores that I had previously based my points on. I figured that anyone who wanted to see you proven wrong even further could look up the derivatives themselves, and see that my conclusions were among those supported by the dictionary there as well. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Is there some reason you didn't include either "ethics" or "morals" in that list of definitions? [:D] K.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 4:56:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Because you called me a liar... Well that certainly should settle any question about who is lying. [:D] K.

DomKen -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 5:19:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: MstSebastian The definition he offered may not be based in any sort of etymology I know, but he is right that morals are group-based. Plus, morality is relative. What is or is not moral is determined by the people involved in a situation, the specifics of the situation, and the culture from which the people, themselves, hail. There is no universal morality. It is all relative. Your opinion notwithstanding, a sense of fairness is inherent in our nature and neither situationally determined nor relative. K. Fairness is not morality it is at most ethics.

DomKen -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 5:20:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I proved it then so why should I bother doing so again. You're listening to those voices again. I happen to know rather a good deal about religion, and not just Christianity. The subject was relevant to my area of study. But enough about me. All you're accomplishing here is to show the extent to which you'll go to defend your annoying habit of imagining facts that aren't. ~Link So you're an atheist who attacksother atheists when we as a group are called inherently amoral? Sure....

Powergamz1 -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 5:21:29 PM)
I would say that the linked citations would prove that quite handily. So are you now making up your own definitions for quote: you're just making up you own faux definitions and issuing non-reality based pronouncements that aren't synonymous with 'You're a liar'? Or just playing the usual internet semantic game? quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Because you called me a liar... Well that certainly should settle any question about who is lying. [:D] K.

DomKen -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 5:22:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Or just playing the usual internet semantic game? It's pretty much all he's got

Bigsqueezer -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 5:53:05 PM)
I am coming late to this conversation and finding in the light of recent developments in the courts on Same Sex Marriage, I am finding myself coming to grips with a number of local religious leaders and finding they we may sometime have common ground. I am finding the only reason a group such as collarme would embroil themselves in a religious discussion is not that we in any way object to someone believing something or disagreeing with us. I have many friends that will not engage in my kink and I hold them no ill. I will not engage in their straightness but that means more girls for my buds. But when my likes and dislikes come to where I feel they should be legislated against everyone, lining up punishments or unequal legal statuses for those that do not match their impression of religious rules. They are not really in consensus in these impressions either. Many Christians do not care one iota about my sexuality, but their mouthy spokesmen do. It's hard for the rank and file to say to these morons "Stay off our side" in any short and effective way. We're talking about the hostile takeover of the election and political processes by a religion that has little nice in mind - it's scared and protecting against all their boogymen. Thanks for reading - please comment.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 7:36:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen So you're an atheist who attacksother atheists when we as a group are called inherently amoral? Sure.... You really need to get that victim drip out of your arm. K.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 7:42:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 So are you now making up your own definitions for quote: you're just making up you own faux definitions and issuing non-reality based pronouncements that aren't synonymous with 'You're a liar'? Of course it's not, but I do appreciate the way your posts illustrate things that I would be Mod-spanked for saying. K.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 8:07:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Fairness is not morality it is at most ethics. The sense of fairness observed in studies of pre-verbal human infants is classed as moral behavior. Not a single researcher anywhere attributes it to the baby's "ethics". K.

MstSebastian -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 8:25:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: MstSebastian The definition he offered may not be based in any sort of etymology I know, but he is right that morals are group-based. Plus, morality is relative. What is or is not moral is determined by the people involved in a situation, the specifics of the situation, and the culture from which the people, themselves, hail. There is no universal morality. It is all relative. Your opinion notwithstanding, a sense of fairness is inherent in our nature and neither situationally determined nor relative. K. And your evidence to support such an assertion? As well, who gets to determine fairness? That is, what is or is not "fair?"

dcnovice -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 8:27:26 PM)
FR Recently received but haven't had a chance to read a pertinent new book that sounds fascinating. The Bonobo and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates [image]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517sCGDvczL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_SX225_SY300_CR,0,0,225,300_SH20_OU01_.jpg[/image]

MissToYouRedux -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 8:29:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice FR Recently received but haven't had a chance to read a pertinent new book that sounds fascinating. The Bonobo and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates [image]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517sCGDvczL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_SX225_SY300_CR,0,0,225,300_SH20_OU01_.jpg[/image] I just ordered that for my Kindle after listening to the author interview on NPR's Science Friday today. Though only in the first chapter, man can write. [:)] ** Edited for clarity.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 8:36:16 PM)
You might like this... Moral Behavior in Animals K.

Kirata -> RE: Does being religious mean that you are: (4/5/2013 9:12:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MstSebastian quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata a sense of fairness is inherent in our nature and neither situationally determined nor relative. And your evidence to support such an assertion? As well, who gets to determine fairness? That is, what is or is not "fair?" There's a fair amount of research out there, both with infants and animals, and obviously I don't have every study at my fingertips. But here are a couple of links: Babies Know What's Fair Sense of Justice Built Into the Brain K.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.046875