But if you have to be wrong, might as well choose a badass religion like the Mesopotamian or Norse ones.
But if you have to be wrong, might as well choose a badass religion like the Mesopotamian or Norse ones.
Most people just like to follow the crowd, and believe what they are told.Originally Posted by SlickSlicer
I personally believe that my cat is a god and her father was a hero from the realm of Skyrim. I am the one and only believer of Minnieism, and I am proud of that. I mention this because Minnieism is the most badass religion of them all. To spare you the story of my cat, she once kicked Chuck Norris in his Wood Chuck Chucks. Just kidding, OR AM I?
Hmm...Is that at all related to ancient Egyptian religion? :P Egypt was a big place for cat worship once.
Unfortunately true. This includes everybody who reads any so-called 'holy book' and believes it.
They worshiped cats because of my cat Minnie. So yes, it is related.
I have 666 posts. I'm scared. I have a fear of all of those numbers together, they're just so unpleasant.
My cat is the one and only true god besides her Father Minoos, the Dovahking. Btw, Minoos is how you say cat in Iroquois I think.
All better now.
That depends. During the Dark Ages if you were a commoner you would be burnt at the stake for reading the Bible, and believing what the Bible said over what the religious leaders taught. In some places in the world today, saying you believe what the Bible says is social suicide.
It definitely applies to those who believe everything they hear on the television, on the Internet, and in secular books.
The number 7 in the Bible symbolically means "Perfection", so what do you think 6 means?
Man, Beast, Satan. I just hate the number 6 really. Not a phobia. I have a phobia of water, but not of a number.
It's quite curious the way that you are speaking about religion in this thread. If you don't have faith, you can't understand what it is. If you really want to understand it, you'll have to look for yourself.
Religions aren't evil, who are evil are the actions of some people.
On the contrary my good pal. I actually believe in a religion. No, not Minnieism. I will kept what it is to myself, however I can tell you it requires devotion, time, and patience. More than yours, I might add.
It's also logical, however, to assert that just because someone kills in the name of their religion doesn't mean that the religion is why they killed - people are notoriously bad at discerning or admitting their own motivations, and even where it is their faith that has driven them, the only thing that can be drawn from that is that their faith drove them, their own personal views, not the views of their religion more generally.
All Glory to Valhalla
True. Back in medieval times, religion was a cover for a desire for land and wealth (Crusades), and political purposes (kings sent the nobles out so they couldn't pose a threat to the throne). In modern times, religion can still be a cover for other motives, just as "fighting for freedom and democracy" in Iraq is a cover for potential other motives (Halliburton stock prices, taking over all development projects in Iraq instead of letting Iraqis fund their own buildings, thank you very much).
I don't agree with the idea that religion causes violence. "Religious wars" have often been about pride, geopolitics, and the stupidity of humans. Religion is as good a cover as any, and the idea that religion is innately related to or causes violence is an overly simplistic view that ignores the existence of people like Gandhi and Mother Teresa.
You...didn't understand the point I was even making. I'll put it in one sentence: If you think your religion is somehow better than any other religion, you don't understand "good and bad" in the first place.
Whoa there. So you are saying that believing what a medical or scientific journal says is the same as believing in Adam and Eve? I think you are proving my and Slickslicer's point. That's clearly not true at all. Not even slightly.
I don't find it too one sided at all. There have been many religions that have gone through the cycle of rise and decline. I think it rather tied in very well with the "End of one way of life but the start of another's..." theme.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” -Voltaire
Faith is what drives people to evil. As I've been saying all along.
You, my friend, need to watch the episode of Penn and Teller's B***sh** called "Holier Than Thou". It might change your view on Gandhi and Mother Teresa. Turns out, Gandhi was a bit of a wierdo (though still ultimately a pretty good guy), but Mother Teresa was one of the worst people in modern history.
Well that itself is a weakness of your mind.
He said it's beyond his ability to reason, not imagine. Of course he can come up with motivating factors leading to modern religion, but none of them involve rationality (thus he can "reason" them).
^trollol.
And for the record, there are only two types of people in this world. People who believe you can categorize the seven billion individual, unique, creative humans on this world into two groups, and people who do not.
What I was trying to get at was, that mankind and these religions have all benefited from the knowledge attained by science. Science directly contradicts; countless amounts of times, religions. Now that we can explain the world around us through science, there is no need for the religious explanation. And to continue to imprint our society with policies based on fairy tales is irrational, thus beyond my ability to reason. I was not trying to criticize any ones faith, because that gets into the realm of spirituality, which is a key element to being a complete human being.
So... I would love to wade into the 'Aetheism' is a religion topic. Or how the Cern accelerator is a big act of faith (one I happen to share), or how the King James Bible is not so named because God was named James although the King who commissioned it was.... but instead... I will revert to the orinigal OP.
Civ 4 had wonderful quotes that I still like to carry around with me to this day.
Civ 5 has irrelevant mumbo jumbo quotes from a single source that just make me cringe.
Baba Yetu is cool and all... but...
The quotes are what civ 4 wipes civ 5 with and until that is fixed, I will be hard pressed to find any bias AGAINST religion in the game.
Strange how religion can never be held accountable for bad things because 'people' did those thing. Surely 'people' are therefore responsible for good things as well? So what exactly is religion good for if good/bad things happen regardless?
Hey, where's Halie Selassie? Don't forget him!!!
Gandhi was no racist through out all of his life. His Medic regiment during the Second Boer War was the only medic regiment that treated both sides of the conflict. At first, when he arrived in South Africa he did dislike the blacks, like many others at the time, however he soon grew fond of them after he was thrown into jail. He did use Kaffir, however this is just, like the title says, Bull***!. Kaffir back then wasn't seen as a racial slur, it is now, but it wasn't back then. Gandhi later became one of the greatest human beings on Earth, and would've shunned the ideas he briefly held for a short time in South Africa.
Their views on the Dalai Lama are also BS, mostly because the Dalai Lama is about as responsible for the hardships in Tibet as the Pope is for Italy. The Dalai Lama originally was never supposed to even hold the power of management over Tibet. The Dalai Lama is strictly a Religious leader. Only rarely does the Dalai Lama hold power, and this is for a short time. There is a very fine line between His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and the Tibetian Government. In fact, the 14th Dalai Lama was never even officially enthroned until November the 17th, which was during the short invasion of Tibet. To blame him for the hardships in Tibet is stupid at best.
*Note, my avatar is the Tibetian flag because Rommel got boring and I wanted something new. It's colorful and makes me smile. Not because of this argument, this is purely a coincidence. A fun one! Unless I lose, then a sad one, but atleast I'll learn something
!
Last edited by PachaMinnie; 06-21-2012 at 03:18 PM.
That's still racism, Pacha. Just because many others did at the time, doesn't mean it's just. Many others were anti-Semitic in Germany in the early 1900s, that doesn't justify Hitler's actions.
My point was he wasn't a rambling racist through all of his life. However, I may need to edit that in...
And I edited my post a bit late. Woops.
Watch the Holier than Thou video Seth informed us about. My main point was that Gandhi wasn't a rambling racist much like the KKK. He would've denounced himself had someone pointed that out, or else deny it. I mean, he was a politician. The video puts across that Mother Teresa was a bad woman, Gandhi was a huge racist (Among other things), and the Dalai Lama is responsible for Tibet being a 3rd world country. They make some good points, and I agree with Penn and Teller most times, but I just don't in this video. I may not be smart enough to argue with the genius Seth, but I shall try.
Edit: I really shouldn't because I'm trying to post less, but boredom gets to me and I have to tell people I disagree with them. Ah well... I may even learn something
I did watch it and if the facts are indeed facts, Mother Teresa wasn't anywhere near a saint, and The Dalai Lama wasn't/isn't a peaceful man. Ghandi may not have been a racist all his life, but he was a racist.
I won't argue for Mother Teresa, I don't know much about her. I did agree with some of the video, but not all of it. I am not denying all of the video, only certain points.
Hah, I must be very "incomplete" then
Religion (through the concept of faith) actively whittles down a human being's capacity to use logic and reason to tell right from wrong. I quoted it above: “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” -Voltaire
You can have an evil atheist, but since he doesn't believe in god, that's one less reason he could have for doing evil. When a religious person does evil, chances are high that his religion (or at least, his interpretation of it) tacitly supports that evil.
Last edited by stethnorun; 06-21-2012 at 04:55 PM.
I actually agree with you about the Dalai Lama. He doesn't seem to be a violent dictator and if he returned to power, we can't exactly know how he would rule. And Ghandi, yes he was a racist, but also yes, most people were. I don't think their point was that he was evil, just that he was far from a saint (so, not a "Mahatma").
Teresa was evil, through and through, however.
Ah okay good. Gandhi was never a racist through his entire life. I think he has deserved the term Mahatma, I mean he convinced an entire nation that now numbers almost 2 billion that violence wasn't the answer. I think that outweighs any petty racism he may have ever held onto. Most people at that time were, and yes that is a damn good excuse. If your parents, neighbors, and your friends are all racist, then your going to be racist to. Hitler acted on it with violence, Gandhi acted on it with unpleasant mutterings.
I am glad that you agree with me about the Dalai Lama. What they said about him putting out eyes is total BS. That's Tibetian culture, and not any of the Dalai Lamas' work. I believe it started with Bon, although I am not sure. No the Dalai Lama didn't live like a king either. If so, he doesn't deserve to call himself a Buddhist. Also, he's retired and may be the last Dalai Lama. Which is very, very sad.
your rounding is terrible pach
Are you saying that most people don't believe what medical or scientific journals say?
Everyone thinks that their religion, or belief is right. The real question is, at least for Christian groups, who is in harmony with their own holy book?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote