God detrimental to society?

[Neo]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2-1798944-2,00.html


RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.

According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems....

[Dylflon]

Religion can cause some mighty big problems.

But I wouldn't say it destroys societies.

In fact, control by religion helped many early societies actually form into something other than crazy anarchy.

[Typhoid]

I would say that Religion stops individual societies from spiraling into a form of anarchy, yet at the same time, Religion causes problems between different societies interacting with one another.

[Dylflon]

Yeah.

That's a good addition to my thesis.

If only I didn't have to write my history term paper on an effing novel.

[Xantar]

What exactly is the definition of religion here? Simple belief in God (or some higher being) isn't all that destructive. It's when religion gets organized that you have problems. The former promotes compassion and good will among people. The latter promotes sheepism.

Besides that, I'm not sure how this study proved causality. What if a high murder rate causes people to turn to religion in order to justify and understand their world? I've known some people from the inner city, and they believe faith and God was what got them out of the ghetto. So maybe if you eliminated poverty, you'd see a decrease in religiosity?

[Professor S]

LOL!! They compared the US to Britain saying that "secular nations" tend to have less violence. Secular or not, the moral values that are held by Westerners are derived from Christian/Jewish belief structure. What a silly, agenda driven study.

It reminds me of the Temple professor who recently wrote a book about how Pedophilia is good for children.

[Bond]

It reminds me of the Temple professor who recently wrote a book about how Pedophilia is good for children.
How exactly did he make that argument?

[Professor S]

He said that "when properly done" pedophilia is a mentoring activity and is not damaging. In fact he went on to say that it was pleasurable in many cases. His basis was ancient Greek and Roman writings.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/09/27/publish

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46447

FYI, the pervert's name is Bruce Rind

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

I agree with the article (the first one, not the pedophelia ones).

Once you have a society running on reason rather than faith, less crimes can be gotten away with, and less murders can be justified, and can altogether help a society bloom.

[GameMaster]

God detrimental to society? Perhaps.

But so are so many other things. Why rest all the blame upon the shoulders of the Gods?

[Typhoid]

Why rest all the blame upon the shoulders of the Gods?


Because God is the answer to "everything" good (according to religious people) so as well, he must be the answer to "everything" bad.


If God created everything, and its because of him we're alive, it is also because of him we kill. Because of him we rape, we pillage, we burn villages, we take other countries, we enslave our own people, and we kill the planet.

[GameMaster]

If God created everything, and its because of him we're alive, it is also because of him we kill. Because of him we rape, we pillage, we burn villages, we take other countries, we enslave our own people, and we kill the planet.

Although, if a certain someone hadn't disobeyed God and eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, then we probably wouldn't be doing all these bad, corrupt things...

Then again...if God hadn't put the tree there, maybe we wouldn't have fallen to temptation and disobeyed...

It's kind of hard to decide who's to truly blame for all of this.

[Professor S]

Why not blame science? Afterall, science has killed far more people than any God or Religion.

Steel - Blades
Gunpowder - Guns and explosives
Nuclear Fission - The Big One

Instead, this person prefers to blame religion, a ideal that in most cases preaches against the darkest parts of our humanity that cause us to kill and commit violence. So shouldn't science be attacked and blamed for our faults and weaknesses? Hasn't science killed millions upon millions of people and given us the ever increasing ability to kill more and more at a time? Did the researcher even consider scientific advancements in societies and their correlation to increased violence when compared to religion?

Or better yet, why don't we stop BLAMING everything but ourselves for what we are and do, and address the actual PROBLEMS. This guy makes the same mistakes in his argument that anti-gun and anti-media violence people make. They remove responsibility from our society to govern and control itself and constantly points the blame to a neculous and nearly unprovable "evil".

Arguments of this type are typical of what I call the "Reverse Society". People that want to try and build a uptopian nirvana from the top down, instead of the bottom up. Confused? Here is my argument:

Society is meant to be built, for the lack of a better model, like a pyramid, with the most important aspects at the bottom:

The World Community
National Government/Culture
Local Government/Culture
Family/Self

If the base is solid, then it will support the upper levels.

Meanwhile those that want to propose the "Reverse Society" want to try and build the uptopia starting with The World Community.

Family/Self
Local Government/Culture
National Government/Culture
The World Community

This model is not new, it is simply communism by another and more friendly name. Proponents of this are those like Parliament member George Galloway, who I believe is one of the most demented and dangerous people I've ever heard speak.

Make no mistake, the Reverse Society sounds wonderful, and pretends to be a world family to replace the nuclear and extebded families that we know, but it will damage us terribly.

Family is the single most powerful force in human development. Without family, nothing that we have achieved would ever be possible. We cannot care about others without learning empathy in our early years. Without family, there is no caring for others, local or worldwide. Its a psychological fact. If you are not TOUCHED enough as an infant, you will grow to be functionally retarded.

Religion has been a powerful force in creating what we know as the family. I really don't think that people unserstand how powerful Western religion has been in forming even what we consider to be "secular" beliefs. Just compare the ideals of what being a good Roman is, which was a very secular society, when compared to what being a good Christian entails or even just a good, moral person. Jews are an excellent example of how string and important religion is in the family. Jews through the ages have endure more persecution than any other people, and they survived because of their belief in family. They invested their money in themselves, creating banks and businesses to look out for their family first and their fellow Jews second. This is how they survived and any secular group would have disintegrated under such horrors, IMO.

If you want to create the perfect society and reduce man's inhumanity to man, look towards yourself and your loved ones first, then once they are in order look to the next level to create a world community.

"Physician, heal thyself"

[Typhoid]

Professor S, its because of god (not entirely) that we've had to make weapons.


Without weapons, the crusades couldnt have been carried out.

Without weapons we cant defend ourselves when opposing religious areas attack us with their weapons.

[Neo]

Science may give us the means, but religion gives us the reasons.

[Professor S]

Um, guys, did you bother reading my entire post? I wasn't blasting science, I was making a point. That point was that blaming science for our actions is as silly as blaming religion. If you want, you can argue that puppies are the reason why we are so violent. I'm sure there is some sort of data out there that you can extrapolate anything from to attain results that meets your agenda, if you wish to do so.

Rome was a almost a completely secular society in function, to the point that their government and leaders became God-like. Yet they were one of the most violent and morally corrupt civilizations ever, promoting pedophilia, slavery, mortal combat for entertainment, extravagence, gluttony, promiscuity, etc. Did religion cause the downfall and horrific nature of their society or compel them to conquer civiliation after civilization from war to war to war? No. What drove them was pride, lust for power and greed. All of which are SINS in Christianity.

We should stop trying to BLAME things outside of our nature for violence, especially when the things that we are blaming actually keep us from committing violence if we actually FOLLOW THEIR TEACHINGS. Even if you believe that all religion is a creation of man and there is no God, and religion is the cause of violence, then religion is just reflection of that side of human nature and man itself is violent.

Either way, the author is foolish and publishing a scapegoat, not a solution or a genuine conclusion. Its such a simplistic and juvenile thesis.

[Typhoid]

What drove them was pride, lust for power and greed. All of which are SINS in Christianity.

But Rome wasnt Christian until Constantine.

Up until that Christians were the "underlings", they were sent into battles, and into the gladiator arenas for not swearing to things by the Roman Gods.


I'm pretty sure what drive them was the Roman Gods. The Gods told them that Power, and conquering all was the "only" way to truly worship them. The more power they have, and the more people Rome enslaved, the more people they could force to worship Roman Gods.

[Professor S]

But Rome wasnt Christian until Constantine.

Up until that Christians were the "underlings", they were sent into battles, and into the gladiator arenas for not swearing to things by the Roman Gods.

What does that have to do with anything I wrote? I was making a comparison of the teachings of popular Western religion, AKA Christianity, and secular Romanism. I wasn't talking about Christian Rome. Also, what Christian Rome did is not necessarily a reflection of the religion, as well as western violence today is not necessarily a reflection of religion.

I was arguing that a secular scoiety, which the author says is less violent than a religious one, can be horrifically violent and immoral. Thus disassembling his whole thesis, which isn't very hard to disassemble in the first place.

And why are you convinced that it was their Gods that drove them? Do you have any sources to back that up, because everything I've seen on the History channel and read points to the generals and emporers trying to CURRY THE FAVOR OF THE PEOPLE, NOT THE GODS. That is a secular society. You are letting your own personal views on religion, or lack there of, taint your objective mind.

And once again, if Religion is created by man, is it not then that man is to blame for the violence? Religious beliefs have evolved for thousands of years, and they have always evolved with societies beliefs in right and wrong. Morals and Religion have shaped each other over the years and are a reflection of the hearts of mankind. If man is violent, it is his fault, because his creation is what makes him violent. Do not blame the instrument, blame the creator and wielder of that instrument.