Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
I try to be a good person. I don’t always succeed. Just on this forum, I wish I were a little thicker-skinned, a little slower to jump to conclusions about the motives of other posters sometimes. I try to be good-natured and sensible, and not to project too much. Sometimes I fail. I very seriously doubt that believing in an invisible man in the sky would somehow make me a better person, online or off.
I guess one has to be in some fucked-up dark reaches of the mind to believe s/he needs an invisible man to get them there. I can conceive in others that without him they might think they will wantonly rape, murder and plunder without restraint, but where must one be if s/he needs to apply it to themself. Likewise, the motivation to do good.
Religions do not say that God is an invisible man in the sky. Atheists do.
Catholicism, a religion, says that the sky (i.e., the whole universe) is in God, like a speck of dust is in the air.
Atheists “reason” with opposite information as a means to ignore the possibility that they might be WRONG. What atheists are actually doing here is making an emotional appeal to THEMSELVES in order to feel better about atheism and to strengthen their argument that God does not exist, when such an argument can only be honestly approached as an agnostic.
A militant atheist is like an earth-daddy, a visible man in the mud. There, now I feel better.
Andrew, I would love to make a list of religion’s benefits to mankind to juxtapose next to your “religion-bad” list. You are asking me to speak for all the well-groomed and well-meaning people sitting in church on a Sunday morning, and thinking that I will have trouble doing so because some of their pastors are piss-poor individuals. And, you are asking me to speak for the millions of needy people who will be helped TODAY by religion, and thinking that I will have trouble doing so because some abused people got, well, abused when they sought help from religion.
The real problem to our dueling lists, however, will be with my understanding of the “inner person” (for this is where the kingdom of God, as taught by Catholicism, reigns) juxtaposed next to your (mis-) understanding of the inner person. The moment I make the claim that the atheist’s “sky-daddy” is an infinite power that manifests as a “spirit”, which allows us to draw upon it, to learn from it, and to become great from it, will be the moment when we will part ways like the Red Sea.
One of the “reasons” I asked atheists on other threads to “list” their personal “good things” that were particularly atheist, was because of my understanding of the power of this spirit and what happens when it is spat upon.
There is a “reason” why people need drugs, each other, and a host of other things to get by a simple passing of a day. I say this “reason” is the lack of spiritual strength, which is a weakness deep inside a person when they stubbornly and proudly “go it alone”.
So (in an effort to honor your request, but without many expectations), the first item on my “religion-good” list is: Religion gives people a faith in a greater power, a hope in an eternal existence, and a love beyond any on Earth.
There is a “reason” why people need drugs, each other, and a host of other things to get by a simple passing of a day. I say this “reason” is the lack of spiritual strength, which is a weakness deep inside a person when they stubbornly and proudly “go it alone”.
Your turn.
My turn. You’re all “inner-strong” with your internal sky-daddy loving you up so deeply and thoroughly, so why do you need us to get by each and every day?
(Andrew): I don’t think anyone has said that. Maybe Bromo, but I missed it if he did.
Mike78 - 03 February 2012 11:17 AM
Even if some historical figure had claimed their conquest, for example, was for the glory of god, we can probably detect other possible motivations, e.g., economic, political, etc., that call into doubt whether the results can be attributed to religion.
(Andrew): One can always speculate about someone else’s motives, but how about something a little more recent? According to Danny Thomas, he founded St Jude’s Hospital because he made a promise to St Jude at some point in his life when he was down and out, that when/if he got rich, he’d do everything he could to help sick children.
And many things can be considered independent of anyone’s claims. It’s a fact that the early Catholic Church—which would not exist but for religion—saved a great deal of literature and scientific knowledge during the Dark Ages. Very much a “good”.
It’s also a fact that the various Inquisitions—something else that wouldn’t exist but for religion—did a great deal of harm.
Mike78 - 03 February 2012 11:17 AM
Even if you want to think of this question as philosophical or metaphysical, there’s no “answer”. A good deed is not made any more or less “good” because it is inspired by a secular or religious motive. If a person is called to do something “good” regardless of the “brand” of motive, is it not good? Since there simply is no good deed (that actually has any demonstrable “good” result) that cannot be performed with no belief in anything religious, I’ll do without religion. Who needs the baggage?
(Andrew): True enough. You don’t need religion to do good.
Andrew, I would love to make a list of religion’s benefits to mankind to juxtapose next to your “religion-bad” list.
(Andrew): Alrighty, then! Let’s get started.
TheBrotherMario - 03 February 2012 11:17 AM
You are asking me to speak for all the well-groomed and well-meaning people sitting in church on a Sunday morning…
(Andrew): No, I’m not. I’m asking you to make a list of all the good things that you think that religion has done. Really simple. Take your time. Don’t make more of this than there is.
TheBrotherMario - 03 February 2012 11:17 AM
So (in an effort to honor your request, but without many expectations), the first item on my “religion-good” list is: Religion gives people a faith in a greater power, a hope in an eternal existence, and a love beyond any on Earth.
(Andrew): That’s no good. I could wash it away by saying that religion induces lifelong fear and hopelessness in believers who feel they lack sufficient faith and are destined to Hell. We need concrete, documented, verfiable examples.
Try again.
Andrew): You didn’t ask about harm done by secular institutes…that’s irrelevant…you asked if religion does good. It does…no one (well, maybe one poster) has dismissed that. It also does harm. If you think it does more good than harm, take my challenge: *List all the good things that religion has done—concrete, verifiable things that be attributed to religion—and I’ll do the same with the harm that religion has done—-and we’ll see who ends up with the longer list.
Should be fun, huh?
I responded to your challenge once and you out-statisticked me, as well as grossed me out. Something to do with thousands of people being tortured in awful ways, then marched into the sea…or into flames. Can’t quite remember because I worked very hard to erase it from my memory.
I think that the problem for those who consider religion a force for good in the world is that it is difficult to fulfill the “concrete, verifiable” requirement. My answer is that religion brings a tremendous amount of comfort to people in terms of adding meaning to their lives, inspiration, encouragement, hope, solace and courage, but how can that be quantified?
Most churches of all denominations serve their members in times of need, as well offering outreach programs in local communities. It’s difficult to measure how influential these activities are because they are so small, but, as Mario says, they add up.
As I said on another thread, the only thing comparable to the members of a congregation supporting each other in times of need is a motorcycle gang. Those guys are a close-knit group.
Truth be told, I was pondering the fact that I am childless and am not a part of any community other than my extended family. If my husband or I becomes enfeebled, who, aside from social workers, would assist us? One hates to have one’s relatives or friends feel obligated to provide assistance. The only thing I could think of was….hmmmm…..I should join a church. I could provide help to others and receive help when needed. What other local organization is comparable? We own a motorcycle, but it’s a faggy Honda and motorcycle gangs will mock us. There’s a bunch of fraternal organizations, but women aren’t allowed to be members and there’s no way I’d be able to drag my husband into the group. He is not fraternally inclined, and frankly, becoming a Moose-ette is unappealing to me.
A church is it. No holy-roller stuff for me. There are several very pleasant churches in my vicinity in which most of the congregation has only a vague sense of God, but honors the Christian message of love, compassion, and service. They skip the dopey parts. I used to be a Quaker (In NY, they are extremely liberal), but the meetings are too far away to attend regularly.
Andrew: That’s no good. I could wash it away by saying that religion induces lifelong fear and hopelessness in believers who feel they lack sufficient faith and are destined to Hell.
Well, you just countered my own argument, but, in my own experience, I’ve noticed that most Christians think OTHER people will go to Hell, but they themselves will be forgiven. See….I told you how gratifying religion can be! Justice and Mercy manipulated in a self-serving manner can be a great comfort to people.
Even if some historical figure had claimed their conquest, for example, was for the glory of god, we can probably detect other possible motivations, e.g., economic, political, etc., that call into doubt whether the results can be attributed to religion.
(Andrew): One can always speculate about someone else’s motives, but how about something a little more recent? According to Danny Thomas, he founded St Jude’s Hospital because he made a promise to St Jude at some point in his life when he was down and out, that when/if he got rich, he’d do everything he could to help sick children.
And many things can be considered independent of anyone’s claims. It’s a fact that the early Catholic Church—which would not exist but for religion—saved a great deal of literature and scientific knowledge during the Dark Ages. Very much a “good”.
It’s also a fact that the various Inquisitions—something else that wouldn’t exist but for religion—did a great deal of harm.
First, I don’t believe Mr. Thomas. Leaving that aside, what if there were no St. Jude? Would Mr. Thomas have gotten rich? Would he have founded a hospital in the name of someone or something else? Am I supposed to believe religion made him wealthy too?
If there were no Catholic Church, would a great deal of literature have been saved by someone else or never attempted to be destroyed? Would a great deal of culture (literature, knowledge) not been wiped out under authority of Papal Bull or “manifest destiny”? Would a great deal of scientific study not been stifled, ruined, or discouraged for thousands of years, even to this very day?
Can you really attribute the inquisitions solidly to religion? Were they not arguably more a tool of the monarchy, authorized by the Pope?
I think it’s hard to get one item inarguably in one column or another as a religion-caused good or bad.
Andrew, don’t forge the huge contribution of Muslims in the Ottoman Empire during the middle ages. Western civilization owes a great debt to them for their translations, philosophy, and mathematics.
About our list: I don’t know one single person who fears Hell, and never ran into one when I was going to church each and every day. Now an idiot, like a drunken bum or an abusive step-father, who goes to church every Sunday is a different story. But to hold up these type of people as major representatives of “religion” is a big agenda-filled, uninformed falsity.
TheBrotherMario=1 Andrew=0
As I see it.
Number two on my list is: Religion gives people the venue to regularly and routinely renew themselves in thinking good thoughts and doing good deeds.
As I said on another thread, the only thing comparable to the members of a congregation supporting each other in times of need is a motorcycle gang. Those guys are a close-knit group.
Truth be told, I was pondering the fact that I am childless and am not a part of any community other than my extended family. If my husband or I becomes enfeebled, who, aside from social workers, would assist us? One hates to have one’s relatives or friends feel obligated to provide assistance. The only thing I could think of was….hmmmm…..I should join a church. I could provide help to others and receive help when needed. What other local organization is comparable?
How about a group of secular humanists? Even a “faggy” group of honda bikers would be better than a church IMHO.
Leaving that aside, what if there were no St. Jude?
(Andrew): But there is. Let’s deal with what is. OK?
Mike78 - 03 February 2012 01:21 PM
If there were no Catholic Church, would a great deal of literature have been saved by someone else or never attempted to be destroyed?
(Andrew): Much was destroyed. That’s one of the great harms that religion has done us…we have no idea what was lost because it was considered subversive or sacrilegious.
Mike78 - 03 February 2012 01:21 PM
Can you really attribute the inquisitions solidly to religion?
(Andrew): Well, they were heresy trials. Heresy doesn’t exist absent religion.
Mike78 - 03 February 2012 01:21 PM
I think it’s hard to get one item inarguably in one column or another as a religion-caused good or bad.
(Andrew): I’m happy to let the reader decide. I’m mostly interested in presenting a side-by-side comparison to illustrate the great disparity between what religion has done for us, and what religion has done to us.
