Religion

[Maxim]

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.
- Karl Marx

Agree or disagree? I know Hooj is as fundamental on this as I am.

[John Kennedy]

Sometimes I think the end of organized religion will naturally come about eventually as a result of the progression of society and the fact that there will eventually be an explanation for everything that was previously thought to be completely religious..

but then I figure that the divide between a self-spirited people and those who seek a higher power for spirituality will ALWAYS exist, and the question of whether religion is real will ALWAYS exist.

So the answer is a more personal one that no single person could dictate for anyone else. The abolishment of religion to me seems just as archaic as how archaic religion seems to those who may seek to abolish it. It's a very personal issue and I believe that with or without religion bad things will happen and good things will happen. It's human nature to seek happiness in some sort way shape or form no matter what. And to say that religion is the root of all evil is to say that a gun makes a killer, same idea in my opinion.

[lizzy]

religion is the opiate of the people.

[Maxim]

Religion is not the the root of all evil, it does provide opiate-like effect for society thus numbing the pain of reality but not ridding from it. That's the way I would phrase it. I'm not touching the effects of religion upon society and it's interaction with others based on such.

Your opinion has a strong point as well. A person's perception of things and their interpretation depends clearly on a person and on their mindset.

Religion is a belief. It's better to have an idea. You can change an idea. ...now changing a belief is a much more complicated task.
-Chris Rock from the movie "Dogma"

[Penelicious]

Originally posted by Maxim
Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.
- Karl Marx

Agree or disagree? I know Hooj is as fundamental on this as I am.

I might personify this very statement. I agree with the general statement, yet being raised in a religious home, I fear walking away from something that has "given me" hope, faith and a sense of structure in my life. How would I know that if I abolished religion from my life I would find "real happiness". What is to say that a life without religion would help me to discover true peace?

Then again, I might just be living an illusion now.

I love Marx.

[drumaboy]

completely agree....but that's just for me, i wont tell anyone else what to do , how to live, but i think the question of religion will really come up in my life if and when i am married and want to have kids, would i raise them roman catholic or not? not sure, then again, i'd rather take my kids to the museum than a church on sunday, there's a fine line between knowledge and religion as well, and i'd want them to know about all religions, but as far as a belief and what not, (because of its effects on history, culture, music, etc)....i can see myself teaching them the scientific reasoning behind why is the sky blue, but then tell them also that the sky was made by God......in hopes they decide for themselves what to believe in

[.gene.]

I think organized religion has it's pros & cons. One of the pros is the fundamental installment of certain values & morals (well hopefully) that help society & help one grow as a personal as a whole. One of the cons is that organized religion also pushes synchronized systemized beliefs and organized identity in honor in fear ( a little Indecision quote). As for religion being the root of all evil, I don't think that's the case. People have had a tendency of being violent before organized religion was established, the cavemen were waging wars & killing each other as were the "crusades" pagan religions which were not in the least bit organized. In today's world some religion(s) condone violence & warfare more than others & that's a huge reason why the world is in a state that it's in right now but I wouldn't solely blame religion.

[raver_mania]

I think religion is a crutch for humanity. People in the early days could not conceive of a cold hard universe without purpose (that they could understand), so they had to invent some higher deity, be it the spirits of dead ancestors, or God, in order for them to feel a sense of purpose and security.
I personally do not believe in a God who "watches over" humanity's every actions, and has set aside heaven for good people and hell for bad people (sorry to offend anyone, but the concept of heaven and hell is way too simplistic for me). Even if there are many different religions out there, the common theme is a God who monitors and judges the actions of humans.
Not to say I don't believe in something, but its definitely not contained in organized religion (Buddhist philosphies might be the closest thing in organized religion I believe in). I believe in some sort of reincarnation, ie, recycling of souls through many lives for learning, experience, I don't know. The problem, I think, is our finite minds at this point in evolution, cannot comprehend the infinity of the universe.

Regarding the effects of religion on humanity - I think its caused some of the greatest advances in civilization, while at the same time, responsible for some of the greatest atrocities of all time. I don't need religion to teach my kids good morals, values, etc - I'll use compassion for that.

So who knows, there might be God, or there might be aliens whom our ancestors, in their primal, barbaric state, thought of as Gods. Or there could be nothing.

Also, in my opinion, I see absolutely no difference in idol worshipping and non-idol worshipping...in both cases some higher diety is being worshipped, except in idol worshipping, the idol is a representation/token of that diety.

[admin]

Originally posted by raver_mania
I think religion is a crutch for humanity. People in the early days could not conceive of a cold hard universe without purpose (that they could understand), so they had to invent some higher deity, be it the spirits of dead ancestors, or God, in order for them to feel a sense of purpose and security.
I personally do not believe in a God who "watches over" humanity's every actions, and has set aside heaven for good people and hell for bad people (sorry to offend anyone, but the concept of heaven and hell is way too simplistic for me). Even if there are many different religions out there, the common theme is a God who monitors and judges the actions of humans.
Not to say I don't believe in something, but its definitely not contained in organized religion (Buddhist philosphies might be the closest thing in organized religion I believe in). I believe in some sort of reincarnation, ie, recycling of souls through many lives for learning, experience, I don't know. The problem, I think, is our finite minds at this point in evolution, cannot comprehend the infinity of the universe.

Regarding the effects of religion on humanity - I think its caused some of the greatest advances in civilization, while at the same time, responsible for some of the greatest atrocities of all time. I don't need religion to teach my kids good morals, values, etc - I'll use compassion for that.

So who knows, there might be God, or there might be aliens whom our ancestors, in their primal, barbaric state, thought of as Gods. Or there could be nothing.

Also, in my opinion, I see absolutely no difference in idol worshipping and non-idol worshipping...in both cases some higher diety is being worshipped, except in idol worshipping, the idol is a representation/token of that diety.

I agree with you on most part, I do disagree with "I think it’s caused some of the greatest advances in civilization". I think religion does the opposite. A lot of great scientists and philosophers were either murdered or told not to practice their studies because it was a sin, some were stoned to death and were called witches. In 1600, Italian monk, Giordano Bruno, was condemned by the Catholic Church for his beliefs - that life most probably existed elsewhere in the cosmos. He was burnt at the stake. Then a few hundred years later you have Galileo. He wasn’t killed but was still forced to renounce his beliefs and spend his final years under house arrest, prohibited from discussing the Copernican system. In the early 90’s, the Vatican admitted it was wrong when it condemned Galileo. Mohamed himself didn't like Artists and Scientists, why you think the Muslim nations are behind in those fields. It wasn't always like that, some great scholars came from Arab nations (I have names if you want them). IMO Religion will always interfere with Science in countries where government is rules by Religion.

Dmitry

[Leon]

Originally posted by Dmitry
I agree with you on most part, I do disagree with "I think it’s caused some of the greatest advances in civilization". I think religion does the opposite. A lot of great scientists and philosophers were either murdered or told not to practice their studies because it was a sin, some were stoned to death and were called witches.




Wow, dude, fantastic post! Remember that Dark Ages were not called that for no apparent reason. After the fall of the Roman Empire, religion was the ruler and we all know what type of advances we had.

That's not to say that great things have not been accomplished or invented by religious Men (and women) but religion as a government, the preacher and the teacher are not synonomous with great advances.

[raver_mania]

Originally posted by Dmitry
I agree with you on most part, I do disagree with "I think it’s caused some of the greatest advances in civilization". I think religion does the opposite. A lot of great scientists and philosophers were either murdered or told not to practice their studies because it was a sin, some were stoned to death and were called witches. In 1600, Italian monk, Giordano Bruno, was condemned by the Catholic Church for his beliefs - that life most probably existed elsewhere in the cosmos. He was burnt at the stake. Then a few hundred years later you have Galileo. He wasn’t killed but was still forced to renounce his beliefs and spend his final years under house arrest, prohibited from discussing the Copernican system. In the early 90’s, the Vatican admitted it was wrong when it condemned Galileo. Mohamed himself didn't like Artists and Scientists, why you think the Muslim nations are behind in those fields. It wasn't always like that, some great scholars came from Arab nations (I have names if you want them). IMO Religion will always interfere with Science in countries where government is rules by Religion.

Dmitry

Sorry I should have made myself more clear. I think there have been some great advances in art and literature (beautiful cathedrals, mosques, temples, etc...great worrks of literature, music, etc) because of inspiration gained from religion. But I agree with you in regards to the clash between science and religion - religion in the past has done a lot to harm science. So far, they've just been on opposite sides of the spectrum - one is about belief, and one is about hard facts and proof.

[admin]

Originally posted by raver_mania
Sorry I should have made myself more clear. I think there have been some great advances in art and literature (beautiful cathedrals, mosques, temples, etc...great worrks of literature, music, etc) because of inspiration gained from religion. But I agree with you in regards to the clash between science and religion - religion in the past has done a lot to harm science. So far, they've just been on opposite sides of the spectrum - one is about belief, and one is about hard facts and proof.

k, I understand, you right about that type of art.