Why Religion Fails

[canada-man]

they did not kill in the name of atheism and North Korea is a religious state where the current leader Kim Jung Il is the head of the party and the army and his dead father Kim Il Sung is the head of state


and the mandatory worship of the leader and his dead father is law

 

[rld]

they did not kill in the name of atheism and North Korea is a religious state where the current leader Kim Jung Il is the head of the party and the army and his dead father Kim Il Sung is the head of state


and the mandatory worship of the leader and his dead father is law

Nope, they were just athiest who killed in the name of a political philosophy of which athiesm is an integral part.

Thus, in the last 100 years or so, athiest based political philosophies have caused far more deaths than religious philosophies.

We should also note that athiesm has also been on the rise in that period.

This is what you have in store for us in your dream world?

You just keep engaging in the invalid attempt to "define down" athiesm to try and avoid the problem, but refuse to deal with the problem head on.

Not surprising. I guess you couldn't find a youtube video to do your work for you.

 

[canada-man]

]Nope, they were just athiest who killed in the name of a political philosophy of which athiesm is an integral part.]

atheism is NOT political

[Thus, in the last 100 years or so, athiest based political philosophies have caused far more deaths than religious philosophies.]

political ideologies are not atheist based


[We should also note that athiesm has also been on the rise in that period.]

athiesm has been on the rise since the enlightenment in the 1800S

[This is what you have in store for us in your dream world?]

so ou would rather live in dark age period where the churches and the self apointed clergy tell you to think, to live your life and persecute non-believers? how do you explain the fact that secular non-relgious democracies like Canada, Scandinavia, Japan etc are more stable, healthier, more educated, have lower crime rates, low rates of STDs, low rates of sexual dysfunction etc?



[You just keep engaging in the invalid attempt to "define down" athiesm to try and avoid the problem, but refuse to deal with the problem head on.]

athiesm is the lack of belief in gods

[Not surprising. I guess you couldn't find a youtube video to do your work for you.]

anybody who went to North Korea will tell you the same thing

 

[Mervyn]

If a human invented it, it's political.

 

[rld]

]Nope, they were just athiest who killed in the name of a political philosophy of which athiesm is an integral part.]

atheism is NOT political

[Thus, in the last 100 years or so, athiest based political philosophies have caused far more deaths than religious philosophies.]

political ideologies are not atheist based


[We should also note that athiesm has also been on the rise in that period.]

athiesm has been on the rise since the enlightenment in the 1800S

[This is what you have in store for us in your dream world?]

so ou would rather live in dark age period where the churches and the self apointed clergy tell you to think, to live your life and persecute non-believers? how do you explain the fact that secular non-relgious democracies like Canada, Scandinavia, Japan etc are more stable, healthier, more educated, have lower crime rates, low rates of STDs, low rates of sexual dysfunction etc?



[You just keep engaging in the invalid attempt to "define down" athiesm to try and avoid the problem, but refuse to deal with the problem head on.]

athiesm is the lack of belief in gods

[Not surprising. I guess you couldn't find a youtube video to do your work for you.]

anybody who went to North Korea will tell you the same thing

Of course athiesm is political. If you think Hitchens and Dawkins are not political you are simply deluding yourself. Would you then accept the reverse premise that religion is not political?

None of the major wars of the 20th century (except perhaps in the middle east and I don't think they are big enough to qualify) had religious basis or motivations. If you want to extend it to the 1800s you will essentially find the same thing.

I am quite happy with how the world is coming along right now. You are the angry one. And just remember, the vast majority of the scientists, educators and health care providers that have built our amazing first world nations have and continue to have religious beliefs. Athiests remain a very small and unimportant minority.

All of the institutions that you treasure were built by religious people.

The church preserved and spread literacy throughout the middle ages (nobody of consequence uses the term "dark ages" anymore, but I am not surprised that you choose to use an outdated pejorative), and I am sure you are aware of the flourishing of mathematics and astronomy of the muslims.

You seem to be angry at religion for some unknown reason, projecting your personal problem is not rational argument.

 

[canada-man]

Of course athiesm is political. If you think Hitchens and Dawkins are not political you are simply deluding yourself. Would you then accept the reverse premise that religion is not political?

Dawkins and Hitchens are advocating humanism, secularism, reason and critical thinking and advancement in science and fighting against religious bullying and coercion

None of the major wars of the 20th century (except perhaps in the middle east and I don't think they are big enough to qualify) had religious basis or motivations. If you want to extend it to the 1800s you will essentially find the same thing.

WW2 in Europe was started by Religious fascists and Nazis whose nations signed concordat agreements with the vatican Imperial Japan in WW2 was a religious state where the Emperor was deified and soldiers were encouraged to commit suicide while attacking enemies

I am quite happy with how the world is coming along right now. You are the angry one. And just remember, the vast majority of the scientists, educators and health care providers that have built our amazing first world nations have and continue to have religious beliefs. Athiests remain a very small and unimportant minority.

did you forget that it was the religious parties that fight against scientific advancements and discoveries and also fight against medical treatments and today they still continue to do so? examples are pharmacists refusing to give people contraception, hospitals refusing to perform abortions to save the life of then mother's fighting against stem cell research using embryionic stem cells, etc FYI most scientists are atheists and you also forget that in the old days (1500-1800s) many atheists don't state thier non-beliefs in god because they risk being killed and jailed for not believing in christianioty and religious intimidation was the norm

All of the institutions that you treasure were built by religious people.

The church preserved and spread literacy throughout the middle ages (nobody of consequence uses the term "dark ages" anymore, but I am not surprised that you choose to use an outdated pejorative), and I am sure you are aware of the flourishing of mathematics and astronomy of the muslims.

you also forget those times illiteracy was high and the church was only interested in promoting religious dogma you also forget that in the last days of the Roman Empire after Christianity became the state religion Libraries, books and other non-christian writings where banned and burned and ceased all learning(which lead to the dark ages) and yes i am aware of the muslim advancements in science and mathematics which bring Europe into the Renaissance.

You seem to be angry at religion for some unknown reason, projecting your personal problem is not rational argument.

yes I am angry at relgion because everytime i read the news there is always reports of religious bullying, coercion, dehumanization of non-believers, attacking and trying to stop scientific research and advancements, and other theocratic interference of society,

 

[rld]

Dawkins and Hitchens are advocating humanism, secularism, reason and critical thinking and advancement in science and fighting against religious bullying and coercion



WW2 in Europe was started by Religious fascists and Nazis whose nations signed concordat agreements with the vatican Imperial Japan in WW2 was a religious state where the Emperor was deified and soldiers were encouraged to commit suicide while attacking enemies



did you forget that it was the religious parties that fight against scientific advancements and discoveries and also fight against medical treatments and today they still continue to do so? examples are pharmacists refusing to give people contraception, hospitals refusing to perform abortions to save the life of then mother's fighting against stem cell research using embryionic stem cells, etc FYI most scientists are atheists and you also forget that in the old days (1500-1800s) many atheists don't state thier non-beliefs in god because they risk being killed and jailed for not believing in christianioty and religious intimidation was the norm








you also forget those times illiteracy was high and the church was only interested in promoting religious dogma you also forget that in the last days of the Roman Empire after Christianity became the state religion Libraries, books and other non-christian writings where banned and burned and ceased all learning(which lead to the dark ages) and yes i am aware of the muslim advancements in science and mathematics which bring Europe into the Renaissance.



yes I am angry at relgion because everytime i read the news there is always reports of religious bullying, coercion, dehumanization of non-believers, attacking and trying to stop scientific research and advancements, and other theocratic interference of society,

Your knowledge of history is flawed. But feel free to keep calling it the "dark ages" it just proves your ignorance.

Much of the literature passed on in the middle ages, copied and preserved by monks was pagan, or non-Christian in nature. Cicero, Plato, all the greats, all preserved by people of religion.

Your suggestion that historical figures were "hidden athiests" is not supported by any evidence. And in fact it is contradicted by the writings of most of those people. Feel free to crack some history books and find out.

Hitler and nazism are not religious, but you choose to cling to this fallacy. Pity. And you simply ignore Communism, Russia and China. YOur silence on these is like a white flag.

And the papers are not filled with such stories...you, with an agenda seek them out. Most of the links you post are anecdotal garbage. I bet not one of Toronto's major papers has such a story today. Once again you try to mislead to help in your crusade.

More importantly the majority of American scientists do believe in either God or a higher power, despite false reports by athiest political organizations. The latest Pew data, well respected makes this clear and points out the harm done by dishonest elements in the athiest movement:

Yet in contrast to New Atheist claims, the Pew survey of scientists finds that 51% indicate that they either believe in God (33%) or a higher power (18%).

Not only do New Atheist claims risk alienating many moderately religious Americans who otherwise trust and admire science, but when these scientist pundits argue that their personal views on religion are overwhelmingly shared by other scientists, they in fact misrepresent and distort the beliefs of their colleagues.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1276/science-survey

So why do athiest politicos feel the need to lie?

 

[canada-man]

Hitler and Nazism not religious? how do you explain pictures like this

And the papers are not filled with such stories...you, with an agenda seek them out. Most of the links you post are anecdotal garbage. I bet not one of Toronto's major papers has such a story today. Once again you try to mislead to help in your crusade.

I read Canadian and overseas news reports

and last August a local church was intimidating a gay couple making noise and disturbing the peace

http://torontoist.com/2010/08/let_us_prey.php

 

[rld]

Hitler and Nazism not religious? how do you explain pictures like this

I read Canadian and overseas news reports

and last August a local church was intimidating a gay couple making noise and disturbing the peace

http://torontoist.com/2010/08/let_us_prey.php

we already discussed the Gott Mit Uns belt buckle, did you sleep through the conversation? It was adopted by the Prussian military in the 1860s and was used long before Hitler was in power and was kept by the Prussian military leadership (who often did not get along well with Hitler but since you clearly don't know any history you wouldn't know that...)

Got a response for the Pew data on scientists or are you admitting that your idols lied?

 

[canada-man]

a poster already debunked those claims with pictures like these you cannot deny the fact that Nazi Germany was a Christian state

SMOKING GUN!
Hitler wth Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, the papal nuncio in Berlin, 1935

On April 20, 1939, Archbishop Orsenigo celebrated Hitler's birthday. The celebrations, initiated by Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) became a tradition. Each April 20, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin was to send "warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany" and added with "fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their altars."

(Source: Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, by John Cornwell)

 

[rld]

a poster already debunked those claims with pictures like these you cannot deny the fact that Nazi Germany was a Christian state

SMOKING GUN!
Hitler wth Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, the papal nuncio in Berlin, 1935

On April 20, 1939, Archbishop Orsenigo celebrated Hitler's birthday. The celebrations, initiated by Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) became a tradition. Each April 20, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin was to send "warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany" and added with "fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their altars."

(Source: Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, by John Cornwell)

We covered that as well. It is completely normal for a head of state to have a relationship with the representative of the church. And if you are curious, heads of 23 countries participated in that event and King George VI sent birthday congrats. Does that make Hitler a Greek nationalist or an Orangeman?

But is fun to watch you run back to tired old arguments to run away from the lie you were putting forth. Can't keep up with the facts?

 

[canada-man]

National Bishop Friedrich Coch giving a Hitler greeting in Dresden, 10 December 1933

Dresden pastor Friedrich Coch is one of the leading men of the "German Christians" in Saxony. The NSDAP's Gau consultant for church matters since 1932, he is elected to the office of state bishop by the "Brown Synod" in August 1933.

 

[rld]

National Bishop Friedrich Coch giving a Hitler greeting in Dresden, 10 December 1933

Dresden pastor Friedrich Coch is one of the leading men of the "German Christians" in Saxony. The NSDAP's Gau consultant for church matters since 1932, he is elected to the office of state bishop by the "Brown Synod" in August 1933.

So? A churchman was a Nazi? Your point?

I bet you think Hitler was a muslim after this picture.

But of course, you have no explanation for the lie you have propogated about scientists and god.

And you just ignore Stalin, Mao and the rest.

Your moral and intellectual bankruptcy become obvious as you retreat into your "cut and paste" in panic style. It is so cute.

 

[canada-man]

my point is Nazi Germany was NOT an atheist state.

 

[rld]

It by athiest state you mean a state made up by a majority of athiests, there is no such thing. Anywhere, ever.

How about a retraction of the lie that most scientists are athiests?

How about an explanation for China and the USSR which were based on communism which holds athiesm as a central philosophy?

Shall I start posting articles about how the religious give more to charity and volunteer more in their community than the secular?

How about that data that the largest group of secularists tend to be male and much less married than their peers?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

National Bishop Friedrich Coch giving a Hitler greeting in Dresden, 10 December 1933

Dresden pastor Friedrich Coch is one of the leading men of the "German Christians" in Saxony. The NSDAP's Gau consultant for church matters since 1932, he is elected to the office of state bishop by the "Brown Synod" in August 1933.

That doesnt mean anything CM, Obama is known to hold Ramadan at the White House, does that mean Obama is a muslim himself??

 

[canada-man]

It by athiest state you mean a state made up by a majority of athiests, there is no such thing. Anywhere, ever.

How about a retraction of the lie that most scientists are athiests?

How about an explanation for China and the USSR which were based on communism which holds athiesm as a central philosophy?

Shall I start posting articles about how the religious give more to charity and volunteer more in their community than the secular?

How about that data that the largest group of secularists tend to be male and much less married than their peers?

Nazi Germany did not promote atheism and never did

scientists who do cientific research are more likley to be athiests and non-religious.

relgious organizations tend to use charity to covertly seek converts and spread religious dogma this was seen after the 2005 Asian tsunami and after the Earthquake in Haiti. philantropists like Bill Gates, are non-believers there are secular charitable organization like the red cross, united way, Plan Canada, etc.

How about that data that the largest group of secularists tend to be male and much less married than their peers?

how about that data that prove atheists/agnostics have lower divorce rates than thier religious peers

 

[Mervyn]

"I was barked at by numerous dogs who are earning their food guarding ignorance and superstition for the benefit of those who profit from it. Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source. They are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against the traditional "opium of the people"—cannot bear the music of the spheres. The Wonder of nature does not become smaller because one cannot measure it by the standards of human moral and human aims."

 

[FAST]

Religion has already failed

If I may make a few points.
All one has to do is read the responses from the god believers to understand why religion is declining.
Except of course for Islam, where the Muslim fanatics who will not let their followers think for themselves.
Religion can only grow now in backward countries, but I think will still maintain stronghold in areas like THE BIBLE BELT, which I guess is the same thing.
The only way a religion will survive today is by ultimate control, with dire consequences if you don't bow under.
Atheism IS NOT a belief, or a political agenda.
I DO NOT BELIEVE IN ATHEISM.
The term atheist, is as out moded now, as is religion.
Its really just that simple.

Glad I could help, FAST

 

[blackrock13]

"I was barked at by numerous dogs who are earning their food guarding ignorance and superstition for the benefit of those who profit from it. Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source. They are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against the traditional "opium of the people"—cannot bear the music of the spheres. The Wonder of nature does not become smaller because one cannot measure it by the standards of human moral and human aims."

Einstein?