Francisco Time Mag. Person Of The Year..

[Rich One]

Before the scientific revolution, people at least had an excuse for arguing about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

People that believe in organized religion deserve respect as well as their beliefs...!! One can be agnostic . Food for thought.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

People that believe in organized religion deserve respect as well as their beliefs...!! One can be agnostic . Food for thought.

Agnosticism is a cop-out. Some beliefs deserve respect, others do not - does the Muslim belief that apostasy requires the death penalty deserve respect, then?

 

[Rich One]

Agnosticism is a cop-out. Some beliefs deserve respect, others do not - does the Muslim belief that apostasy requires the death penalty deserve respect, then?

Maybe....? Who Am I to judge... ? Stoning is a healthy practice, You toss the first stone......

 

[internationalguy]

Agnosticism is a cop-out. Some beliefs deserve respect, others do not - does the Muslim belief that apostasy requires the death penalty deserve respect, then?

There's such a thing as common sense. Maybe you should give it a try.

 

[ajoknoblauch]

There's such a thing as common sense. Maybe you should give it a try.

Too bad believers lack common sense but, if they had it, they wouldn't be believers.

 

[Jaredberryman]

See: like clockwork. A glib one-liner making sweeping generalisations with no evidence. Maybe it's a bot?

Thanks for the comment, EdRooney. At this point, I just would like to know why I am suddenly a child abuser for teaching my children about my faith. Apparently, I am just supposed to ignore them when they ask questions about God or why we go to church. For those of you that are interested, you can view this link for evidence: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/kalam. It will give you a brief overview of some cosmological evidence. This, of course, is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Jaredberryman]

W H A T ..... I F ..... mmmm .... there were no Gods !!

Let's say, science one day proved to complete certainty beyond any doubt that there are no Gods .. none.

What would this world look like?

More chaos or less ?
More wars or less ?
10 commandments / values / moralities?
Purposeful or meaningless life ?
Reasons to live or die?
Reasons to construct or destruct ?
More greed or more poverty?
What does it all mean ?
What would change ?

Your questions are difficult to answer for a number of reasons. First, you can't just broadly paint all religions together. A Wiccan actually has zero in common with the Christian worldview, for instance. Also, some people that practice religions are actually atheists, like some Buddhists (I guess in that case, it would be considered more of a religious philosophy). I think we might be able to say, for instance, that if Islam were banned, we might have less wars. But if Buddhism was banned, would we have less wars? I doubt anything would really change. So your questions are unfair in that respect.

However, we do have some indicators as to what a world without any inkling of God would look like. We have the Soviet Union and Pol Pot's regime. These were both states that completely destroyed or attempted to destroy belief in God. As a direct result of their Atheist philosophy, in these countries, the State became God. The result is the death of millions and millions of people due to murder, starvation, etc. Please note that this is a DIRECT result of atheist philosophy. God does not exist...therefore...and those were the results. I am not saying here that Atheists cannot be good people or that there is anything to fear from an Atheist, I'm simply pointing to an answer for your question.

Finally, if science proved that God does not exist (strange since at present the evidence points to the fact that God exists), we would at last know that objective moral values and duties are a figment of our imagination, since without a God, objective moral values and duties cannot exist (lots of Atheists believe this, like Nietzsche for instance). Once we know that objective moral values and duties do not exist, then people can determine what their own subjective morals are according to their desires. They would then be perfectly justified if they wished to rape, murder, kill, etc. What would it matter, anyways, since we are just walking bags of genetic material? Whoever would be tougher and fitter, would be stronger and survive. There would be no more need for such illusory concepts as morals anymore.

 

[EricLovesBA]

You know, it's tiresome when people spend a lot of energy trying to convince people of their viewpoint. Yes, certain religions/ideologies tend to be very restrictive, and religious images, morality, duality, etc permeate the society and the structure of our policies, actions and laws. I often find it stifling to live in such an environment, seeing where the ideas come from a non-rational place, and how people want to impose their will and viewpoints on others, make arcane laws, start wars, etc.. I would really rather live in a world of live and let live, but of course I don't, so I have to accept it and have a thick skin. But deep down I've always felt that people who desperately try to push their ideas on others do not have confidence in their own ideology. On the surface, and lying to themselves, they appear dead sure, and they supposedly want to move the entire world to their position and thus create a utopia. But deep down I think they know in the end - that they are afraid and unsure of their own ideas and won't really be comfortable until everyone thinks the same as they do. When that impossible moment arrives they'll sigh breath of relief - "Oh, whew! I really was right!!". This applies to any religion, including science, objectivism, atheism or whatever. When your morality and ideology comes from within, you don't have this need. You can stand alone. You are self assured and open, and the conversation becomes one of curiosity, and love for the diversity of your fellow man, not a battle to make an army of clones.

 

[Rich One]

SAN LORENZO CAMPEON......!! HOLIDAY AT THE vATICAN....?

 

[Rich One]

Well now Francisco is Che's successor ?