A World Without A Religion?

[DogEater008 0]

i'm against religons. Most of the religons brainwash people into believing in nonsence things. Making countries fight between each other. Muslum killing Jewish and vice versa. For example, christians, they go around telling everybody that if they don't believe in their god, then they will go to hell. When a leader of a country is a religous person, it is easy to start wars with other country with a different dominate religion. Because of religion beliefs, stem-cells reason are stopped in the US because of our president being a "GOOD" christian. In this world, only the riches are right and the rest is wrong. United States is a country with many rich christian/jewish, that is why, i believe that Isreal always have our support. PS. i rather be a buddish than a christan.

[BooZker 0]

If you take care of someone, then you're probably living for someone else. If you truly are in it for yourself, you would not even dare help a rape victim who is being raped right in front of your eyes. When you help another person, you just crossed the line from living for yourself, to living for more than just yourself.

I am not talking about one hour, one day, one week, or even a month, i am talking about my entire life. My way of trying to show you what i mean is like this:

God is like your parent for life and you never become and adult. It is liking living up to your parents for ever and always trying to impress them and do what they want and never what you want simply because it makes you a better person.

I can live just fine without trying to live up to being Jesus Christ or Buddha because they were one of a kind.

There's no possible way to not be in any religion. Afterall, didn't you say several posts back that you are either an atheist or an agnostic? Eventhough you did not specify which one, i'ma guess you're an atheist, only because of how similar you act like them. Eventhough you say you don't attack, you could very well be attacking during your defense--even if it doesn't seem that way to you.

Here is what dictionary.com said, or at least one of the many definitions.

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

Your right it is impossible and i didn't know that religion was just a set of beliefs. My definition in my head was a belief or beliefs of high powers. Obviously wrong, but my new statment is "i believe stongly in no high power other then the human race"

Yes, your also might i might be attacking, but it is in defense. I never EVER start a conversation about how my religion is better or how stupid a certain religion is. Even look at this post. I never said that any kind of religion was bad i was just asking what the world would be like without a religion. So in response, i try not to attack unless i was attacked first about my beliefs.

Correction: One is not dead when they go to Heaven, they are alive. You can't judge the dead. Though, you're probably thinking that the body is the person. However, the body is just a detachable thing. The spirit is the person.

Good correction. I meant to say there is no way to prove that heaven is real because there is no way to communicate between the two places.

[truefusion 3]

God is like your parent for life and you never become and adult. It is liking living up to your parents for ever and always trying to impress them and do what they want and never what you want simply because it makes you a better person.
I can live just fine without trying to live up to being Jesus Christ or Buddha because they were one of a kind.

Oh, ok, i understand now. I thought you meant differently. Like, for example, someone extremely close to you can't get out of bed, cause they lost their legs or something, and you help them by getting them stuff they need to save them the effort. Glad you cleared things up.

[Thorned Rose 0]

I can live just fine without trying to live up to being Jesus Christ or Buddha because they were one of a kind.

I agree - this is something I keep saying but I keep getting attacked by Christians for saying it. I believe that humans are perfectly capable of living their lives in a good way without having resorting to religious indoctrination to do it but I keep being told that humans are fundamentally sinful and weak and can't possibly be decent people without god's guidance. Funny, because I'm a good person, more moralistic than many people purporting to be christians. It comes down to integrity not religious beliefs.
I was talking about the concept of living up to religious figures the other day and how silly it was of the Council of Nicea to make Jesus the "son of god" rather than a prophet as he was up until that time. Rolemodels are far easier to follow when you can relate to them and see them for people. No human on this earth could live up to the standards of a 'divine being'! Rolemodels are far more effective when we can look and them and say "What an amazing person. If they can do it, so can I!". You can't say that of someone who is 'divinely perfect'. You just end up wasting your whole life trying to attain the unattainable. I'm not saying that because Jesus as the son of god is perfect, his teachings aren't worth merit, just that he is a better role model as a person.
Even then, you still don't need someone to 'follow' to be a good person. As I said, it comes down to integrity. I hold myself accountable to my actions, I don't need someone or something else to do that for me. If I want to continue to be a good person I need to hold myself accountable for my actions and own my mistakes and learn from them. I hardly think screwing up and then getting god's forgiveness straight away just because you are a Christian etc makes for very good integrity. Hence why reincarnation was another thing taken out of the Bible - if people thought they got another chance at life, they could do what they want and be damned with the consequences because ultimately there weren't any - they would still go to heaven and they could be a better person next time round just so long as they said the right prayer and genuflected at the right moment.
I'm probably going to be flamed by Christians for saying the Bible has been changed but I don't apologise for being factual.

[darran 0]

I am split on this issue. It is these religions that have taught us what is right or wrong, maybe not directly as we are free to choose for ourselves but then again they are the ones which teach us what is the right things to do. For me, they are the building blocks in building one's character and ethics, and it also plays a part in their morals. For example, to some religions, we are not allowed to do certain things but in the other religions these are condone. That brings out the different kind of people we see today. But then again, without religions in this world, there would probably be no fightings between religions, and we can see the world become a much more peaceful loving place to be in. Everybody would be on the equal stand, there is nothing to disagree on since there is no religion to affect how one thinks. And it is the actions of people who wants to bring down the religion you are having so that you will have a reason to join them, I believe this is the lowest a human can get to with regards to getting more followers for their religion.

[BooZker 0]

Oh, ok, i understand now. I thought you meant differently. Like, for example, someone extremely close to you can't get out of bed, cause they lost their legs or something, and you help them by getting them stuff they need to save them the effort. Glad you cleared things up.

Oh no no. I'm not that cruel haha. Yes, i meant on a life basis not a day to day basis.

[crazyteens 0]

world would be a better place to live. Think about a world without terrorism.

[BooZker 0]

world would be a better place to live. Think about a world without terrorism.

To be honest i don't think terrorism is that big of a problem compared to the others in the world, but i get what you are saying. I also think terrorism, most of it anyways, is based on people disagreeing on religion.

[Danny 0]

I don't think it would be better.. don't know why but.. no religion = no god? So there would be just I belive, I do not, In god??......

[Thorned Rose 0]

What?! What's wrong with just beliefs? Religion is just collective beliefs with organisation anyway. And yuo can still believe in God without being religious - as I said religion is beliefs in an organised and indoctrinated way. Unfortunately religion tends to pray upon peoples' weaknesses liek fear, insecurity, hierachy and religious leaders take advantage of this.Believe what *you* know to be true or what is true in your heart not what someone else tells you is true.

[BooZker 0]

Believe what *you* know to be true or what is true in your heart not what someone else tells you is true.

This is a great way to look at it. For example:

If you truly believe everything in the bible, but really think that people came from apes (evolution) don't deny yourself that belief because it is not accepted. I am sure most of you have not read every post in this thread, so i will say it again:

The main reason i stopped being religious with the belief of a God or higher being, is because i thought to myself it doesn't make sense. Now if it makes sense to you, great! Go for it.

[killerbichon 0]

I was thinking about it and thought, you know, i think it would be better. Here are my reasons.
The biggest change in the world would be less wars. Think about it. Most wars are start because of religion. One of the reasons people came to America back in the 1700s was because they wanted freedom of whatever religion they wanted.

You might as well be against agriculture. Pre-historic man was tribal and nomadic. As we began to not die as often, we discovered we could grow plants where we wanted and not go out and find them randomly. The better we got at that, the more of us in one place we were and the more free time we had. When groups of people get together they begin to arrange themsleves in hierarchies. Like in high school for instance. The more institutionalized these hierarchies become, and the more dependent people become on controlling natural processes, the more likely religion is to arise. Egypt, the Aztechs, Rome, Greece, almost every society that arises hits a point where religion enters in, in a big way. The exception was the mongols (Ghengis Khan). They sort of became the managers of many religious societies and maintained a separate, more aloof clan structure on top of these.

Mazlow's hierarchy of needs talks about this, essentially: the more successful you are at surviving, the more free time you have to devote to non-survival activities like introspective thought. We are a curious species and we tend to want to know "why." Religion is the ultimate "why" Q&A session. Whether it is right or wrong doesn't matter.

Another great thing that would come about it would be that laws would be made on what is actually bad. For example, the most well known mostly religious law is the banning of gay marriage. I don't know if they would accept it or not, but the descions would be for science and what could hurt people.

Science does not offer a moral framework. A purely logical or scientific society would be devoid of compassion. Take for example the idea that we should kill all people with mental disabilities, becuase it is better for the species. A simple scientific study on genetics and inheritance could make a strong argument for this. The problem is if you go too far in that direction you begin to sound like the Nazi's did. What is right and wrong, often cannot be empirically tested. What cannot be empirically tested is not science.

Another would be no one would discrimanate about religions and whats better. It would be just one more thing people could hurt feelings about.

People discriminate. Religion does not create discrimination, it is just another excuse people use to discriminate. "Discrimination" is important... not the "bad" kind where one race has to be better than another, but the "good" kind where people can evaluate situations and solutions and determine if one is better than another. That some people are not very good at this and inappropriately apply discrimination to things like race, creed, or color is just a product of this natural need to place ourselves in hierarchies, determine right from wrong, who is "better" and "worse" and so on.
It is difficult to say if we would be better or worse without religion. It is safe to say that the more that societies freely exchange ideas (not at the point of a gun) the more peace and prosperity there is. It may be that religion has been a necessary stepping stone to a higher, more civilized existance.

[BooZker 0]

welcome killerbichon! I am glad you posted in here for one of your first few posts. This is a great post with great points. I will try my best haha.

You might as well be against agriculture. Pre-historic man was tribal and nomadic. As we began to not die as often, we discovered we could grow plants where we wanted and not go out and find them randomly. The better we got at that, the more of us in one place we were and the more free time we had. When groups of people get together they begin to arrange themsleves in hierarchies. Like in high school for instance. The more institutionalized these hierarchies become, and the more dependent people become on controlling natural processes, the more likely religion is to arise. Egypt, the Aztechs, Rome, Greece, almost every society that arises hits a point where religion enters in, in a big way. The exception was the mongols (Ghengis Khan). They sort of became the managers of many religious societies and maintained a separate, more aloof clan structure on top of these.
Mazlow's hierarchy of needs talks about this, essentially: the more successful you are at surviving, the more free time you have to devote to non-survival activities like introspective thought. We are a curious species and we tend to want to know "why." Religion is the ultimate "why" Q&A session. Whether it is right or wrong doesn't matter.

Agriculture and religion is much different. The way you explained it is great, but still is not good enough

This is actually some what false. People today are slowing becoming less religious (Based on the studies i have read. One in which includes a study from Newsweek). Today there is even MORE free time then there was when they started Rome and Greece. I mean now a teen can be out with his friends ALL day on the weekends and stop and eat at a fast food place, use up only $3 for a whole meal, and then go "hang out" again within minutes. What you are saying is true for ancient times, but not now, or it seems. Plus, why do you have to devote time to religion. Why not fishing, sports, computers, ect?

Science does not offer a moral framework. A purely logical or scientific society would be devoid of compassion. Take for example the idea that we should kill all people with mental disabilities, becuase it is better for the species. A simple scientific study on genetics and inheritance could make a strong argument for this. The problem is if you go too far in that direction you begin to sound like the Nazi's did. What is right and wrong, often cannot be empirically tested. What cannot be empirically tested is not science.

To be honest i can't really argue with this. The best thing i can i said based "more" on not completely. But also before religions did people go up to each other and just kill them? No because if thats so we would not be here. Humans, i believe, already know the most basic idea, killing is bad. Yes, i used the word bad also because before religion there was no "evil." I am not saying religion created evil i am saying the created the definition. I had also said though "what does not hurt people" killing people hurts them, well obviously. I just don't believe that religion is needed to know killing, stealing, raping, ect is the wrong thing to do. Maybe people needed it back in acient time, but now we all teach or kids those skills and they would never be forgotten because they are part of our everyday life. We teach our kids not to take toys from others once they can play toys. And that my friend, is very young.

People discriminate. Religion does not create discrimination, it is just another excuse people use to discriminate.

No people DO discriminate and religion does NOT create dicrimination, but it does create something to discreaminate against.

It may be that religion has been a necessary stepping stone to a higher, more civilized existance.

This could be true. Although religion also creates war which is uncivilized, but i understand what you are saying and that is a great point.

[truefusion 3]

If you truly believe everything in the bible, but really think that people came from apes (evolution) don't deny yourself that belief because it is not accepted.

One would not truly believe in everything in the Bible, if they really believe in the Theory of Evolution. There's a good chance that they'd fully reject the Bible if they believed in the Theory of Evolution.

 

People today are slowing becoming less religious (Based on the studies i have read. One in which includes a study from Newsweek).

There will always be a greater amount of people who don't follow theistic religions. Even the Bible tells you this. But how many people was this study based on, and on what society?

 

Plus, why do you have to devote time to religion. Why not fishing, sports, computers, ect?

I shall bring up the word "choice" to answer that question. We chose to devote ourselves to a certain religion. And we found it to be very good on our lives. Just like we choose to go fishing. Just like we choose to play/watch sports. Just like we choose to use computers. Etc... Some people are different, that's what makes us choose differently.

[killerbichon 0]

Agriculture and religion is much different. The way you explained it is great, but still is not good enough
This is actually some what false. People today are slowing becoming less religious (Based on the studies i have read. One in which includes a study from Newsweek). Today there is even MORE free time then there was when they started Rome and Greece. I mean now a teen can be out with his friends ALL day on the weekends and stop and eat at a fast food place, use up only $3 for a whole meal, and then go "hang out" again within minutes. What you are saying is true for ancient times, but not now, or it seems. Plus, why do you have to devote time to religion. Why not fishing, sports, computers, ect?

What I meant to say is that agriculture is a more successful way of producing food and surviving than a nomadic lifestyle. Being more successful leads to greater population densities, and with that comes the inherent need for people to organize themselves hierarchically. Both Religion and Academia are the ultimate expressions of this need as they are essentially institutionalized elitism.

As for people becoming less religious, studies have shown that the more intelligent a person is, the less likely they are to be religious. (here is a list of studies going back to the 1920's http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-thinkingchristians.htm ). As societies go, religion has lots of competition in western style civilizations (Internet, TV, Porn). I said that the more free time a person has, the more a person tends towards introspective thought. Religion is introspective thought, but I didn't say that more free time == Religion.