Post Praetorian said:
dclarkg said:
Post Praetorian said:
In your opinion, might the world be improved or impoverished by a general reduction of religious views?
I don't mind people believing that myths and legends are true, what I mind is those peoples pushing religious non-sense into state laws, education programs, science class, etc. In that sense I could say that world can improve not with a reduction of the religious views ''per se'' but with a reduction of the presence or religious views in public domain affairs like health, education, social equality, human rights, etc. If someone wants to pray, go to church or other religious activity I respect that.
This seems a fair approach, but must it not bring a difficulty to the true believer? For if one truly believes in a supernatural deity that has established a moral code for the world to follow, that judges the individual based on his/her actions (or inactions), and that is to decide one's eternal fate, how might one then go about by day as though no such beliefs might be true, but then spend the evenings and Sunday fully accepting of their reality?
Further, would not such a ponderous supernatural being be assumed to negatively judge the believer for keeping such sacred truths to themselves rather than sharing and enforcing same?
Finally, if a believer truly believes that an individual with atheistic tendencies is destined for an afterlife of torment, should not the atheist view those most ardently wishing to save his/her soul in a positive, though perhaps misguided, light?
For is not such an individual apparently more caring with regards to the fate of the atheist than the believer who might accept the atheist's own preferred terms while knowing in his/her bosom that the atheist is bound for hell-fire?
To clarify: if one were certain of a conspiracy that would end with the injury of many, would not a compassionate individual be the one striving to warn the world in spite of being labeled a lunatic while one with less humanitarian aims simply be content to ensure that they and their family were outside of the area of effect at the time in question?
The problem is that they assume too much and don't see the evidence that disproof their claims (this must NOT be confused with evidence of the non-existence of god which is an absurdity IMHO). Also there is suppose to be ''free will'' which pretty much means stop shoving your beliefs on people don't believe them. I can understand advices and suggestions based on their faith but usually it does not stop there, also most of the religious groups by default tend to see other beliefs and people that believe them as false, wrong or ''not in the side of the truth''.
My real point here is that if you want to run a society by religious terms them you must prove that your religion and god are the true ones to follow, to do that you must present evidence of you claims that should be reviewed in terms of reality, you can't go around saying that god exists because ''I feel it'' and a ancient book says so.