Forum Thread

the role of religion in politics

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 52 1 2 3 4 Next
  • Independent
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    there is an old saw that when you mix religion and politics you get politics.

    the role of religion in politics is to provide a cover or cloak for the believer's political actions. of course we know that many times these actions are violent but religion will always be there to provide that legitimacy. the one particular problem with religion providing any role in politics derives not from the separation of church and state (disclaimer: i am a strict separationist) but from the issue of inconsistency and contradiction. irshad manji who wrote "the problem with islam" is a muslim who notes the inconsistencies in the q'uran. the same applies to the bible and the torah. to use these as the "basis" of a political belief system means that said believer must be able to defend contradictory positions.

    cognitive dissonance will reign supreme as opposed to their personal god construct.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote: there is an old saw that when you mix religion and politics you get politics.

    the role of religion in politics is to provide a cover or cloak for the believer's political actions. of course we know that many times these actions are violent but religion will always be there to provide that legitimacy. the one particular problem with religion providing any role in politics derives not from the separation of church and state (disclaimer: i am a strict separationist) but from the issue of inconsistency and contradiction. irshad manji who wrote "the problem with islam" is a muslim who notes the inconsistencies in the q'uran. the same applies to the bible and the torah. to use these as the "basis" of a political belief system means that said believer must be able to defend contradictory positions.

    cognitive dissonance will reign supreme as opposed to their personal god construct.
    As long as our"elected" (read: bought) leaders go bravely to church and "pray" all the time as well kneel for the Pope; religion will be part of the politics in this country for sure..
    Seperation between church and state is a total farce; Why do churches have tax priviledges, while they run a "bussiness"? Why is "God bless America" a favorite slogan?( Did someone inform the "whatever up there" that we decided that?) Does it mean anything at all? Church indoctrination determines already on how to vote and for whom; certainly not on an Atheist.

    In other words the Pentagon, churches, NRA, the 1%, do run this country; not common sense people. Indoctrination plays a huge role in this country; together with a "herd" mentality; Because of their inferiority complex, they stick to their indoctrination like glue; common sense is not preached in churches or the army.
  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote: there is an old saw that when you mix religion and politics you get politics.<br /> <br /> the role of religion in politics is to provide a cover or cloak for the believer&#39;s political actions. of course we know that many times these actions are violent but religion will always be there to provide that legitimacy. the one particular problem with religion providing any role in politics derives not from the separation of church and state (disclaimer: i am a strict separationist) but from the issue of inconsistency and contradiction. irshad manji who wrote "the problem with islam" is a muslim who notes the inconsistencies in the q&#39;uran. the same applies to the bible and the torah. to use these as the "basis" of a political belief system means that said believer must be able to defend contradictory positions.<br /> <br /> cognitive dissonance will reign supreme as opposed to their personal god construct.
    Thanks, you are another clear minded thinker!
  • Independent
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    lonely bird Wrote: there is an old saw that when you mix religion and politics you get politics.

    the role of religion in politics is to provide a cover or cloak for the believer's political actions. of course we know that many times these actions are violent but religion will always be there to provide that legitimacy. the one particular problem with religion providing any role in politics derives not from the separation of church and state (disclaimer: i am a strict separationist) but from the issue of inconsistency and contradiction. irshad manji who wrote "the problem with islam" is a muslim who notes the inconsistencies in the q'uran. the same applies to the bible and the torah. to use these as the "basis" of a political belief system means that said believer must be able to defend contradictory positions.

    cognitive dissonance will reign supreme as opposed to their personal god construct.
    As long as our"elected" (read: bought) leaders go bravely to church and "pray" all the time as well kneel for the Pope; religion will be part of the politics in this country for sure..
    Seperation between church and state is a total farce; Why do churches have tax priviledges, while they run a "bussiness"? Why is "God bless America" a favorite slogan?( Did someone inform the "whatever up there" that we decided that?) Does it mean anything at all? Church indoctrination determines already on how to vote and for whom; certainly not on an Atheist.

    In other words the Pentagon, churches, NRA, the 1%, do run this country; not common sense people. Indoctrination plays a huge role in this country; together with a "herd" mentality; Because of their inferiority complex, they stick to their indoctrination like glue; common sense is not preached in churches or the army.
    i was disgusted by the theatre of mccain and obama meeting with warren in 2008. that being said religion is part of the political scene especially since the advent or rather onslaught of the (im)moral majority. but we can also look back and see the religious fervor when jefferson was running for president. "the godless constitution" by kramnick and moore recounts the hyperbole that went on including comments that is jefferson were elected christians would have to hide their bibles in the their wells. there is nothing new here on that front.

    what is new is that the religious hand-wringing and harrumphing is combined with a narrative of a hatred for government. this can be blamed upon republicans. the concept of americans being anti-government is a myth. what americans have always wanted is for government to be there when they want it and not be there when they don't. a silly and impossible scenario. and without government the exceptionalists would not have been presented with the mythology they crave because government allowed for the building of the middle class and for the american economy to stand astride the world along with the garrison empire. i will grant that circumstances played a huge role in the narrative but the reality as regards the exceptionalist myth is that with out government it wouldn't have happened. the rise of a party BASED upon hatred of government at least from an agitprop standpoint is a recent phenomenon and one that is actually counter to the american myth. religion is an easily exploited sideshow. one even wonders if the religionists realize this. for all of their rants about how "god" and religion have been removed from the public square they really don't want religion in the public square because that would mean actual debate upon dogma and that is something they do not want. like all interest groups they want to have their cake and eat it too.

    while i understand your comment re: the pentagon, religion, the nra and the 1% running the country, i tend to look at things a little differently. these groups don't really run the country. the political system that has been allowed to be distorted since the election of reagan is to blame. and the rise of a political party that is, imo, virulently opposed to the very country they wish to run is to blame and most especially those who support such nonsense. religion in the case of the (anti)republic-an party provides that cloak of legitimacy in the eyes of part of their base. if the pharisaical right actually ran the country the (anti)republic-an party would have moved long ago to reintroduce prayer in public schools and introduced bills on a federal level to outlaw abortion. state laws on such have been unsuccessful in the prayer arena and partially successful in the choice arena.

    one has rambled on for long enough in this post. i share your concerns but action on them must be aimed at the party itself. and one wonders if the democratic party has the stones to do so.
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    lonely bird Wrote: there is an old saw that when you mix religion and politics you get politics.

    the role of religion in politics is to provide a cover or cloak for the believer's political actions. of course we know that many times these actions are violent but religion will always be there to provide that legitimacy. the one particular problem with religion providing any role in politics derives not from the separation of church and state (disclaimer: i am a strict separationist) but from the issue of inconsistency and contradiction. irshad manji who wrote "the problem with islam" is a muslim who notes the inconsistencies in the q'uran. the same applies to the bible and the torah. to use these as the "basis" of a political belief system means that said believer must be able to defend contradictory positions.

    cognitive dissonance will reign supreme as opposed to their personal god construct.
    As long as our"elected" (read: bought) leaders go bravely to church and "pray" all the time as well kneel for the Pope; religion will be part of the politics in this country for sure..
    Seperation between church and state is a total farce; Why do churches have tax priviledges, while they run a "bussiness"? Why is "God bless America" a favorite slogan?( Did someone inform the "whatever up there" that we decided that?) Does it mean anything at all? Church indoctrination determines already on how to vote and for whom; certainly not on an Atheist.

    In other words the Pentagon, churches, NRA, the 1%, do run this country; not common sense people. Indoctrination plays a huge role in this country; together with a "herd" mentality; Because of their inferiority complex, they stick to their indoctrination like glue; common sense is not preached in churches or the army.
    i was disgusted by the theatre of mccain and obama meeting with warren in 2008. that being said religion is part of the political scene especially since the advent or rather onslaught of the (im)moral majority. but we can also look back and see the religious fervor when jefferson was running for president. "the godless constitution" by kramnick and moore recounts the hyperbole that went on including comments that is jefferson were elected christians would have to hide their bibles in the their wells. there is nothing new here on that front.

    what is new is that the religious hand-wringing and harrumphing is combined with a narrative of a hatred for government. this can be blamed upon republicans. the concept of americans being anti-government is a myth. what americans have always wanted is for government to be there when they want it and not be there when they don't. a silly and impossible scenario. and without government the exceptionalists would not have been presented with the mythology they crave because government allowed for the building of the middle class and for the american economy to stand astride the world along with the garrison empire. i will grant that circumstances played a huge role in the narrative but the reality as regards the exceptionalist myth is that with out government it wouldn't have happened. the rise of a party BASED upon hatred of government at least from an agitprop standpoint is a recent phenomenon and one that is actually counter to the american myth. religion is an easily exploited sideshow. one even wonders if the religionists realize this. for all of their rants about how "god" and religion have been removed from the public square they really don't want religion in the public square because that would mean actual debate upon dogma and that is something they do not want. like all interest groups they want to have their cake and eat it too.

    while i understand your comment re: the pentagon, religion, the nra and the 1% running the country, i tend to look at things a little differently. these groups don't really run the country. the political system that has been allowed to be distorted since the election of reagan is to blame. and the rise of a political party that is, imo, virulently opposed to the very country they wish to run is to blame and most especially those who support such nonsense. religion in the case of the (anti)republic-an party provides that cloak of legitimacy in the eyes of part of their base. if the pharisaical right actually ran the country the (anti)republic-an party would have moved long ago to reintroduce prayer in public schools and introduced bills on a federal level to outlaw abortion. state laws on such have been unsuccessful in the prayer arena and partially successful in the choice arena.

    one has rambled on for long enough in this post. i share your concerns but action on them must be aimed at the party itself. and one wonders if the democratic party has the stones to do so.
    Lonely Bird...you typed imo.....what is imo
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    in my opinion...imo
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    thanx
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Although there are some historical events that brand religion as being cause and effect to inhumane treatment, just how does society gage what one person does to another? How can human beings relate to one another without a conscious thought of sacrifice, help and aid to other people? Where do the laws or regulations come from that provide the measurement of how people relate to one another. Without religion there is nothing but anarchy and people doing what they "feel" best to one another. Steal, kill, maim, rape, and do whatever pleases you, that is anarchy. Religion has given mankind conscious thought and cause to think about what you are about to do before you hurt another human being. With that being said, I realize we all fall short of doing the righteous things we so desire. As human beings we fail to control our actions, thus mankind fights one another and allows greed and power to be the primary goal in humanity. Religion does have a long way to go , but it is humanity's only device to get further along into evolution.

    By religion, populations have missionaries where people helping other people that are poor, sick and in dismal war-torn areas. Religions do come with danger, because there are many that seek to destroy any gains by religion. Persecution and ridicule is common among the religious by people who have problems with religions. Religions against other religions are common, but in most of the world religions work together for a common goal increasing humanity's freedom and preventing death from disease and poor areas. Most of all there is the enjoyment of knowing a deity (GOD) and the Words laid down throughout history. In knowing God and having faith in the promises, many non-religious find these religious people very stubborn and wielding a formidable spirit of doing their God's Work. Above all and against all, religious people do go forth into danger and peril, but one thing stands out, they are blessed by the Holy Spirit and stand for righteousness to the best they can do. God will know their true heart and no non-religious person can ever speak against them.

    So, in answering the crux of this post, religion and politics do mix, which is the difficulty in bringing so many different people together. They all have their own ideas of how political party candidates vote and agree on anything. Having religion in the mix is better than not. Without religion, politics wouldn't care about the environment, your taxes, education, jobs, employment, benefits, health care and so on. Without religion, there would be utter chaos with more greed and power ruling the day and having no justice. There would be the strongest will survive character and no thought on the poor and under privileged sick or not, job or not. Yes, religion is needed in politics, just that America does not allow any religious thought over-rule another. That is wrong and humanity has not evolved enough to even consider it as possible. One day, maybe!
  • Liberal
    Other Party
    Llos Angeles, CA
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Although there are some historical events that brand religion as being cause and effect to inhumane treatment, just how does society gage what one person does to another? How can human beings relate to one another without a conscious thought of sacrifice, help and aid to other people? Where do the laws or regulations come from that provide the measurement of how people relate to one another. Without religion there is nothing but anarchy and people doing what they "feel" best to one another. Steal, kill, maim, rape, and do whatever pleases you, that is anarchy. Religion has given mankind conscious thought and cause to think about what you are about to do before you hurt another human being. With that being said, I realize we all fall short of doing the righteous things we so desire. As human beings we fail to control our actions, thus mankind fights one another and allows greed and power to be the primary goal in humanity. Religion does have a long way to go , but it is humanity's only device to get further along into evolution.

    By religion, populations have missionaries where people helping other people that are poor, sick and in dismal war-torn areas. Religions do come with danger, because there are many that seek to destroy any gains by religion. Persecution and ridicule is common among the religious by people who have problems with religions. Religions against other religions are common, but in most of the world religions work together for a common goal increasing humanity's freedom and preventing death from disease and poor areas. Most of all there is the enjoyment of knowing a deity (GOD) and the Words laid down throughout history. In knowing God and having faith in the promises, many non-religious find these religious people very stubborn and wielding a formidable spirit of doing their God's Work. Above all and against all, religious people do go forth into danger and peril, but one thing stands out, they are blessed by the Holy Spirit and stand for righteousness to the best they can do. God will know their true heart and no non-religious person can ever speak against them.

    So, in answering the crux of this post, religion and politics do mix, which is the difficulty in bringing so many different people together. They all have their own ideas of how political party candidates vote and agree on anything. Having religion in the mix is better than not. Without religion, politics wouldn't care about the environment, your taxes, education, jobs, employment, benefits, health care and so on. Without religion, there would be utter chaos with more greed and power ruling the day and having no justice. There would be the strongest will survive character and no thought on the poor and under privileged sick or not, job or not. Yes, religion is needed in politics, just that America does not allow any religious thought over-rule another. That is wrong and humanity has not evolved enough to even consider it as possible. One day, maybe!
    This is the most outrageous nonsense I have ever seen you post. The measurement of how people relate to one another is based on the self. What I wouldn't want you to do to me. Example: The TEN Commandments.
    Religion has given mankind a conscience? Yup, your'e correct....millions murdered, billions in plunder....and the jury's still out of how many alter boys.

    Have a great Pagan Thanksgiving
  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AMC you really have to get out of the house more often! Your premise that without religion we would all act as violent animals is so outrageous and false that it's hard to understand how an intelligent person could even consider it. This is the basis religion uses to justify their existence (along with eternal life), nothing more. Start doing yourself a favor by reading up on other forms of society and civilization as a whole and stop making a public fool of yourself - you are smarter than that I hope!
  • Independent
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Although there are some historical events that brand religion as being cause and effect to inhumane treatment, just how does society gage what one person does to another? How can human beings relate to one another without a conscious thought of sacrifice, help and aid to other people? Where do the laws or regulations come from that provide the measurement of how people relate to one another. Without religion there is nothing but anarchy and people doing what they "feel" best to one another. Steal, kill, maim, rape, and do whatever pleases you, that is anarchy. Religion has given mankind conscious thought and cause to think about what you are about to do before you hurt another human being. With that being said, I realize we all fall short of doing the righteous things we so desire. As human beings we fail to control our actions, thus mankind fights one another and allows greed and power to be the primary goal in humanity. Religion does have a long way to go , but it is humanity's only device to get further along into evolution.

    By religion, populations have missionaries where people helping other people that are poor, sick and in dismal war-torn areas. Religions do come with danger, because there are many that seek to destroy any gains by religion. Persecution and ridicule is common among the religious by people who have problems with religions. Religions against other religions are common, but in most of the world religions work together for a common goal increasing humanity's freedom and preventing death from disease and poor areas. Most of all there is the enjoyment of knowing a deity (GOD) and the Words laid down throughout history. In knowing God and having faith in the promises, many non-religious find these religious people very stubborn and wielding a formidable spirit of doing their God's Work. Above all and against all, religious people do go forth into danger and peril, but one thing stands out, they are blessed by the Holy Spirit and stand for righteousness to the best they can do. God will know their true heart and no non-religious person can ever speak against them.

    So, in answering the crux of this post, religion and politics do mix, which is the difficulty in bringing so many different people together. They all have their own ideas of how political party candidates vote and agree on anything. Having religion in the mix is better than not. Without religion, politics wouldn't care about the environment, your taxes, education, jobs, employment, benefits, health care and so on. Without religion, there would be utter chaos with more greed and power ruling the day and having no justice. There would be the strongest will survive character and no thought on the poor and under privileged sick or not, job or not. Yes, religion is needed in politics, just that America does not allow any religious thought over-rule another. That is wrong and humanity has not evolved enough to even consider it as possible. One day, maybe!
    how does society gauge what one person does to another? by laws. life, liberty and property which jefferson modified to the pursuit of happiness although there is discussion over why he meant by happiness.

    how can humans relate to each other without a conscious thought of sacrifice, help and aid to other people? perhaps this is rhetorical? ask the jews. tribalism has been around a lot longer than christianity or even judaism. people relate to each other based upon successively upward and outward rings of connection. for example: family, extended family, friends, tribe/community, religion or lack thereof, (in the case of the u.s) state, nation-state, humanity. as the rings expand connection becomes increasingly tenuous.

    you are right to fear anarchy. but anarchy is described/defined as follows:

    a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

    but also as:

    absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.

    as for missionaries an interesting concept. who are they to impose their belief system on indigenous peoples? we have the following from mckinley in the aftermath of the spanish-cuban-american war:

    "(3) That we could not leave them to themselves-they were unfit for self-government, and they would soon have anarchy and misrule worse then Spain's was; and

    (4) That there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them and by God's grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow men for whom Christ also died."

    here is the link:

    http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=1257

    a minor problem with mckinley's position which was made as a political decision was the philippines had been christianized by the spaniards. mckinley was using the cloak of religion to justify a very violent political act.

    you made an assertion that most religions work together for the common goal of increasing humanity's freedom. an astounding assertion for which i will ask you to provide some evidence. humans work together in some instances to increase humanity's freedom. their motives may derive from a variety of places. religion demands that you believe as the religion requires. don't believe it? look at the back of the mass guides in a roman church. if you are not roman you can not receive eucharist. you must believe in the manner they determine else you are (without them actually saying it) less than human. how many died when protestants and catholics waged war upon each other precisely because either side was deemed "the other" and as such less than human? how many sunnis and sh'ias have died? how many hindi and muslims? how many animists who refused to be "converted" to the "true faith?"

    you make another assertion that without a religious belief structure no one would care about the environment. the very foundational writings of judaism and christianity state that man is to subdue and have dominion over the world. man can in no way subdue or dominate nature. man can inflict actions upon the environment but nature will be here long after man is gone. and what of the atheist who works for a clean environment or helps those in need?

    as for having religion in the mix bringing people together such a position isn't supported by the evidence. i have no wish to have my belief structure be co-opted or compromised by those who are the pharisaical right yet that same pharisaical right would impose their belief structure upon others.

    and which religious thought do you hope will one day rule over another? such thought is anathema to the concept of religious freedom.

    your position is one of naive arrogance.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    pr Wrote: AMC you really have to get out of the house more often! Your premise that without religion we would all act as violent animals is so outrageous and false that it's hard to understand how an intelligent person could even consider it. This is the basis religion uses to justify their existence (along with eternal life), nothing more. Start doing yourself a favor by reading up on other forms of society and civilization as a whole and stop making a public fool of yourself - you are smarter than that I hope!
    Absolutely correct stated PGR; I guess AMC does not realize that this globe and its "started from nothing" people lived for millions of years without religion. When religion started it was certainly not the "baby" who we, present day stupid people, declare to be a "god". In those days no one wrote "bibles" etc., but still made certain rules, or the plain animal rules, like if you breach my territory I'll eat you alive. So the earliest people automatically instated rules to keep the species alive. The ridiculous society we live in right now has way too many rules; anyone should know by now that "killing' is a bad thing, without consulting "bibles" or Mozes. Again I state that "religion" is the curse of humanity; it serves no other purpose than to rule and indoctrinate in pure nonsense. Any healthy thinking person can live without it. The most ridiculous part is that there are and have been so many different religions,which already proves that no one knows what the "universe" is realy about, so why bother. Then the statement of AMC that missionaries do good work; wow!, without realizing that they are the ones who cause the wars, because their help is a cover-up to spread "our" religion in countries who have already another religion; so they set the stage to get war. Nuts.
    Especially the total arrogance of the "Christian" as well "Muslim" religions that they are the only one's who got it right, while there are plenty of other religions around who do not promote theirs so much as these two. So that creates wars and will continue till the end of the world as we know it.
    But all of this is "god's will and in "god" we trust; laughable; the poor "whatever up there" has no notion of what people arrange for it all the time. Certainly the X-Mas "human" baby is long dead and will not help anyone, even if you pray all day to the walls of your house; the universe just goes its own way with or without people or religion; it would laugh all the time about our own created pityfull circus on this tiny globe.
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The walk that one takes in any religion is a long and hard road of persecution and ridicule. You could parallel the thought of religion to that of non-religious thinking in that it mimics similar goals, but without order and laws to prevent a person in doing what they desire to do to others, regardless of rather it is right or wrong. History has taught the masses in establishing laws and rules to live by and just where did that come from? Religion, of course! Rather you believe or don't believe our religions in the world have already produced our background to further enlightenment. Now, people al over the world bicker and destroy each other because they believe something different or have opposing goals in life. Some choose "power" and those that yield the most power wins. Some choose greed and accumulate enormous amounts of wealth and material and those with the most, wins. I often say to my wife where I enjoy my favorite toy shop, "the hardware stores", the one with the most tools when he dies.....wins.

    Religion has produced many leaders in the past and those that stand out are champions for the poor and sick. These crusaders of their religious belief moves millions into the fold of God believing and faith abundance. Ghandi, Jesus, Budda, Mohammand, Mother Teresa, and thousands others have promoted a faith in God for a journey into a religion. I believe Jesus as the Son of God, which is my Savior and walk into faith. Others believe who they desire to believe or have had a experience that changed their disbelief. I studied Buddhism and learned that it was started by a person and an enlightenment occurred to where people believe in his deity. Christianity, Islam, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhism, and more religion to choose from have all got their roots to where people join together as a society. In this society, evolution takes place and from religions beginnings even the ancient Greek philosophers have their roots in some form of religion that contributed to their philosophy.

    Society is in continuous evolution, but you can thank religion for contributing to the laws, rules, regulations and mannerisms that take place in politics and in life. Is religion the only answer? That is difficult to respond with because people so carelessly do not follow their religion correctly and interpret the truth of teachings falsely. The simplest answer is "Love your neighbor as you would want him to love you" and the greatest trait in anybody's character is "Love beyond anything else". We all fail miserably at this...........even me. As people evolve past this bickering and disagreement in beliefs , society will eventually move in the "Right" direction. At the moment, humanity is moving in oblique circles, backward more than forward is often the course.

    So to answer the disbelief in religion, than ask yourself, "Do you treasure love and humility as your gift to humanity?" Most religions preach this standard to their patrons of faith, so why don't disbelievers do likewise? Politics and religion must be joined at the hip, thus we can pursue humanity together instead of what we currently do.........war, famine, poor, greed, cheating, lying, corruption, evil, and all tendencies that make people fight one another. The Biblical story of Cain and Able throughout history has produced many wars, deaths and put people against one another is just an example of how far humanity has come. That story is over three thousand years old. Humanity sure doesn't evolve very fast, does it?
  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    "So to answer the disbelief in religion, than ask yourself, "Do you treasure love and humility as your gift to humanity?" Most religions preach this standard to their patrons of faith, so why don't disbelievers do likewise"

    Where do you come up with these ridicules accusations? Put your bilble and superstitions down for a moment and start thinking clearly for yourself, NOT mindlessly repeating the fables you have been programmed to believe! Like it or not, believe it or not, religion has nothing to do with honesty, caring, loving or peace but everything to do with power, mind control and violence. There are many books and sources out there that can start to explain to you why you believe what you believe and the dangers and ignorance that comes from those beliefs.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AMC, sure you are still in la la land and believe that everyone going to whatever church is only good and sweet and has no other motives. We call that in Dutchyland "naive"
    The other thing as you said makes absolute no sense whatsoever: Quote: The Biblical story of Cain and Able throughout history has produced many wars, deaths and put people against one another is just an example of how far humanity has come. That story is over three thousand years old. Humanity sure doesn't evolve very fast, does it? "Unquote (or do you mean McCain? they must be related)

    First of all you finally admit this is just a "story"; thus not the thruth. Second you say that story is over 3000 years old. Wow, sorry this earth is millions of years old, thus if they were the first humans on this clump of lava, then you must think this tiny planet is only a few thousand years old, you must be kidding;(even the Pope believes now in evolution) then on top of it if this guy killed his brother, while his father had very close contact with "the whatever up there" because this "whatever" "created" him and dropped him and Eve into "paradise" (molten lava?) , then if the "whatever" indeed is "holy" then it should have told this family "thou shall not kill", so like you said this is just a story, which makes your "book" a story book only. People in la la land love this I guess.