Religion shoud be outlawed

[MJinZ]

Modern government is not a religion that demands deference from all. You are still mistaking my claim that government is a religion to mean that it is a religion in exactly the same form of the religions that preceded it. All it demands is the right to tax, the right to set the rules whereby anyone can oppose it, and the right to color a piece of a map, and have this jurisdiction respected by the other state religions of the world. Come to think of it, that's not really all that different from more overtly religious governments except that western governments have figured out that they probably won't get killed by the citizens if they leave legislating certain kinds of superstition alone. Something about wealthy people seems to make them value that tiny extra bit of "freedom". Let people choose which talisman they kiss at night and they probably won't ask why exactly they need to pay money to have rich people tell them which herbs they can put in their brownies without a SWAT team accidentally killing their grandmother.

Also it's a shame you know so few members of the military.

Hah, you're right. I know nobody in the military, though I had that in mind when formulating the argument.

The thing about most modern governments is that taxes are levied by those around you - aka society. The governments do it in order to benefit society, on the whole, not to enrich a select group of people.

The reality is that corruption can have that exact effect, but blaming it on the governments itself is like blaming psychopaths on the fact they that they are human.

The thing I don't get is why people who argue like you do treat governments as if they are a separate entity from the people?

Well, no. The Military is composed of the people. The police is composed of the people. All of those people have civilian familes and friends, and those same families and friends also make up the civilian branches of government.

The government is, and should be, a reflection of the makeup of the people. And one with higher/elite qualifications than the regular joe plumber at that, for very good reasons.

I think that treating governments as representative of religions is reflective of the person indeed - a distrust of those around you that lies deep within the psyche. Whether this lack of "faith" is warranted or not, really, I think depends on the quality of makeup of a society indeed.

 

[MJinZ]

Humanity has been struggling to rise from the slime for a million years. Everything you are, every penny you earn, every bit of knowledge you have acquired you owe to the struggle and work of millions of others. What you pay is a small price for not having to swinging from trees, no?

Agreed.

This is the crux of why I disagree/do not like most conservatives.

They all believe everything is about ME ME ME and they deserve every penny they've ever earned, and nobody should take a piece away from them.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think that treating governments as representative of religions is reflective of the person indeed - a distrust of those around you that lies deep within the psyche. Whether this lack of "faith" is warranted or not, really, I think depends on the quality of makeup of a society indeed.

Yet there are many which distrust those who are religious. That seems to be something which lies in the psyche of the beholder as well.

I think this all depends on the quality of the people involved. A corrupt religious leader is no better or worse than a corrupt government in principle, but in our society only one can take your property, life or liberty with impunity. If you think not, try not going to church and not paying your taxes. See which lands you in Hell faster.

 

[MJinZ]

Yet there are many which distrust those who are religious. That seems to be something which lies in the psyche of the beholder as well.

I think this all depends on the quality of the people involved. A corrupt religious leader is no better or worse than a corrupt government in principle, but in our society only one can take your property, life or liberty with impunity. If you think not, try not going to church and not paying your taxes. See which lands you in Hell faster.

We have Lawyers for that.

Exorcists... don't work as well.

 

[CycloWizard]

According to this:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr139.pdf

Youse folks in Missouri are already taking MY tax dollars...that negates your rant about "taking my money and giving it to someone else."

You really can't string three thoughts together without completely changing the topic, huh? Disappointing, but hardly unexpected.

 

[BoomerD]

You really can't string three thoughts together without completely changing the topic, huh? Disappointing, but hardly unexpected.

Gee perfesser...I diddint no I wuz ritin no essay...BUT, it's NOT changing the topic, in fact, it's perfectly on topic...it's all about "That big nasty gubment taking my money and giving it to someone else."

 

[CycloWizard]

Humanity has been struggling to rise from the slime for a million years. Everything you are, every penny you earn, every bit of knowledge you have acquired you owe to the struggle and work of millions of others. What you pay is a small price for not having to swinging from trees, no?

Are you really going to claim that I owe you everything I earn over my lifetime by virtue of an infinite, unpayable debt to a bunch of dead guys? You've contributed absolutely nothing to my life genetically, economically, socially, physically, emotionally, or mentally. You have not poured my coffee for the countless all-nighters of grad school. You have not spent countless nights solving complex problems while lying in bed unable to sleep. Therefore, I have a better idea: drag your lazy ass off the couch and do something of value for someone so they pay you. You have no claim to anything I've achieved or earned in my lifetime, nor do I have any claim to yours. I owe you nothing for the non-contributions you've made to what I've become. If I decide, out of the goodness of my heart, guilt of my conscience, or whatever else, to send a few bucks your way, count your blessing, but you have no right to delude yourself into thinking that you have in any way earned such a contribution from anyone.

 

[CycloWizard]

Gee perfesser...I diddint no I wuz ritin no essay...BUT, it's NOT changing the topic, in fact, it's perfectly on topic...it's all about "That big nasty gubment taking my money and giving it to someone else."

It was YOUR idea that government should take money from some people and redistribute it according to some inherently arbitrary criteria. In your next post, you are blaming me because your system is already in place. I'm pretty sure at this point that you don't know what the topic is.

 

[CycloWizard]

Agreed.

This is the crux of why I disagree/do not like most conservatives.

They all believe everything is about ME ME ME and they deserve every penny they've ever earned, and nobody should take a piece away from them.

I said it to Moonbeam and I'll say it to you:

Are you really going to claim that I owe you everything I earn over my lifetime by virtue of an infinite, unpayable debt to a bunch of dead guys? You've contributed absolutely nothing to my life genetically, economically, socially, physically, emotionally, or mentally. You have not poured my coffee for the countless all-nighters of grad school. You have not spent countless nights solving complex problems while lying in bed unable to sleep. Therefore, I have a better idea: drag your lazy ass off the couch and do something of value for someone so they pay you. You have no claim to anything I've achieved or earned in my lifetime, nor do I have any claim to yours. I owe you nothing for the non-contributions you've made to what I've become. If I decide, out of the goodness of my heart, guilt of my conscience, or whatever else, to send a few bucks your way, count your blessing, but you have no right to delude yourself into thinking that you have in any way earned such a contribution from anyone.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

We have Lawyers for that.

Exorcists... don't work as well.

If the government wants you, lawyers won't help. Ask Jose Padilla. You see, that the common thing between many in organized religion and government seek the same thing and that is power. The nature of that is entirely different however. Jimmy Swaggart can trick people into giving him money. He cannot lock you up.

That does not mean that government OR religion is inherently good or evil. What it does mean is that it is wise to be wary of "salvation" preached by either when the "preacher" benefits.

 

[nonlnear]

The thing about most modern governments is that taxes are levied by those around you - aka society.

No, taxes are levied by an incredibly small minority of society. The vast majority of society doesn't much care about taxes one way or another as long as they are hidden from view. "Society" does not want to govern. They have a dream of governance, and as long as they are allowed to dream that dream they are content to remain ignorant of the nightmare lurking beneath the dome.

The governments do it in order to benefit society, on the whole, not to enrich a select group of people.

I find it baffling to think that you don't actually realize that you are reciting mythology as fact.

The reality is that corruption can have that exact effect, but blaming it on the governments itself is like blaming psychopaths on the fact they that they are human.

I wasn't laying blame. I was simply observing the structure for what it is.

The thing I don't get is why people who argue like you do treat governments as if they are a separate entity from the people?

I don't. Governments, like all religions, are the people. (No Moonbeam, I don't mean this in quite the same sense that you say it... ) Religion is what people do whenever they invent an abstracted reason to enforce their will on their neighbors. Whether that reason is a fairy tale in a book a couple millennia old, or a fairy tale on a parchment a couple centuries old doesn't make much difference to me. The premise for collectivized mandatory authority is an abstraction - a myth - promulgated by a clergy caste. How it is that people insist the specific form of the myth makes one form of this virtually universal institution somehow above the religious fray is beyond me. In fact, I quite firmly believe that those who claim the existence of a secular state to be the most devoutly religious of all. It takes a good deal of faith in one's convictions to believe away the fact that those convictions require faith in the first place. At least the openly religious statists maintain a tiny shred of self-awareness!

Well, no. The Military is composed of the people. The police is composed of the people. All of those people have civilian familes and friends, and those same families and friends also make up the civilian branches of government.

The government is, and should be, a reflection of the makeup of the people. And one with higher/elite qualifications than the regular joe plumber at that, for very good reasons.

I think that treating governments as representative of religions is reflective of the person indeed - a distrust of those around you that lies deep within the psyche. Whether this lack of "faith" is warranted or not, really, I think depends on the quality of makeup of a society indeed.

I don't understand why you think I am arguing against government. I am only arguing against an almost universal misconception of the nature of government. I happen to believe that certain of the ridiculous fairy tales we tell ourselves are actually useful - as aspirational values. The Rule of Law is a wonderful fairy tale. We would do well to continue to pursue it. Of course we don't have it as long as mass murderers like Don Blankenship are able to buy state supreme court justices but, as Miley Cyrus says, "It's the climb." I feel similarly about many of the founding values of the USA. I do not surrender my faculties to them by "believing" in them. They do not "exist".

I think part of the problem with what you are reading into my posts (quite reasonably I might add) is that the tone of the OP is representative of many atheists: that anything "religious" is inferior. I don't share that vanity. Humans are religious, and use this religious belief in the need for centralized authority to organize themselves. I see (limited) use in that structure. However I also see it for what it is. I don't feel the need to deny the obvious just to preserve some ridiculous vanity about being "above" religion. I reject those religious structures I find distasteful without apology, and I retain those religious structures I find useful without apology.

I generally approach life as a grand farce full of cockamamie bullshit which people praise as gems and gems treated as shit. I look around a library and see a lot of kindling. I aspire to burn every idea I come across to see what's left. Usually there isn't much but ashes and smoke, but occasionally there is a moment of clarity. Take a modern theologian's meaning of "myth", take a historical long view of the relationship between political and religious power (no, not just in the west as you accused me of being too narrowly focused on, but in the tribal depths of the Amazon, Africa, Asia, and everywhere else), toss in the hilarious parallels between the Bush/Gore lawsuits and the tussles over papal succession, and the comical religiosity with which the various state liturgies are performed (ZOMG! Justice Roberts might have stumbled over the sacred incantation! We must pronounce the words of power before the church government will function!), light a match, and an interesting gem is left in the ashes. Government is a religion - just as it always has been. Yes, it has changed - evolved even, but it is not suddenly irreligious simply because it ejected the more elaborate superstitions from its purview.

 

[Zorkorist]

I'm glad to see that thoughts overtook the bashing of me, OP.

FWIW, I posted this Friday night and then the Forum goes down, in the middle of Friday Night. Go figure.

Some great posts above, particularly from Moonbeam, whom I think is the Plato to my Socrates.

The only thing I have to say is that, again, Religion is a Government, and our Government does it better.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

For the folks that said I was throwing Free Speech out the window...

Well our Government grants free speech. Does your Religion?

Say, "Hell Yeah!"

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

I can see where Religion might be called, Free Speech, and I guess I am not against that, but for sure society needs to recognize how fucked up Religion is.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Someone else above, likened my thoughts to Communist Russia, and I realize that. It is what I am asking for... a Godless Society, ruled by Government.

But I believe it is a better thing, even knowing that.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

There's little left to argue when Religion, and America come face to face.

-John

 

[RavenSEAL]

"Freedom of Religion"

That means you can be anything you'd like to be, or nothing at all. Pretty simple really...If someone doesn't like it, you can kick their ass or take them to court. It's in the constitution.

 

[Zorkorist]

Of course, the Religious aren't free. That's why Religion needs to be banned, so that they can all take advantage of what America has to offer.

-John

 

[woolfe9999]

No, taxes are levied by an incredibly small minority of society. The vast majority of society doesn't much care about taxes one way or another as long as they are hidden from view. "Society" does not want to govern. They have a dream of governance, and as long as they are allowed to dream that dream they are content to remain ignorant of the nightmare lurking beneath the dome.
I find it baffling to think that you don't actually realize that you are reciting mythology as fact.
I wasn't laying blame. I was simply observing the structure for what it is.
I don't. Governments, like all religions, are the people. (No Moonbeam, I don't mean this in quite the same sense that you say it... ) Religion is what people do whenever they invent an abstracted reason to enforce their will on their neighbors. Whether that reason is a fairy tale in a book a couple millennia old, or a fairy tale on a parchment a couple centuries old doesn't make much difference to me. The premise for collectivized mandatory authority is an abstraction - a myth - promulgated by a clergy caste. How it is that people insist the specific form of the myth makes one form of this virtually universal institution somehow above the religious fray is beyond me. In fact, I quite firmly believe that those who claim the existence of a secular state to be the most devoutly religious of all. It takes a good deal of faith in one's convictions to believe away the fact that those convictions require faith in the first place. At least the openly religious statists maintain a tiny shred of self-awareness!

I don't understand why you think I am arguing against government. I am only arguing against an almost universal misconception of the nature of government. I happen to believe that certain of the ridiculous fairy tales we tell ourselves are actually useful - as aspirational values. The Rule of Law is a wonderful fairy tale. We would do well to continue to pursue it. Of course we don't have it as long as mass murderers like Don Blankenship are able to buy state supreme court justices but, as Miley Cyrus says, "It's the climb." I feel similarly about many of the founding values of the USA. I do not surrender my faculties to them by "believing" in them. They do not "exist".

I think part of the problem with what you are reading into my posts (quite reasonably I might add) is that the tone of the OP is representative of many atheists: that anything "religious" is inferior. I don't share that vanity. Humans are religious, and use this religious belief in the need for centralized authority to organize themselves. I see (limited) use in that structure. However I also see it for what it is. I don't feel the need to deny the obvious just to preserve some ridiculous vanity about being "above" religion. I reject those religious structures I find distasteful without apology, and I retain those religious structures I find useful without apology.

I generally approach life as a grand farce full of cockamamie bullshit which people praise as gems and gems treated as shit. I look around a library and see a lot of kindling. I aspire to burn every idea I come across to see what's left. Usually there isn't much but ashes and smoke, but occasionally there is a moment of clarity. Take a modern theologian's meaning of "myth", take a historical long view of the relationship between political and religious power (no, not just in the west as you accused me of being too narrowly focused on, but in the tribal depths of the Amazon, Africa, Asia, and everywhere else), toss in the hilarious parallels between the Bush/Gore lawsuits and the tussles over papal succession, and the comical religiosity with which the various state liturgies are performed (ZOMG! Justice Roberts might have stumbled over the sacred incantation! We must pronounce the words of power before the church government will function!), light a match, and an interesting gem is left in the ashes. Government is a religion - just as it always has been. Yes, it has changed - evolved even, but it is not suddenly irreligious simply because it ejected the more elaborate superstitions from its purview.

I don't envy you and your post-modern nihilism and negationism. I gave that up a long time ago. I don't pretend that life isn't filled with "cockamamie bullshit." I just ignore it unless it is important not to. Just be a pragmatist or you'll eventually go insane.

- wolf

 

[Linflas]

For the folks that said I was throwing Free Speech out the window...

Well our Government grants free speech. Does your Religion?

Say, "Hell Yeah!"

-John

You have it backwards and in the process hit on one of the things that has so many people reading and discussing the founding documents of this country. The most important principle this country was founded on was that people are born with inalienable rights. The Constitution is nothing more than a list of enumerated powers we the people grant to government, the Bill of Rights is not a list of rights granted to the people by the government rather it is a list of rights so fundamental the founders insisted they be reinforced by inclusion into the Constitution. The argument against the Bill of Rights was the fear that citizens would come to believe these rights are granted by government much like your statement above.

 

[Zorkorist]

Either I am missing what you are saying, or I disagree.

At this point, today, your inalienable rights mean XYZ. IE they have been decided by Government, over and over again.

-John

 

[Linflas]

Either I am missing what you are saying, or I disagree.

At this point, today, your inalienable rights mean XYZ. IE they have been decided by Government, over and over again.

-John

1. Inalienable Rights


The government of the United States is the result of a revolution in thought. It was founded on the principle that all persons have equal rights, and that government is responsible to, and derives its powers from, a free people. To Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers, these ideas were not just a passing intellectual fad, but a recognition of something inherent in the nature of man itself. The very foundation of government, therefore, rests on the inalienable rights of the people and of each individual composing their mass. The Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson, is the fundamental statement of what government is and from what source it derives its powers. It begins with a summary of those inalienable rights that are the self-evident basis for a free society and for all the powers to protect those rights that a just government exercises.

Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government

 

[Zorkorist]

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness?

Those rights have been trounced on by Government since day one.

They are an antithesis to Government.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

While Government can provide some life, some, liberty, some, pursuit of happiness, there is no doubt that they are there to LIMIT, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Just like Religions.

But our Government is better than Religions.

Religions should be outlawed.

-John