Using Religion to Justify...

[Duo_Maxwell]

Explain.

[TomAZ]

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." (Pascal)

[cpwill]

i feel perfectly okay about my religion justifying or being my motivation for many of my acts.

for example; i tithe because of my faith.
i give to the homeless because of my faith.
i let people into traffic, and don't scream or curse at "foolish" drivers because of my faith.
i justify trying to cut temptation out of my life based on my religion.
i justify time "wasted" on others because of my religion.

etc. etc. etc.

[DRMIZER]

Originally posted by TomAZ
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." (Pascal) Took the words out of my mouth. I taught Pascal that. ;)

BTW, scares the crap out of me.

Welcome to the board!! ;)

[DRMIZER]

Originally posted by cpwill
i feel perfectly okay about my religion justifying or being my motivation for many of my acts.

for example; i tithe because of my faith.
i give to the homeless because of my faith.
i let people into traffic, and don't scream or curse at "foolish" drivers because of my faith.
i justify trying to cut temptation out of my life based on my religion.
i justify time "wasted" on others because of my religion.

etc. etc. etc. You mean you wouldn't do those things if it wasn't for religion? Shame on you.

[ranger]

Originally posted by DRMIZER
You mean you wouldn't do those things if it wasn't for religion? Shame on you.

Obviously he allows his morality as defined by his faith to lead him to do specific individual acts of charity.

The question is, Do you do all of these things and if so why?

Most "non-believers" want the government to take care of others so they don't have to.

[Duo_Maxwell]

if someone has to justify an act upon religious grounds it shows they have no logical basis for it.

[cpwill]

no, it simply shows that the religious reason is the strongest one. obviously i could try to help other's on some kind of grounds that if i ever choose to run for political office it will help me out; but i prefer to simply do it because that's what God wants me to do.

You mean you wouldn't do those things if it wasn't for religion? Shame on you.

certainly i can think of several times when i have risked or given when i would not have if it hadn't been for my religion. heck, i pick up hitchikers on the highway; no way would i do that if i didn't have God's assurance riding on my heart.

if that makes me a bad person in my heart; well then heck, all the more reason to thank God for coming into my life.

[ranger]

Originally posted by Duo_Maxwell
if someone has to justify an act upon religious grounds it shows they have no logical basis for it.

I see you dodged the questions

[Duo_Maxwell]

ranger: I wasn't going or trying to answer your question.

no, it simply shows that the religious reason is the strongest one. obviously i could try to help other's on some kind of grounds that if i ever choose to run for political office it will help me out; but i prefer to simply do it because that's what God wants me to do.

Which is ultimetly a weak argument. Because a higher power told you to is total bs. You can't prove that crap.

You run for office because you're afraid that someone worse then you will be granted power. You don't want this power in anyway but the polential for damage is too great and you feel there is no choice.

Religious fevor often brings up horrible atroicites.

[ranger]

My question was " Do you do all of these things and if so why?

Most "non-believers" want the government to take care of others so they don't have to

[mahayana]

I think this poll question is pretty wide-open. I didn't pick any of the answers.

Many religions offer approval for certain actions, disapproval for others. You get to heaven for good deeds, go to hell for sins, etc.

I often ask "what would Jesus do?" or say "Buddhists believe.." when confronted by a choice of action, so it is definitely a factor in my moral code.

But as far as others killing in the name of their religion, or promoting political things I disagree with (prayers in school, for example), then I am troubled by these justifications.

Perhaps there could be another choice, "troubles me sometimes", in the poll?

[Voice Of Reason]

As far as the poll goes, I say none of the above.........

[Simon666]

To do good things you do not need religion, all you need is a drive to do what is best for all people. Religion merely gives a higher purpose to this. Evil however, as Bin Laden and abortion clinic bombers indicate, can be most viciously committed by religious people as they place the responsability for their acts away from themselves to another person, a god. This scares the crap out of me.

[cpwill]

Originally posted by Duo_Maxwell
Which is ultimetly a weak argument. Because a higher power told you to is total bs. You can't prove that crap.

You run for office because you're afraid that someone worse then you will be granted power. You don't want this power in anyway but the polential for damage is too great and you feel there is no choice.

Religious fevor often brings up horrible atroicites.

LOL, methinks perhaps you have zero to no experience in dealing with instructions from On High;)
a weak argument? what argument is stronger than the Becuase the Omniscent All-Powerful Ruler of the Universe told you to?
because you want to "help people"? :rolleyes: gimme a break; that kind of motivation is easy to lose and weakly falls by the wayside.

people run for office because they are afraid that otherwise worse individuals might win? eh, maybe sometimes, but i'm not holding my breath when it comes to politics. as far as i'm concerned, that attitude was largely finished after Jefferson's Administration; maybe Washingtons'.

any kind of fevor can lead into horrible atrocities; but think about it; how many of these "horrible atrocities" can you name that were actually in keeping with the teachings of Jesus? for that matter, can you name any suicide-attacks which were in keeping with the teachings of muhammed?
i shall be sincerely suprised if you can.

[JustinH]

Originally posted by cpwill
LOL, methinks perhaps you have zero to no experience in dealing with instructions from On High;)
a weak argument? what argument is stronger than the Becuase the Omniscent All-Powerful Ruler of the Universe told you to?
because you want to "help people"? :rolleyes: gimme a break; that kind of motivation is easy to lose and weakly falls by the wayside.

You should read up Christianity. You do nice things because you want to, not because God told you so. If you were unwilling to do so without the guidance of God, then your intentions were completely impure.

any kind of fevor can lead into horrible atrocities; but think about it; how many of these "horrible atrocities" can you name that were actually in keeping with the teachings of Jesus? for that matter, can you name any suicide-attacks which were in keeping with the teachings of muhammed?
i shall be sincerely suprised if you can.

Huh... ever heard of the Spanish Inqusitition? Yeah I know, you're going to say "But that's no the 'true' teaches of the Bible". Maybe not to you, but it certainly was how they depicted the words. Religion has caused more death then any other single entitiy. Primarily, because the translations of religious texts over the years, are so archaic, that personal interpratation varies dramatically.

As for me, I'm Buddhist. I help people because I like to help people, not because Buddha said it was the thing to do.

[whatever]

Don't buddha always say that we should help ppl? besides buddhist believe in retribution, so if you do good it means that you either repay your dept from the life before or gain something for the next. is that not at all on your mind?

anyway what really bugs me about the use of religion is when ppl use it to justify some really nonsensical stands ( when you consider it with logics and reasons) on issues in society such as abortion and homosexuality and in some part of the world the basic rights of women.

[JustinH]

Buddha says helping people is good yes, but there is something far more important: intentions. If your intentions are impure (you do it because Buddha said you should) then it would be like not doing it at all. You have to do good things because you want to.

As for your last paragraph, I agree completely. But it won't change, as we see a conservative Christian push to get more and more religion in politics.

[mahayana]

One of the things I like best about Zen Buddhism is the lack of doctrine. Prayer is just sitting, and emptying the mind.

My take on Mahayana Buddhism is making a religion out of service to others. And striving to become enlightened, for the sake of all living things.

I honor all the boddhisatvas, and am constantly looking for those still walking among us!

[JustinH]

I know little of Zend Buddhism. Basically, what I've read. I still have much to learn as I am a recent convert. I know much more abou Vajrayana, since that is what originally interested me in Buddhism.

I'd say the hardest part is being in a retirement town. Not many Buddhists here, so I have to drive 30 miles to get to a meditation center.

[mahayana]

Whatever- you mentioned that Buddhists believe in retribution; this idea can probably be traced to Hinduism. In India, a strict caste system exists to this day, based on the concepts of dharma and reincarnation.

In other words, these religious ideas severely limit what a person is allowed to do in life, and you are told that you will have another life which is better or worse depending on your adherance to the laws. Very conservative.

Buddhists that I know do believe in karma, more the idea that you "reap what you sow' or "what goes around comes around," not that you are scoring points for heaven or hell or lifting yourself up in some reincarnation scheme.

Meditation is really for finding inner peace, and a "good" Buddhist is one who works to alleviate suffering.

[JustinH]

Sorry, but who was that directed at?

[mahayana]

It was for the member called "whatever", 6 posts up.

Sorry for confusing you!

Hindus use religion to justify a whole social system; Buddhists are more concerned with compassion.

[JustinH]

No problem :D... I don't know much about Hinduism, what I do know is less then appealing. Their class system seems pretty oppressive...

That's what I love about Buddhism... the religion doesn't concern itself with "who's better". It's far more important to help others achieve other goals... reminds me of a story.

Two Buddhist Monks are walking along a shore, they come to an old women who needs to cross. The first Monk refuses and crosses the river, the second carries the women across.

As the Monks continue their journey the first monk turns to the second and said "You shouldn't have done that, it's against the precepts to touch a women." The second monk replies "Yes it is against the precepts, but it is you who is still carrying the women on your back."

The idea that helping others is even more important then the most rigid of Theravada precepts truly shows that the purpose of Buddhism is to care, and not to do whatever you can to get to a better place.

[Trool]

Huh... ever heard of the Spanish Inqusitition? Yeah I know, you're going to say "But that's no the 'true' teaches of the Bible". Maybe not to you, but it certainly was how they depicted the words.

Couldn't agree more. I also think that it's not just the past depictions, but it can still be justifiable under current teachings. From what I know of Christianity all it takes to get into heaven is to believe in Christ and by not believing one is doomed to hell. If that is the corner stone of it then it seems like it's the duty of every Christian to get people to turn to god. And if they do not turn to god then it's alright to kill them and prevent them from making more unchristian babies...i know this is very very extreme, but it could be a justifiable argument used during the Spanish Inquisition.

But I think that's the ugly face of Christianity, I also think it has done a LOT of good for the world in general. I know a lot of people who are Christians and they couldn't be better people. I also know people who have found god in the Christian faith and are now much better people then before. I don't think at it's core Christianity or any religion for that matter is bad, but sometimes the people who are in power use it to commit horrific things.

[cpwill]

Originally posted by JustinH
You should read up Christianity. You do nice things because you want to, not because God told you so. If you were unwilling to do so without the guidance of God, then your intentions were completely impure.

i am a christian, and probably more educated on my religion than most of my peers (i can take you right from the yawheist/elohimist traditions through the deuteronomistic historian right up to the debate over the author of Collossians). and yes, there have been several times when i would have been afraid to do kind things without the reassurance of God's touch. if you can understand this then it is evident that you have never actually been willing to acknowledge the presence of a Living God.

Huh... ever heard of the Spanish Inqusitition? Yeah I know, you're going to say "But that's no the 'true' teaches of the Bible". Maybe not to you, but it certainly was how they depicted the words. Religion has caused more death then any other single entitiy. Primarily, because the translations of religious texts over the years, are so archaic, that personal interpratation varies dramatically.

read the new testatment and please point out to me where Jesus tells his followers to torture those who do not follow the state-approved religion as a means of maintaining political control. you are mistaking people who use religion to justify their own actions with the religion itself.

As for me, I'm Buddhist. I help people because I like to help people, not because Buddha said it was the thing to do.

good for you.

[Simon666]

Originally posted by cpwill
read the new testatment and please point out to me where Jesus tells his followers to torture those who do not follow the state-approved religion as a means of maintaining political control. you are mistaking people who use religion to justify their own actions with the religion itself.
But where lies the responsability cpwill, with the man who brainwashed someone to act evil, with the doctrine used to brainwash that person and/or with the person who acts evil? I say with all.

[JustinH]

Originally posted by cpwill
i am a christian, and probably more educated on my religion than most of my peers (i can take you right from the yawheist/elohimist traditions through the deuteronomistic historian right up to the debate over the author of Collossians). and yes, there have been several times when i would have been afraid to do kind things without the reassurance of God's touch. if you can understand this then it is evident that you have never actually been willing to acknowledge the presence of a Living God.

First of all, tame your ego. If you think you know more about the topic then most of your "peers" then you are obviously mistaken. Second, you would have been "afraid to do kind things" without God there? That makes you a very small person in my view. You need God there to tell you being good and nice is a good thing? Truly pathetic... I don't need your "Living God" to tell me to be nice, I do so because I want to.

Now in accordance to your little statement, I'm going to hell because I don't believe in God and I treat people nicely because I want to. But you are going to heaven because you do believe in God, and treat people nicely not because you want to, but because God told you to? Honestly, that's a fairly twisted view of Christianity, and I sincerely doubt your "peers" who know far less then you would disagree with that.

read the new testatment and please point out to me where Jesus tells his followers to torture those who do not follow the state-approved religion as a means of maintaining political control. you are mistaking people who use religion to justify their own actions with the religion itself.

WHAT? Ahh... you are one of those blinded by faith people aren't you? If you sincerely believe that crap, then you haven't read up on a single war in the last 1000 years or so... they all used religion and God to justify their actions (this includes Hilter).

Oh, and you must read Aramaic then right? Because unless you can, you've never once read the bible in it's true form, you've read it after it was translated several hundred times. And simply replacing adjectives would truly change the whole objective of a passage.

good for you.

Get off your high-horse and educate yourself. I would honestly have to say, judging by this post, you know little of Christianity, or the history of it. I however, have done much studying on the topic and really understand the impact that religion can have on people. And I'm not even a Christian.

[Captain America]

You really have some valid observations Justin. Too bad they are lost in all the venom. C'mon bro. Make ya mama proud. We're all friends here. Celibrate diversity and respect the time other people offer you. I do.

[Simon666]

Originally posted by JustinH
WHAT? Ahh... you are one of those blinded by faith people aren't you? If you sincerely believe that crap, then you haven't read up on a single war in the last 1000 years or so... they all used religion and God to justify their actions (this includes Hilter).
Not Hitler, although he believed a higher force protected him, he was not christian nor did he use religion to justify his actions. Besides Jews, also Jehova's witnesses and some catholic priests found their death under Hitler.

[JustinH]

Originally posted by Captain America
You really have some valid observations Justin. Too bad they are lost in all the venom. C'mon bro. Make ya mama proud. We're all friends here. Celibrate diversity and respect the time other people offer you. I do.

I in no way disrespect altering views. I mean, I'm a Buddhist married to a Mormon, my whole life is a different view :D. But this stuff:

probably more educated on my religion than most of my peers
you have never actually been willing to acknowledge the presence of a Living God.
good for you.

That simply bugs me. I've worked very hard to study all aspects of religion, from Catholiscm to Nordic Gods. But instead of coming up with a valid response, he insinuates that I know less then him, that I've never acknolwedged the possibility of God and gives me a short "good for you" when I explain my perspective... so yes, my post was a bit venomous, but sometimes I get more then frustrated when a person thinks their almighty knowledge is greater then everyone elses...

[mahayana]

Another interesting sub-topic

I will look, but in one of the biographies I read, it was mentioned that Adolf was the illegitimate son of Maria Schicklgruber, an Austrian servant girl who later married a man whose last name was Hitler.

His mother raised him Catholic, and wanted him to become a priest. The doctrine that the Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus was taught to him as a child.

I've never heard what religious views he held as an adult, just that he was a vegetarian. Anyone have more info?

Is anyone disputing that Germany, a Christian nation, started both World Wars?

[Simon666]

Whenever Hitler comes up, it is best to search what Ian Kershaw or other experts have to say. I found this in a comment on Kershaw's work:

It is a significant lacuna in Kershaw's book that he has nothing to report on Hitler' s religion or on his special brand of religiosity. As a thoroughly secularized scholar, Kershaw is not interested in religion. But Hitler himself was. He was born into a Roman Catholic family (mother pious and a regular church-goer, father not practising), was baptized as a baby, did his First Communion at the age of twelve, and was confirmed by the bishop of Linz, when he was sixteen. It is true that he then broke with the Roman Catholic Church and never set a foot again in a church, for whatever reason. Yet, this does not mean that he became totally irreligious. He remained a member of this Church, paying the church tax until the end of his life.

For a long time he maintained a special relationship with Jesus Christ, even to the point of identification. His mentor Eckart spoke of his `Messiah complex'. Friedrich Heer called him a prêtre malgré lui (in his Der Glaube des Adolf Hitler, München, 1968, a book that is significanly never mentioned by Kershaw). He so often concluded his pre-1933 speeches with doxologies that the opposition press scathingly called him the nazi Feldprediger. It lasted until 1937 before he left the last vestiges of the Christian religion definitely behind him.

He was then already constructing a religion of his own, his `Parsifal religion'. On p. 589 of Vol. I Kershaw reports that in March 1936 the Führer returned by train from the reoccupied Rhineland to Berlin, `looking out on the furnaces of the steellmills, lighting up the night sky'. He does not tell - but he should have done this - what happened then. Hitler ordered to play the Vorspiel of Wagner's Parsifal on the portable grammophone. Listening to the indescribably beautiful opening bars in the horns, he musingly said `Aus Parsifal baue ich meine Religion', followed by `Nur im Heldengewand kann man Gott dienen'. This proves three things: 1. Hitler believed in God; 2. he had a religion of his own; 3. Parsifal was the quarry where he found the stones for his new temple. He indeed identified himself with Parsifal as the redeemer and the new Messiah. Kershaw speaks (Vol. II, 695) somewhat denigratingly about this. "Such sentiments were redolent, through a distorting mirror, of the Wagnerian redeemer-figure, a hero who alone could save the holders of the Grail, indeed the world itself, from disaster - a latter-day Parsifal." Kershaw has as little feeling for Wagner as he has for the real Hitler. If anything demonstrates that the Führer was not a power politician, it is his identifiction with Parsifal.

Source (http://home.wanadoo.nl/piet.fontaine/oth-pub/kershaw/kershaw.htm#IIIj)

It seems he constructed his own religion, based mainly upon christian belief as well as aspects of other beliefs.

[mahayana]

And Hitler did what he did, justified by his religion. Thanks, Simon, for the scholarly references.

Then again, so did Ghandi, and so does GWB.

"I had great regard for Jesus and for Christianity, until I met a few Christians." from 'The Autobiography of Mahatma Ghandi'

[Trool]

Is anyone disputing that Germany, a Christian nation, started both World Wars?

I believe WWI and II both had very meny reasons for starting and I think, at least in I, it's hard to point out who started it.

FROM: http://members.aol.com/TeacherNet/WWIFAQ.html#Q1
The physical catalyst for the start of World War I was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austrian throne, in the summer of 1914. Austria immediately accused Serbia of instigating the murders and issued an ultimatum, whereupon Russia declared her support of Serbia. Once the Russians ordered general mobilization, the Austrian, French, and German mobilization orders followed in quick succession, each triggered by the other in a domino effect. So it really started because of the conflicting national Interests; when the expansionist policy of Austria-Hungary conflicted with Serbian nationalism.

Also I believe, and I might be getting my history messed up here, at the end of WWI the nations that won imposed a LOT of restictions on Germany, many of which were harsh and unfair, also the german's weren't regarded very well around the world, I think it's only natural that a lot of them started to feel a hatered toward the rest of the world, that's what Hitler played off so well, all the hate was already there he just intensified it and consentrated it on certain classes to grab more power.

[whatever]

Originally posted by mahayana
It was for the member called "whatever", 6 posts up.

Sorry for confusing you!

Hindus use religion to justify a whole social system; Buddhists are more concerned with compassion.


buddha was an indian prince, so he was born a hindu, until he founded the philosophy which we now called buddhism. we regard it as a religion because over time ppl started to regard buddha as god. that's why a lot of aspect of buddhism that is quite similar to hinduism.
but i do know about the class system in hinduism, and the way it is practiced , even today, in india can be quite destrutive. but from what i know, it is part of the religion, also to do with the retribution aspect of the religion, since you know if you are born in a lower cast, it must mean that you had done something bad for your past life, and so on.


since alot of religions is about compassion and helping others, sometimes our own goodwill is confused with religious' teachings. an anthiest may think he help others bacause of his compasion and moral values, but someone religious may think that he do so becasue his god teach him to do so. which is not untrue since that is what his religion taught him. so u know i don't think there's any wrong if a person uses his religion to justify his doing good, afterall that is what the red cross and the red cresent is, a religious organization commited to doing good, because of their religions' teaching.

[cpwill]

Originally posted by JustinH
First of all, tame your ego. If you think you know more about the topic then most of your "peers" then you are obviously mistaken.

as i am a religion Major, and but 8 hours away from my bachelor, and my peers being my fellow students, then i would certainly hope i am more educated on this topic than they are, else my education thus far is a failure. this is not bragging, it is a statement of who i am and an answer to the charge that i am uneducated in my beliefs.

Second, you would have been "afraid to do kind things" without God there? That makes you a very small person in my view.

well then we are in agreement. i would, in fact, be afraid to (for instance) pick up random hitchikers if i did not have my faith.

You need God there to tell you being good and nice is a good thing? Truly pathetic... I don't need your "Living God" to tell me to be nice, I do so because I want to.

ah, so you don't require a hand because you've decided that you will do whatever you want? you may call me truley pathetic, and perhaps you are right, but i am pathetic and weak only in that i am human; when God chooses to work through me, he can do amazing things, and with His encouragement, i have surpassed obstacles i did not think i could beat.

Now in accordance to your little statement, I'm going to hell because I don't believe in God and I treat people nicely because I want to. But you are going to heaven because you do believe in God, and treat people nicely not because you want to, but because God told you to? Honestly, that's a fairly twisted view of Christianity, and I sincerely doubt your "peers" who know far less then you would disagree with that.

:rolleyes:, no.
A) it isn't up to me where you go at all; that is between you and God.
B) our final destination isn't dependant upon our actions but rather on our acceptance of the sacrifice made on our behalf by God, and our willingness to enter into a relationship with him (we are saved not by acts but by faith); this is quite standard doctrine and has been since Paul.

WHAT? Ahh... you are one of those blinded by faith people aren't you? If you sincerely believe that crap, then you haven't read up on a single war in the last 1000 years or so... they all used religion and God to justify their actions (this includes Hilter).

:rolleyes: well duh. people will take anything they can get their hands on and twist it to justify their actions. of course people will try to use religion to justify what they do or do not. my point (which i'll notice you didn't answer) was that whatever others say: JESUS did not advocate the use of torture as a means of mantaining control; and i challenge you to show me where he did.

Oh, and you must read Aramaic then right? Because unless you can, you've never once read the bible in it's true form, you've read it after it was translated several hundred times. And simply replacing adjectives would truly change the whole objective of a passage.

actually straight-translations are available now, in several different editions, if you like. also, i have been taught by professors who speak aramaic, hebrew, latin, and old greek, so i am at least getting this second hand; and i pretty much trust them not to outright lie to me.

Get off your high-horse and educate yourself. I would honestly have to say, judging by this post, you know little of Christianity, or the history of it. I however, have done much studying on the topic and really understand the impact that religion can have on people. And I'm not even a Christian.

i would love for you to "educate" me then, please point out to me where you think that i have demonstrated little knowledge of history or religion, and we shall discuss.

what say, however, that we keep it civil.

[Duo_Maxwell]

any political, economical, or military action must be based securely, and primiarily in a logical reason that can clearly be seen and deducted.

Anything else is fundementally weak.

You must be able to defend a decision with a logical argument.

If you cannot, the decision was hastely made, and most likely, incorrect.

You cannot make decisions because "someone I can't consult, I can't get a second opinion on, and I cannot hold in a conference and spar with told you to." You must make decisions based on reason and rational.

[cpwill]

i can make my decisions based on anything i want;)

that being said, the majority of the decisions we make a day we make on intuition, on faith, we do not stop to reason that if we choose to drop this sock that it will be sucked by gravity towards teh center of the earth, and that in a straigth line towards it is the hamper...no, we simply drop the sock in the basket and move on. furthermore; i can think of several times in my life where had i done the strictly reasonable logical thing to do it would have been the wrong decision. when we give up using intuition, emotion, feeling, faith, then we have lost much of what has made us human.

if i have to make my decisions based on what i can see and what God can see: i choose what He sees.

[mahayana]

I think when anyone says "do the right thing", they are consulting their personal morality, or asking others to do the same. So for the majority, their actions are influenced by religious ideas.(at least in these cases)

Most of the time our actions are routine and we don't think deeply. Humans are pretty random and less than perfectly rational most of the time. IMHO

[Duo_Maxwell]

Intution is often based on logic itself. The dialect is the most powerful reasoning tool ever created.

[cpwill]

yes, but intuition also means that there were less than enough facts to suggest a solution; it's a gut-feeling, we are arriving at a conclusion with less than enough evidence, we are going out on faith;)

[Duo_Maxwell]

it amazes me how little you know about reason and logic, as well as the dialect.

[cpwill]

it amazes me how you prefer to simply act as though you can assume your own superiority in these areas without providing backup;)

[Duo_Maxwell]

Originally posted by cpwill
it amazes me how you prefer to simply act as though you can assume your own superiority in these areas without providing backup;)

Why do I need to? After all, you SAID you know your history well, you should know full well how logical and reasoning as well as the dialectec came about and how they were used. Not to mention the numerous amount of atrocities commited in the name of religion.

And you're simply not allowed to ignore links and scientific laws. But you do anyway. :)

[cpwill]

i'm fully aware of the misuses of religion. i' am also fully aware of the misuses of democracy; that doesn't mean i think democracy is a bad thing.